THOROUGH

"The hopeless defect of women in all practical matters," said a shrewd

merchant the other day, "is that it is impossible to make them thorough."

It was a shallow remark, and so I told him. Women are thorough in the

things which they have been expected to regard as their sphere,--in their

housekeeping and their dress and their social observances. There is nothing

more thorough on earth than the way housework is done in a genuine New

England household. There is an exquisite thoroughness in the way a

milliner's or a dressmaker's work is done,--a work such as clumsy man

cannot rival, and can hardly estimate. No general plans his campaigns or

marshals his armies better than some women of society--the late Mrs. Paran

Stevens, for instance--manage the circles of which they are the centre. Day

and night, winter and summer, at city or watering-place, year in and year

out, such a woman keeps open house for her gay world. She has a perpetual

series of guests who must be fed luxuriously, and amused profusely; she

talks to them in three or four languages; at her entertainments she notes

who is present and who absent, as carefully as Napoleon watched his

soldiers; her interchange of cards, alone, is a thing as complex as the

army muster-rolls: thus she plans, organizes, conquers, and governs. People

speak of her existence as that of a doll or a toy, when she is the most

untiring of campaigners. Grant that her aim is, after all, unworthy, and

that you pity the worn face which has to force so many smiles. No matter:

the smiles are there, and so is the success. I often wish that the

reformers would do their work as thoroughly as the women of society do

theirs.

No, there is no constitutional want of thoroughness in women. The trouble

is that into the new work upon which they are just entering they have not

yet brought their thoroughness to bear. They suffer and are defrauded and

are reproached, simply because they have not yet nerved themselves to do

well the things which they have asserted their right to do. A distinguished

woman, who earns one of the largest incomes ever honestly earned by any one

of her sex, off the stage, told me the other day that she left all her

business affairs to the management of others, and did not even know how to

draw a check on a bank. What a melancholy self-exhibition was that of a

clever American woman, whom I knew, the author of half a dozen successful

books, refusing to look her own accounts in the face until they had got

into such a tangle that not even her own referees could disentangle them to

suit her! These things show, not that women are constitutionally wanting in

thoroughness, but that it is hard to make them carry this quality into new

fields.

I wish I could possibly convey to the young women who write for advice on

literary projects something of the meaning of this word "thorough" as

applied to literary work. Scarcely any of them seem to have a conception of

it. Dash, cleverness, recklessness, impatience of revision or of patient

investigation, these are the common traits. To a person of experience,

no stupidity is so discouraging as a brilliancy that has no roots. It

brings nothing to pass; whereas a slow stupidity, if it takes time enough,

may conquer the world. Consider that for more than twenty years the path of

literature has been quite as fully open for women as for men, in America,--

the payment the same, the honor the same, the obstacles no greater.

Collegiate education has until quite recently been denied them, but how

many men succeed as writers without that advantage! Yet how little, how

very little, of permanent literary work has yet been done by American

women! Young girls appear one after another: each writes a single clever

story or a single sweet poem, and then disappears forever. Look at

Griswold's "Female Poets of America," and you are disposed to turn back to

the title-page, and see if these utterly forgotten names do not really

represent the "female poets" of some other nation. They are forgotten, as

most of the more numerous "female prose writers" are forgotten, because

they had no root. Nobody doubts that women have cleverness enough, and

enough of power of expression. If you could open the mails, and take out

the women's letters, as somebody says, they would prove far more graphic

and entertaining than those of the men. They would be written, too, in what

Macaulay calls--speaking of Madame d'Arblay's early style--"true woman's

English, clear, natural, and lively." What they need, in order to convert

this epistolary brilliancy into literature, is to be thorough.

You cannot separate woman's rights and her responsibilities. In all ages of

the world she has had a certain limited work to do, and has done that well.

All that is needed, when new spheres are open, is that she should carry the

same fidelity into those. If she will work as hard to shape the children of

her brain as to rear her bodily offspring, will do intellectual work as

well as she does housework, and will meet her moral responsibilities as she

meets her social engagements, then opposition will soon disappear. The

habit of thoroughness is the key to all high success. Whatever is worth

doing is worth doing well. Only those who are faithful in a few things will

rightfully be made rulers over many.

Women and the Alphabet: A Series of Essays · 第 74 / 113 题