Little Lord Fauntleroy- male vs. female authorship

When it comes to authorship, it really shouldn’t make much of a difference if an author is male or female because it doesn’t change the actual text or the ideas being put forth through the text. Although the story is still the same, our analysis of the literature may change with information of whether the author it a girl or a boy. I think we all get in our mind what the author’s sex is based on how the story is written and what it is about. Women tend to write more about relationships, love stories, and things women could relate to while men seem to write more action and heroic tales. That is the stereotype at least, and some of the works we have written fall under these categories, like Washington Irving, a male, writing “Rip Van Winkle” about a crazy adventure of waking up after 20 years of sleeping and “The Wide Wide World” being written by Susan Warner, a woman, which is about domestic life and involves many emotions and a whole lot of crying. We have come to expect these different writing styles by men and women, and so it screws us up and we don’t know exactly what to think of writings that are exceptions to this general rule. It makes me think of Nicolas Sparks that writes all the love novels like The Notebook. It’s not that guys cannot write great love stories, it’s just more uncommon. Out of the works we’ve read I think the second half of “A Whisper in the Dark” seems like something that a man would be more apt to write but Louisa May Alcott is a woman.

In Frances Hodgson Burnett’s Little Lord Fauntleroy, I got the impression that the author was a girl by the wording like “he was so beautiful to look at that he was quite a picture” (Burnett 445). I didn’t picture a male talking about a little boy and describing him as “beautiful,” so it didn’t surprise me too much that Burnett was a woman. Ceddie seems a little girly to me too, with his long hair and clothes, and it seems less likely that a male would have made a boy character like this.

I think the main thing that changes when we find out that an author is male or female is our expectations of what the story will be about. I think that’s one reason why a man might go under a woman’s name or vice versa during this time period. People want to read a domestic fiction written by a woman who would seem to have more experience with the home life they are writing about while a man would have more experience about the outside world and people would be interested in what adventures they could come up with based on that experience. If we can’t tell if it’s a girl or a boy writing the story then there seems to be an even playing field where the author has no expectations they are set under and they can write what they want. The audience might not trust the work as much, however, because they would not have the additional information that is helpful in analyzing the literature.

Country vs. City business in Tom Sawyer

In order to encourage Tom to memorize his bible verses, Mary gives him a knife as a reward. “True, the knife would not cut anything, but it was a “sure-enough” Barlow and there was inconceivable grandeur in that—though where the Western boys ever got the idea that such a weapon could possibly be counterfeited to its injury, is an imposing mystery…” (Twain 427). This passage reminded me of the ignorance of country boys as far as money and possessions goes. They would not know a real knife from a fake knife, just as Frank, in Ragged Dick, couldn’t tell that a “silver pitcher worth twenty dollars” (Alger 376) in reality “aint worth sixpence” (Alger 377).

I can just imagine Tom or any other country boys going to the city and being scammed. That’s not to say that Tom isn’t witty and good at playing people. He’s clearly good at getting little treasures like bible verse tickets and doorknobs from his friends, so he is skillful economically in that way, but Tom does not have the city street smarts that Dick has. While both boys have a way of reading people and making business, Dick is a boy living in a real and harsh world of hunger and the danger associated with living on the streets. Dick knows the value of products and how to make real money while Tom, although the same age, is in a kid’s world where all his needs are provided for and his business transactions for little treasures does little for Tom but gives him a few moments of enjoyment and bragging rights among his friends.

For both Dick and Tom, wealth is acquired with the intention of having a good time with the wealth in mind. Because money is scarce and the boys in the country don’t have fun places or things to spend the money on like theaters and cigarettes, it is of little importance to have actual money. To a little boy in the country, being rich and popular meant having cool things like a dead rat on a string. The overall idea expressed about boys is that they should use all resources they can get their hands on to have fun. Girls were encouraged to buy things they would use to enhance their future, like Ellen in the Wide Wide World, while it seems to be acceptable for boys to live for the day and spend their wealth in foolish but fun ways.

Boys vs. Girls- Ragged Dick

It’s amazing how different the social expectations are between boys and girls. In today’s society it seems like we generally have the same expectations for girls and boys. They’re supposed to be good and mind their parents and go to school and play nice with each other. In the 19th century boys were expected to either go to school and learn a trade or work. It’s like they were being trained from early on to fulfill their economic duty to their family while the girls were being trained to be the perfect house wives. This perhaps says a lot about the 19th century society and how hard it was to prosper in that time. Boys and girls had to be trained early to fulfill their roles as adults while today, for the most part, we get to enjoy our childhood, learn a little, and eventually take on the responsibilities we will have as adults.

There was one big difference I found in the depictions and expectations of boys and girls that stuck out to me. There seems to be a double standard when it comes to boys. Girls are expected to act perfect and godly, while boys are encouraged to be good, but then are not severely looked down upon when their flaws are clearly visible. Horatio Alger depicts Dick as a “frank and straightforward” (Alger 342) boy who also lies, makes up stories, and tells “a wrong direction to honest old gentlemen unused to the city” (Alger 339) for the fun of it. Dick is also very business savvy but is then “careless of his earnings” (340). He blows the money he makes on gambling and entertainment instead of saving it for his next meal or to get ahead in life. Think of the shame a woman would have if she carelessly frivoled away money for cigars and movie theatres. Although no one is perfect, it is clearly more acceptable for boys to show their faults, in part because being a little bad is cool, which gives guys more power than just being good.

Another thing is that while boys are encouraged to show ambition in their life, as far as a career goes, women were only encouraged to do the housework required of them. The only way a woman could be ambitious and try to better her life was through having an advantageous marriage. The independence of little boys shows how their future is really in their hands while it seems that girls must rely on their family and the hope for a rich husband in order to get by.