We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
In Mary E. Wilkins Freeman’s novel, The Portion of Labor (1901), set in the fictional New England factory town of Rowe, the wife of one of the town’s three shoe factory owners, Mrs Norman Lloyd, is out on a sleigh ride during an economic depression. She happens to see the young Ellen Brewster out riding with her unemployed father Andrew, a former worker in Mr Lloyd’s factory. Mr Lloyd frowns on the ride as wasteful; it indicates their lower-class status. By contrast, Mrs Lloyd comments on how “desperate” Ellen’s family must feel to be spending down their savings, reasoning “they might as well get a little good time out of it to remember by-and-by when there ain’t enough bread and butter” (120). Despite her feeling of sympathy for Ellen’s family, Mrs Lloyd nonetheless reflects that “the world couldn’t be regulated by women’s hearts, pleasant as it would be for the world and the women, since the final outcome would doubtless be destruction” (121).
The gravity of Mrs Lloyd’s pessimism is ironic on multiple levels. For one, the threat and reality of economic “destruction” in Rowe’s working-class community occurs throughout the novel, causing panic, unemployment, and hunger; it was a “city of strikes” (120). The question of “women’s hearts” also speaks to one of the novel’s central questions: what is the relation between gender and solidarity in the novel, and how do women in particular feel and articulate solidarity within and beyond the working class, within and beyond the constraints of their sex? In a world before New Deal welfare capitalism, such questions were urgent in part because survival could be at stake. In this chapter, I will build on literary scholarship by Mary V. Marchand, Donna M. Campbell, and J. Samaine Lockwood to elaborate on the gendering of solidarity in The Portion of Labor. I will address how solidarity extends from women’s queer or romantic relationships, and how those relations, together with the novel’s heterodox generic style, advance received innovative interpretations of literary naturalism.
During their famous Kitchen Debate at the 1959 American National Exhibition in Moscow, US Vice President Richard Nixon and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev argued over the relative merits of capitalism and communism, but they agreed on what success meant: nice furniture, big houses, and cool appliances. Both believed in the necessity of consumer citizenship in part because the mass production economies behind mass-produced domesticity meant lucrative contracts for both private corporations and state-owned enterprises. Like the defense corporations transforming Cold War fears into lucrative contracts, well-positioned individuals and firms in both countries understood that billions were at stake in the economy of domesticity. Much like the urbanization model that's driven the Chinese economy of the past twenty years, the mass housing projects of the United States and Soviet Union were vital to economic and political stability during the second half of the twentieth century. Both Nixon and Khrushchev understood that the success of their governments depended upon contented middle classes. Economic growth strongly influenced public opinion about political leadership and, by extension, government legitimacy. Nothing was more important to economic growth than housing. Each man fantasized about a future of beautiful mothers working effortlessly with electric mixers to feed their Cold War kids.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.