Presentation 3: Hands’ Represenation of the Female Labouring = Poet in "...mad=20 heifer..."
Originally presented January 24, 2000
"Written, originally extempore, on seeing a Mad Heifer run through = the=20 Village where the Author lives" by Elizabeth Hands is a deceptively = simple poem;=20 it’s language and syntax typical perhaps of the work of a = labouring poet. It=20 would be easy to dismiss it — I almost did, initially thinking it = not nearly the=20 substance of a fifteen minute presentation. Hands herself predicted its=20 impending trivialization after being published in "A Poem, On the = Supposition of=20 the Book having been Published and Read":
‘O law!, says young Seagram, ‘I’ve seen the book, = now
I remember there’s something about a mad cow.’
‘A mad cow!--ha, ha, ha, ha,’ returned half the room;
‘What can y’expect better?’, says Madam Du = Bloom
(Lonsdale 429, lines 88-91)
Of her poems in general and specifically of "The Death of Amnon", the = fictitious rector in the same poem says:
A style elevated you cannot expect;
To some of her equals they may be a treasure,
And country lasses may read ’em with pleasure.
That "Amnon", you can’t call it poetry neither,
There’s no flights of fancy, or imagery either; =
(Lonsdale 429, lines 99-103)
Equally cynical was her prediction of the reaction to an = advertisement for=20 her volume of poetry in "A Poem, On the Supposition of an Advertisement=20 appearing in a Morning Paper, of the Publication of a Volume of Poems, = by a=20 Servant-Maid":
‘I suppose you all saw in the paper this morning
A volume of Poems advertised - ’tis said
They’re produced by the pen of a poor servant-maid.’
‘A servant write verses!’ says Madam Du Bloom:
‘Pray what is the subject — a Mop, or a Broom?"
‘He, he, he,’ says Miss Flounce: ‘I suppose we = shall see
An Ode on a Dishclout — what else can it be?"
Says Miss Coquettilla, ‘Why, ladies, so tart?
Perhaps Tom the footman has fired her heart;
And she’ll tell us how charming he looks in new clothes,
And how nimble his hand moves in brushing the shoes;
Or how, the last time that he went to May Fair,
He bought her some sweethearts of gingerbread = ware.’
(Londsdale 425, lines 8-20)
These quotes serve to illustrate both that Hands viewed herself as a = literary=20 underdog as a result of her less than affluent station in life and = indicate what=20 she sees as the inherent prejudice of polite society towards the poetic = works of=20 the labouring class. As Richard Greene writes in his book, Mary = Leapor: A=20 Study in Eighteenth-Century Women's Poetry, "Despite the significant = number=20 of labouring poets who published throughout the century, Hands assumed = that her=20 social position would constitute an obstacle to the acceptance of her = work."=20 (Greene 98)
Additionally, Hands writes in the dedication of her volume of = poems:
The difficulties with which an Author, under my circumstances, has to = contend=20 with — born in obscurity, and never emerging beyond the lower = stations in life —=20 must have been an insurmountable bar to the publication of the following = POEMS,=20 had not the approbation and zeal of some particular friends to serve me, = been=20 exerted in a manner which demands my most thankful acknowledgments, and = with a=20 success which I had little reason to expect.
(Hands A1)
Interestingly, Hands expresses a level of pessimism in regards to = literary=20 acceptance greater than many of her contemporaries and predecessors that = is=20 strangely incongruous with her socio-economic status. For though Hands = was=20 indeed a labouring poet, she worked as a domestic servant only until she = married=20 her blacksmith husband, enjoying life in the first or second tier of the = working=20 class population which according to Klaus in The Literature of = Labour,=20 "can be divided into three classes of differing status: the highly = skilled and=20 relatively well-paid craftsmen and artisans, including printers, = tailors,=20 watchmakers and skilled workers in the building trade; next, the still=20 apprenticed but lesser-paid textile trades, glaziers, leather-dressers = and the=20 like; and finally, at the lower end, labourers of all descriptions, = amongst them=20 transport workers, farmhands and miners." (Klaus 4)
Though these distinctions are more relevant to the first half of the=20 eighteenth century, they serve as an estimation of Hands’ = socio-economic place=20 in terms of the rest of the population, one higher than, for example, = Stephen=20 Duck or Mary Collier. However, despite her relative affluence in = comparison to=20 her fellow labouring poets, Hands is able to provide a compelling = depiction of=20 the female labouring poet; in the "heifer" poem she accomplishes it = through=20 analogy.
The analogy can be readily mapped from source to target. As a heifer = that=20 strays from her herd, the subject of this poem illustrates the social = plight of=20 the female labouring poet. A heifer is a young female cow that has had = up to one=20 calf. She plays the roles of mother, milk-provider, and eventual source = of beef.=20 Straying from the herd is therefore doubly unthinkable as a result of = these=20 responsibilities; the heifer’s freedom carries with it a heavy = burden of=20 neglect. The woman labouring poet is equally weighed down in her = literary=20 aspirations, for by straying from her own herd of class and occupation, = she not=20 only neglects her domestic and serving responsibilities, but as Greene=20 writes,
Despite the success of Stephen Duck, the status of labouring poets = was never=20 equal to that of writers from polite society. Labouring poets carried a = stigma=20 comparable to that of women writers. Therefore, women poets from the = labouring=20 class, such as Jane Holt Wiseman, Constantia Grierson, Mary Collier, = Mary=20 Masters, Mary Leapor, Ann Yearsley, Elizabeth Bentley, and Elizabeth = Hands,=20 (etc) were doubly disabled. (Greene 110)
Through the images of the "heifer" poem, Hands draws out the = comparison=20 between the farm animal and the woman poet while commenting on the = irrationality=20 of labouring-poet stigma. For example, the weapons of the villagers are=20 incomplete — the rakes broken, the stakes rotten, the whips = without lashes. The=20 imperfection and fragmentation of the weapons represents at once the = lack of=20 preparedness of the villagers, the madness of the heifer, missing = however much=20 sanity with which a heifer is equipped, and perhaps, in turn, the = missing=20 rationality or compassion of the villagers. There is a glaring = contradiction=20 between the "peaceful village" (Londsdale 424, line 6) and the = "villagers,=20 alarmed,/ Come rushing forth, with various weapons armed;" (lines = 9&10) In a=20 two line span the villagers shift from peaceful to armed, reacting = swiftly and=20 perhaps rashly, resorting to violent means immediately. Among their = arsenal, the=20 whips are missing lashes, their flexible ends. The exclusion of the = lashes from=20 the structure of the whips of the villagers echoes their own = inflexibility.
The heifer "spurns the ground with madness as she flies" (line 7) = rejecting=20 the ground level on which she treads and creating an elevation through = her=20 kinetic madness. This nicely parallels the motivations of the female = labouring=20 poet who seeks financial and intellectual elevation through her literary = pursuits. Her movement forward creates "clouds of dust, like autumn = mists" (line=20 8) in the summer, which indicated on line 1; the heifer, like Hands, by = creating=20 a seasonally anachronistic mist is ahead of her time. The villagers = represent=20 oppressive society, working together to prevent both her movement and = its=20 direction: "‘Stop her,’ one cries; another, ‘Turn her = there’"(line 18)
The death of the heifer left ambiguous, implied but not explicitly = stated,=20 echoing perhaps the silent snobbery of polite society towards labouring = poets.=20 That the heifer is indeed a heifer and not a cow is significant because, = as a=20 function of its youth, the heifer has a greater potential yet to fulfil = and is=20 barred from doing so by the villagers, much like Hands felt prevented = from=20 fulfilling her own potential as a result of her class and the society in = which=20 she lived.