“What moved me, in the first instance, to attempt a work like this, was the discomfort and suffering which I had seen brought upon men and women by household mismanagement. I have always thought that there is no more fruitful source of family discontent than a housewife’s badly-cooked dinners and untidy ways … Her spirit will be seen through the whole establishment; and just in proportion as she performs her duties intelligently and thoroughly, so will her domestics follow in her path” (Beeton 1542).
I couldn’t agree more! I love my poor, sweet Clara, but when I went to work for her she hardly knew how to do a thing! I’m glad that she let me take charge of her household, but as a servant, it was not my place. Bless her poor soul, but she should have been the one who taught me how to cook and keep that place tidy. Miss Beeton is right: family discontent often leads back to the housewife. It is her duty to manage the household. Now that I am married to Mr. Barkis, I am certain that I’ve learned all of my household duties from being a servant for my poor Clara, and I am so glad that I will be able to run my household efficiently with my domestics dutifully following in my path!
Editor's Note: Since there was so much attention paid to women knowing how to run their households, it makes sense that women would want to be able to fulfill the role of the “angel in the house” by gaining the knowledge of their domestic duties before they married. With this in mind, how typical was it for women to use domestic service as preparation for marriage? In Victorian England, many of the women becoming domestic servants, especially nursemaids, were generally very young and uneducated (McBride, “As the Twig is Bent” 50). This meant that many of them would use domestic service as a way to learn skills that would be useful in their own marriages later. Broom and Smith define these types of occupations as “bridging occupations.” They define this term as an occupation “which provides, though work experience, the conditions and opportunities for movement from one occupation or cluster of occupations to another” (322). The authors note that individuals usually pick such an occupation because they want to learn certain skills that will be applicable later in their lives. Some of the characteristics common to a bridging occupation are the change in social surrounds and values, a postponement of marriage and family size, and the possibility of financial competence through the saving of wages (Broom and Smith 322-323). One of the main bridging occupations the article outlines is domestic service. Although male servants had more opportunities to use their skills in later occupations, it does state that while they were in domestic service, women were able to obtain some skills, such as cooking and sewing, that they could use later in life (Broom and Smith 325-326). While the article does not address marriage as an occupation that female domestic servants could enter, many female servants did become married after they left their service. It seems reasonable that they could enter domestic service in order to gain knowledge of their domestic duties, which would prepare them for marriage. In Peggoty’s case, being a servant of the Copperfield’s undoubtedly forced her to learn how to cook, clean the household, manage the daily affairs, and raise a child, all of which she would have to do as a wife to Mr. Barkis.
Beeton, Isabel. “The Book of Household Management.” The Longman Anthology: British Literature. 4th Edition Volume 2B. Eds. David Damrosch and Kevin J. H. Dettmar. Boston: Pearson Education, 2010. 1542-44. Print.
Broom, L, and J.H. Smith. "Bridging Occupations." The British Journal of Sociology 14.4 (Dec., 1963): 321-334. Web. 16 Mar. 2015.
McBride, Theresa. "'As the Twig is Bent':The Victorian Nanny." The Victorian Family. Ed. Anthony S. Whol. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1978. Print.
-- Bryce Longenberger
I couldn’t agree more! I love my poor, sweet Clara, but when I went to work for her she hardly knew how to do a thing! I’m glad that she let me take charge of her household, but as a servant, it was not my place. Bless her poor soul, but she should have been the one who taught me how to cook and keep that place tidy. Miss Beeton is right: family discontent often leads back to the housewife. It is her duty to manage the household. Now that I am married to Mr. Barkis, I am certain that I’ve learned all of my household duties from being a servant for my poor Clara, and I am so glad that I will be able to run my household efficiently with my domestics dutifully following in my path!
Editor's Note: Since there was so much attention paid to women knowing how to run their households, it makes sense that women would want to be able to fulfill the role of the “angel in the house” by gaining the knowledge of their domestic duties before they married. With this in mind, how typical was it for women to use domestic service as preparation for marriage? In Victorian England, many of the women becoming domestic servants, especially nursemaids, were generally very young and uneducated (McBride, “As the Twig is Bent” 50). This meant that many of them would use domestic service as a way to learn skills that would be useful in their own marriages later. Broom and Smith define these types of occupations as “bridging occupations.” They define this term as an occupation “which provides, though work experience, the conditions and opportunities for movement from one occupation or cluster of occupations to another” (322). The authors note that individuals usually pick such an occupation because they want to learn certain skills that will be applicable later in their lives. Some of the characteristics common to a bridging occupation are the change in social surrounds and values, a postponement of marriage and family size, and the possibility of financial competence through the saving of wages (Broom and Smith 322-323). One of the main bridging occupations the article outlines is domestic service. Although male servants had more opportunities to use their skills in later occupations, it does state that while they were in domestic service, women were able to obtain some skills, such as cooking and sewing, that they could use later in life (Broom and Smith 325-326). While the article does not address marriage as an occupation that female domestic servants could enter, many female servants did become married after they left their service. It seems reasonable that they could enter domestic service in order to gain knowledge of their domestic duties, which would prepare them for marriage. In Peggoty’s case, being a servant of the Copperfield’s undoubtedly forced her to learn how to cook, clean the household, manage the daily affairs, and raise a child, all of which she would have to do as a wife to Mr. Barkis.
Beeton, Isabel. “The Book of Household Management.” The Longman Anthology: British Literature. 4th Edition Volume 2B. Eds. David Damrosch and Kevin J. H. Dettmar. Boston: Pearson Education, 2010. 1542-44. Print.
Broom, L, and J.H. Smith. "Bridging Occupations." The British Journal of Sociology 14.4 (Dec., 1963): 321-334. Web. 16 Mar. 2015.
McBride, Theresa. "'As the Twig is Bent':The Victorian Nanny." The Victorian Family. Ed. Anthony S. Whol. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1978. Print.
-- Bryce Longenberger
“Tell me what should you say, darling?” I asked again.
“If you were thinking of being married - to Mr. Barkis, Peggotty?”
“Yes,” I said.
“I should think it would be a very good thing.” Davy said. “For then you know, Peggotty, you would always have the horse and cart to bring you over to see me, and could come for nothing, and be sure of coming.”
The heart of that boy. He’s worried that I won’t visit him once I get married.
“The sense of the dear!” I cried. “What I have been thinking of, this month back! Yes, my precious; and I think I should be more independent altogether, you see; let alone my working with a better heart in my own house, than I could in anybody else's now. I don't know what I might be fit for, now, as a servant to a stranger. And I shall be always near my pretty's resting-place,” I said, musing, “and be able to see it when I like; and when I lie down to rest, I may be laid not far off from my darling girl!'
We neither of us said anything for a little while.
“But I wouldn't so much as give it another thought,” I said, cheerily, “if my Davy was anyways against it - not if I had been asked in church thirty times three times over, and was wearing out the ring in my pocket.” (Ch. 10, pg. 133)
I can’t believe I’m finally getting married. For so long, I couldn’t even consider the idea! How preposterous! I was always wholly devoted to Clara and my little Davy. They are dearer to me than anything in the world. But now that Clara – my poor, departed Clara – is lying in that grave with her little child grasped in her delicate arms, I think it is finally time for me to get married to Mr. Barkis. Now that I am no longer a servant to the Murdstones – Thank the Lord! – I cherish the thought of devoting myself to my own marriage. But of course, I’ll always check in on my little Davy.
Editor’s Note: This quote comes from Chapter 10 of David Copperfield. In it, Peggotty decides that she will finally marry Mr. Barkis, but she only does it once Clara has passed away and she has essentially been fired from being a domestic servant. Why does Peggotty decide to marry only once she ceases being a servant, and why didn’t she get married while she worked for Clara? According to researcher Theresa McBride, a high majority of female servants were single. Looking at census data from England and Wales in 1851, she found that around 93% of female servants were single, with only 2% of female servants being married (87). Since very few servants were married, these numbers suggest that women would usually stop their work in domestic service when they married. McBride also notes that “servants complained that marriage disqualified them for positions as live-in domestics, and it is true that employers were reluctant to employ married servants because it involved too many problems and a conflict of interest.” Furthermore, it seemed that many employers would rather “seek a replacement” than have to continue hiring a married woman as a domestic servant (88). This was probably due to the fact that a married woman would have to take care of her own children and household, so employers believed it would be difficult for her to manage their household as well. This explains why Peggotty waited to get married; the prevailing social norms at the time stated that women who were married could not easily find or maintain their positions as domestic servants. Thus, when Peggotty found that she was no longer needed as a domestic servant, it makes sense that she made the decision to become married to Mr. Barkis.
McBride, Theresa. The Domestic Revolution: The Modernisation of Household Services in England and France 1820-1920. New York: Holmes and Meier Publishers, 1976. Print.
Dickens, Charles. David Copperfield. Ed. Nina Burgis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print.
-- Bryce Longenberger
“If you were thinking of being married - to Mr. Barkis, Peggotty?”
“Yes,” I said.
“I should think it would be a very good thing.” Davy said. “For then you know, Peggotty, you would always have the horse and cart to bring you over to see me, and could come for nothing, and be sure of coming.”
The heart of that boy. He’s worried that I won’t visit him once I get married.
“The sense of the dear!” I cried. “What I have been thinking of, this month back! Yes, my precious; and I think I should be more independent altogether, you see; let alone my working with a better heart in my own house, than I could in anybody else's now. I don't know what I might be fit for, now, as a servant to a stranger. And I shall be always near my pretty's resting-place,” I said, musing, “and be able to see it when I like; and when I lie down to rest, I may be laid not far off from my darling girl!'
We neither of us said anything for a little while.
“But I wouldn't so much as give it another thought,” I said, cheerily, “if my Davy was anyways against it - not if I had been asked in church thirty times three times over, and was wearing out the ring in my pocket.” (Ch. 10, pg. 133)
I can’t believe I’m finally getting married. For so long, I couldn’t even consider the idea! How preposterous! I was always wholly devoted to Clara and my little Davy. They are dearer to me than anything in the world. But now that Clara – my poor, departed Clara – is lying in that grave with her little child grasped in her delicate arms, I think it is finally time for me to get married to Mr. Barkis. Now that I am no longer a servant to the Murdstones – Thank the Lord! – I cherish the thought of devoting myself to my own marriage. But of course, I’ll always check in on my little Davy.
Editor’s Note: This quote comes from Chapter 10 of David Copperfield. In it, Peggotty decides that she will finally marry Mr. Barkis, but she only does it once Clara has passed away and she has essentially been fired from being a domestic servant. Why does Peggotty decide to marry only once she ceases being a servant, and why didn’t she get married while she worked for Clara? According to researcher Theresa McBride, a high majority of female servants were single. Looking at census data from England and Wales in 1851, she found that around 93% of female servants were single, with only 2% of female servants being married (87). Since very few servants were married, these numbers suggest that women would usually stop their work in domestic service when they married. McBride also notes that “servants complained that marriage disqualified them for positions as live-in domestics, and it is true that employers were reluctant to employ married servants because it involved too many problems and a conflict of interest.” Furthermore, it seemed that many employers would rather “seek a replacement” than have to continue hiring a married woman as a domestic servant (88). This was probably due to the fact that a married woman would have to take care of her own children and household, so employers believed it would be difficult for her to manage their household as well. This explains why Peggotty waited to get married; the prevailing social norms at the time stated that women who were married could not easily find or maintain their positions as domestic servants. Thus, when Peggotty found that she was no longer needed as a domestic servant, it makes sense that she made the decision to become married to Mr. Barkis.
McBride, Theresa. The Domestic Revolution: The Modernisation of Household Services in England and France 1820-1920. New York: Holmes and Meier Publishers, 1976. Print.
Dickens, Charles. David Copperfield. Ed. Nina Burgis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print.
-- Bryce Longenberger
"Lucy's whole life since her marriage had been a series of mistakes, but her first great error was her early assumption of the duties of a wife. Mr. Waylie, utterly unskilled in women's nature, had never doubted the existence of all the qualities which he fancied should belong to the female character, and he had been both disappointed and discouraged at her actual inferiority to his ideal. She had neither the taste nor the talent which could enable her to share his intellectual pursuits, and believing that he had only shared the common lot, by uniting himself to a woman so unequal to himself in mental strength, he returned with double ardor to his books, leaving her to attend to the more essential but less refined duties of life. But he took no pains to direct her unformed character. She was left to the teaching of circumstances alone, and the lessons of experience, though fraught with sorrow to all, bring not to all the fruits of wisdom. Warm-hearted and well disposed as she was, yet Lucy was a most faulty and negligent wife, and her increasing duties only seemed to diminish her power or her will to fulfill them" (Edbury 232).
Poor Lucy! She reminds me of poor Clara. They were both so young when they married, and they just didn’t have the experience they needed to become a good wife. And of course their husbands couldn’t teach them anything. They were busy going out into the world and providing for their wives and children. No, it was Lucy and Clara’s obligation to understand how to run their households, and their inexperience in life brought ruin and neglect upon their households. I am so glad that I didn’t marry so young and inexperienced. I would never want my Barkis to suffer like poor Mr. Waylie. It would just break my heart!
Editor’s note: This excerpt was published in 1842, and it comes from a short story called “Married Too Soon: Or a Lesson From Life.” In the short story, Lucy is a young girl who marries too early, despite the warnings from her aunt that she is too inexperienced in her domestic duties to marry. But she marries Mr. Waylie anyway, and eventually the household falls apart and one of her children almost dies because the servants she has hired don’t know how to care for Lucy’s children. In the end, the faithful aunt comes to the rescue and Lucy is able to manage her household in time; but the moral of the story is still not to get married too soon.
Since Peggotty was much older when she married Mr. Barkis, I wonder how common it was for women in domestic service to marry late, and if this practice came partly from a fear of getting married too early in Victorian England? If we examine the prevailing attitudes toward marriage and woman’s role in that institution, we see that there is plenty of evidence to support the notion of not marrying too early. The domestic sphere was meant to be safe haven for men as they returned from the tumultuous environments of the economic and political world, and so the domestic sphere needed to be well-managed and maintained. It was the duty of the wife, as the angel in the home, to remain in the household and manage everything so her husband would have a refuge to come home to (Henderson and Sharpe 1520). If the wife lacked the knowledge of governing the domestic sphere, which mostly included running the domestic staff, then the household could become a place of disaster and chaos, as shown above in the excerpt from the short story. With this in mind, it’s quite likely that some women were cautioned not to marry too early when they were still lacking the knowledge they would need to run their own households. This idea is also present in the statistics regarding marrying ages in Victorian Britain. According to Theresa McBride, “delayed marriage was an almost inevitable condition of domestic service,” and that caused female domestic servants in Victorian Britain to marry “later than the norm” (The Domestic Revolution 87; 88). And although many female servants did marry when they were in their 20’s, some did wait to get married or never married at all. McBride mentions that, in the census date for England in 1851 and 1871, 4% to 6% of female domestic staff were still unmarried by the age of 45 (88). While it is a rather small percentage, it still shows that some women chose never to marry and remained instead in service. All in all, given the views of women’s domestic responsibilities and the fact that some female domestic servants married later than other women, it is possible that some women waited to marry because they feared they were not ready for their domestic responsibilities. Also, many servants feared that marriage would threaten their further employment as servants, and they didn’t marry because working as a servant allowed them save up money for a dowry (McBride 88, 90). Together, this fear of losing employment and the need for more financially stability also caused women servants to marry later.
Edbury, Emma C. "Married Too Soon; Or a Lesson From Life." Goodey's Lady's Book 25 (July 1842): 229-334. Print.
Henderson, Heather and William Sharpe. “Victorian Ladies and Gentlemen.” The Longman Anthology: British Literature. 4th Edition 2B. Boston: Pearson Education, 2010. 1520-21. Print.
McBride, Theresa. The Domestic Revolution: The Modernisation of Household Services in England and France 1820-1920. New York: Holmes and Meier Publishers, 1976. Print.
-- Bryce Longenberger
Poor Lucy! She reminds me of poor Clara. They were both so young when they married, and they just didn’t have the experience they needed to become a good wife. And of course their husbands couldn’t teach them anything. They were busy going out into the world and providing for their wives and children. No, it was Lucy and Clara’s obligation to understand how to run their households, and their inexperience in life brought ruin and neglect upon their households. I am so glad that I didn’t marry so young and inexperienced. I would never want my Barkis to suffer like poor Mr. Waylie. It would just break my heart!
Editor’s note: This excerpt was published in 1842, and it comes from a short story called “Married Too Soon: Or a Lesson From Life.” In the short story, Lucy is a young girl who marries too early, despite the warnings from her aunt that she is too inexperienced in her domestic duties to marry. But she marries Mr. Waylie anyway, and eventually the household falls apart and one of her children almost dies because the servants she has hired don’t know how to care for Lucy’s children. In the end, the faithful aunt comes to the rescue and Lucy is able to manage her household in time; but the moral of the story is still not to get married too soon.
Since Peggotty was much older when she married Mr. Barkis, I wonder how common it was for women in domestic service to marry late, and if this practice came partly from a fear of getting married too early in Victorian England? If we examine the prevailing attitudes toward marriage and woman’s role in that institution, we see that there is plenty of evidence to support the notion of not marrying too early. The domestic sphere was meant to be safe haven for men as they returned from the tumultuous environments of the economic and political world, and so the domestic sphere needed to be well-managed and maintained. It was the duty of the wife, as the angel in the home, to remain in the household and manage everything so her husband would have a refuge to come home to (Henderson and Sharpe 1520). If the wife lacked the knowledge of governing the domestic sphere, which mostly included running the domestic staff, then the household could become a place of disaster and chaos, as shown above in the excerpt from the short story. With this in mind, it’s quite likely that some women were cautioned not to marry too early when they were still lacking the knowledge they would need to run their own households. This idea is also present in the statistics regarding marrying ages in Victorian Britain. According to Theresa McBride, “delayed marriage was an almost inevitable condition of domestic service,” and that caused female domestic servants in Victorian Britain to marry “later than the norm” (The Domestic Revolution 87; 88). And although many female servants did marry when they were in their 20’s, some did wait to get married or never married at all. McBride mentions that, in the census date for England in 1851 and 1871, 4% to 6% of female domestic staff were still unmarried by the age of 45 (88). While it is a rather small percentage, it still shows that some women chose never to marry and remained instead in service. All in all, given the views of women’s domestic responsibilities and the fact that some female domestic servants married later than other women, it is possible that some women waited to marry because they feared they were not ready for their domestic responsibilities. Also, many servants feared that marriage would threaten their further employment as servants, and they didn’t marry because working as a servant allowed them save up money for a dowry (McBride 88, 90). Together, this fear of losing employment and the need for more financially stability also caused women servants to marry later.
Edbury, Emma C. "Married Too Soon; Or a Lesson From Life." Goodey's Lady's Book 25 (July 1842): 229-334. Print.
Henderson, Heather and William Sharpe. “Victorian Ladies and Gentlemen.” The Longman Anthology: British Literature. 4th Edition 2B. Boston: Pearson Education, 2010. 1520-21. Print.
McBride, Theresa. The Domestic Revolution: The Modernisation of Household Services in England and France 1820-1920. New York: Holmes and Meier Publishers, 1976. Print.
-- Bryce Longenberger
How doth the little crocodile
Improve his shining tail,
And pour the waters of the Nile
On every golden scale!
How cheerfully he seems to grin,
How neatly spreads his claws,
And welcomes little fishes in
With gently smiling jaws!
I cannot believe it! Reading to my Davy’s children the new book Alice in Wonderland, and what do I find? I just had to snip it out!
I kept that crocodile book all them years, not able to let it go. I thought maybe I’d read it to my own kids, but there was never to be little Barkises. The tiny Copperfields seems to like it at any rate. Then I find crocodiles in this book, and it got me thinking about Davy’s life.
He ran into a lot of humans that acted like the crocodile from this poem. From that damned Murdstone, who captured that little fishy that was his mother in his smiling jaws, to that Steerforth boy to even that Uriah Heep, though he wasn’t so good at keeping his grin wide enough.
I hope that maybe Davy’s children will not have to swim through such crocodile infested waters or at least have cleverer teachers to make them sharper fishes. All I could do was read to their father about crocodiles in books, which could not come out of the page, so they were safe. I couldn’t protect him from real ones in the world. He turned out safe and sound, so maybe he learned something from them books by the time he got to that Heep. I like to think I was able to do some good by reading to him.
Editor's Note: This poem was one of Lewis Carroll’s many parody poems found in his book Alice in Wonderland (1865). The poem parodies Isaac Watts’ moralistic poem, “Against Idleness and Mischief,” which praises the fruits of hard work and honesty. In the book, Watts’ poem is what Alice was trying to recite, but “How Doth the Little Crocodile” was what came out.
This poem was published a little after David Copperfield, so I took some liberties by including it. I wrote this post to talk about Peggotty’s role in David’s education. It was traditionally the mother’s duty to teach her children to read, even the boys because she was in charge of their early education (Flanders 86). This explains why Clara Copperfield was in charge of teaching David in the book. Because Clara is so young and inexperienced at times, she often shares her motherly duties with Peggotty. For this reason, Peggotty also had a role in young David’s education. Peggotty’s own education levels, however, limit her from being able to teach David anything but life lessons and morality. This blog post shows how she hoped that her contribution to that part of his education had helped him along the way and that she had been a decent teacher. The crocodile book also started David’s love of reading, which would, in turn, lead him to his final career choice. In a way, Peggotty actually contributed the most to David’s education in both of those respects.
Carroll, Lewis. Alice in Wonderland. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1992. Print.
Flanders, Judith. "The Nursery." Inside the Victorian Home: Portrait of Domestic Life in Victorian England. New York: W.W. Norton, 2003. Print.
-- Niki Wilkes
Improve his shining tail,
And pour the waters of the Nile
On every golden scale!
How cheerfully he seems to grin,
How neatly spreads his claws,
And welcomes little fishes in
With gently smiling jaws!
I cannot believe it! Reading to my Davy’s children the new book Alice in Wonderland, and what do I find? I just had to snip it out!
I kept that crocodile book all them years, not able to let it go. I thought maybe I’d read it to my own kids, but there was never to be little Barkises. The tiny Copperfields seems to like it at any rate. Then I find crocodiles in this book, and it got me thinking about Davy’s life.
He ran into a lot of humans that acted like the crocodile from this poem. From that damned Murdstone, who captured that little fishy that was his mother in his smiling jaws, to that Steerforth boy to even that Uriah Heep, though he wasn’t so good at keeping his grin wide enough.
I hope that maybe Davy’s children will not have to swim through such crocodile infested waters or at least have cleverer teachers to make them sharper fishes. All I could do was read to their father about crocodiles in books, which could not come out of the page, so they were safe. I couldn’t protect him from real ones in the world. He turned out safe and sound, so maybe he learned something from them books by the time he got to that Heep. I like to think I was able to do some good by reading to him.
Editor's Note: This poem was one of Lewis Carroll’s many parody poems found in his book Alice in Wonderland (1865). The poem parodies Isaac Watts’ moralistic poem, “Against Idleness and Mischief,” which praises the fruits of hard work and honesty. In the book, Watts’ poem is what Alice was trying to recite, but “How Doth the Little Crocodile” was what came out.
This poem was published a little after David Copperfield, so I took some liberties by including it. I wrote this post to talk about Peggotty’s role in David’s education. It was traditionally the mother’s duty to teach her children to read, even the boys because she was in charge of their early education (Flanders 86). This explains why Clara Copperfield was in charge of teaching David in the book. Because Clara is so young and inexperienced at times, she often shares her motherly duties with Peggotty. For this reason, Peggotty also had a role in young David’s education. Peggotty’s own education levels, however, limit her from being able to teach David anything but life lessons and morality. This blog post shows how she hoped that her contribution to that part of his education had helped him along the way and that she had been a decent teacher. The crocodile book also started David’s love of reading, which would, in turn, lead him to his final career choice. In a way, Peggotty actually contributed the most to David’s education in both of those respects.
Carroll, Lewis. Alice in Wonderland. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1992. Print.
Flanders, Judith. "The Nursery." Inside the Victorian Home: Portrait of Domestic Life in Victorian England. New York: W.W. Norton, 2003. Print.
-- Niki Wilkes
"What extravagances she committed; what laughing and crying over me; what pride she showed, what joy, what sorrow that she whose pride and joy I might have been, could never hold me in a fond embrace; I have not the heart to tell. I was troubled with no misgiving that it was young in me to respond to her emotions. I had never laughed and cried in all my life, I dare say—not even to her—more freely than I did that morning."
I was reading my little Davy’s new book and got teary eyed as I remembered this very scene myself. My heart couldn’t have swelled bigger if I were the boy’s own mother. He gushes too much for his old nurse, of course. Still, I remember that day, seeing him after so many years, a man who I’d only known as a boy. I am happy that his hard life, which I had to witness from afar, had not hardened his precious heart. He could still laugh and cry after what life had done to him.
I do wonder why me though. Why he loved his cross Peggotty so after I could do nothing to protect him? How could he still show me such unguarded emotions when I was neither his actual mother, like Mrs. Copperfield, nor his savior, like that strange Miss Trotwood? The first he owes his life, the second his rescue. What does Peggotty have to offer the boy?
Deserved or not, I will appreciate my little Davy’s affection until the end of time. If I got nothing to offer him, I at least got my devotion.
Editor's Note: I decided to use this quote to explore Peggotty’s humbleness for all that she gave David. In the book, she is often trying to diminish her goodness, calling herself phrases such as “stupid, cross old Peggotty” (94). I figure that if she were to read what David had written about her, she would have approached it the same way. It also gave me a place to explore the role Peggotty had in David’s life. Through my research, I found that a major role assigned to Victorian mothers was that of comfort and encouragement. Sarah Stickney Ellis, famous Victorian author of English female conduct guides, wrote, “[i]n the management of children, it is of the utmost importance that attention should directed to [maladies that] overwhelm the mind with causeless apprehensions, weaken the resolution, and render the temper irritable” (227).
David’s life was full of apprehensions, mostly involving the coming and goings of the people he finds important in his life. He did not have that unwavering presence that makes a person feel solid. Peggotty was the only one to offer that loyalty and that presence, and reassured him of this loyalty like any mother would. She could not replace his mother and she could not help him out of the strife of the world. But she could offer her arms for comfort and that’s what she gave David. A comfortable place in a world that had been so cold and confusing. This was her maternal role that she was able to play for David.
Ellis, Sarah Stickney. The Mothers of England: Their Influence & Responsibility. Fisher, Son, & Co., 1843. Print.
-- Niki Wilkes
I was reading my little Davy’s new book and got teary eyed as I remembered this very scene myself. My heart couldn’t have swelled bigger if I were the boy’s own mother. He gushes too much for his old nurse, of course. Still, I remember that day, seeing him after so many years, a man who I’d only known as a boy. I am happy that his hard life, which I had to witness from afar, had not hardened his precious heart. He could still laugh and cry after what life had done to him.
I do wonder why me though. Why he loved his cross Peggotty so after I could do nothing to protect him? How could he still show me such unguarded emotions when I was neither his actual mother, like Mrs. Copperfield, nor his savior, like that strange Miss Trotwood? The first he owes his life, the second his rescue. What does Peggotty have to offer the boy?
Deserved or not, I will appreciate my little Davy’s affection until the end of time. If I got nothing to offer him, I at least got my devotion.
Editor's Note: I decided to use this quote to explore Peggotty’s humbleness for all that she gave David. In the book, she is often trying to diminish her goodness, calling herself phrases such as “stupid, cross old Peggotty” (94). I figure that if she were to read what David had written about her, she would have approached it the same way. It also gave me a place to explore the role Peggotty had in David’s life. Through my research, I found that a major role assigned to Victorian mothers was that of comfort and encouragement. Sarah Stickney Ellis, famous Victorian author of English female conduct guides, wrote, “[i]n the management of children, it is of the utmost importance that attention should directed to [maladies that] overwhelm the mind with causeless apprehensions, weaken the resolution, and render the temper irritable” (227).
David’s life was full of apprehensions, mostly involving the coming and goings of the people he finds important in his life. He did not have that unwavering presence that makes a person feel solid. Peggotty was the only one to offer that loyalty and that presence, and reassured him of this loyalty like any mother would. She could not replace his mother and she could not help him out of the strife of the world. But she could offer her arms for comfort and that’s what she gave David. A comfortable place in a world that had been so cold and confusing. This was her maternal role that she was able to play for David.
Ellis, Sarah Stickney. The Mothers of England: Their Influence & Responsibility. Fisher, Son, & Co., 1843. Print.
-- Niki Wilkes
AH! While amid the world’s wide strife
We yet may trace that sweeter life,
Now fading like a lovely dream,
Why cannot Fancy’s power redeem
The glowing hopes, the thoughts sublime,
The feeling of our early prime?-
Can haughty Science ever pour
Such blissful visions from her bower,
As when that mother’s warblings wild
Had sooth’d to rest her sickly child,
And o’ver my couch I dream’d there hung
Ethereal forms, with seraph-tongue,
Who told of former, happier spheres,
Exempt from pain, unstain’d with tears
And, when that gentlest human friend
No more her anxious eye could bend
On me, by young affliction prest
More close to her maternal breast,
I deem'd she still beheld afar
My sorrows from some peaceful star ;
In slumber heard her faintly speak,
And felt her kiss upon my cheek.
And oft, when through the solemn wood
My steps the schoolway path pursued,
I paused beneath its quiet shade
To view the spot where she was laid,
And pray, like hers, my life might be
From all ungentle passions free, --
Like hers, in pain or sorrow’s hour
My hope and stay that Holy Power,
To whom, even ‘mid delirium wild,
Her prayers consign’d her weeping child.
O sainted Spirit ! — (if thy care
An earthly wanderer yet may share !)
Still in celestial dreams return
To bid faith's failing embers burn —
While yet unquenched the smoking brand
By worldly passion's wasting hand !
Let fond remembrance oft restore
Each long-lost friend endeared of yore,
And picture o'er the scenes where first
My life and loveliest hopes were nurst ;
The heaths which once my fathers trod,
Amidst the wild to worship God ;
The sacred sabbath's mild repose ;
The social evening's saintly close,
When ancient Zion's solemn song
Arose the lonely banks among ;
The music of the mountain rills ;
The moonlight sleeping on the hills ;
The Starry Scriptures of the sky,
By God's own finger graved on high
On Heaven's expanded scroll — whose speech
To every tribe doth knowledge teach,
When silent Night unlocks the seals,
And to forgetful Man reveals
The wonders of eternal might
In living lines of glorious light!
Oh poor Davy. I think about how much he lost when he lost Mrs. Coppe- Oh I mean Mrs. Murdstone. (Oh, it makes my blood hot to think she had died with that name on her tombstone!) How I wish I could have been even half of a replacement for her. Perhaps if it wasn’t for those blasted Murdstones I could have been, though if it wasn’t for them, Davy would not have needed a stand-in.
It aches my heart to think what that poor boy went through. Sometimes I wish I had been that boy’s mother. Not because poor darling Mrs. Copperfield wasn’t any good. No, no, she was the saint this here poem talks about. I only wish this because then at least maybe it wouldn’t have hurt so much to lose her. I was removable, but I lived. She was not, but she was lost.
Still, at least Davy did have someone who could still kind of be that trace of sweeter life in a worldwide strife. And there were plenty of times that I was able to be that boy’s “gentlest human friend,” and I often pulled him to my own “maternal breast” (lost me a lot of buttons doing that, but anything for my boy). I only wish I could have protected him from those heartless Murdstones, but, unlike his real mother, I was dismissible. I could only be there from afar.
Editor’s Note: This poem is called "Recollection of Maternal Tenderness, And Early Life" by Thomas Pringle. It was printed in 1823, well before David Copperfield was published. I imagined that David was pretty old when he published his memoir though, so it seemed like it would have been appropriate for Peggotty to collect this poem and clip it.
I chose this poem because I thought it expressed the pain of David’s childhood and his love for his mother very nicely. I also saw Peggotty seeing this poem and thinking about David. I added musing about how she wished she could have done more for David, but because of her servant status, she could only do what the master and mistress of the house instructed. It is clear that Peggotty had an attachment to David, but she still could not protect him from the world because she had no power in the household. In many Victorian minds, a servant, especially a female servant, was to perform her duties without disturbing the family in any way. One housemaid once wrote, “it was assumed, I suppose, that the fairies had been at the room” (May 19). The Copperfields had given Peggotty much more liberty in that respect, but once the Murdstones entered the scene, they expected her to go back into that invisible role. They especially would not allow her to voice her opinion, reminding her that while she had been part of the family with the Copperfield, she was again a servant with the Murdstones. I think this post could give some light on how it would feel for a servant to be attached to a child they were helping to raise but with no control over their well-being.
May, Trevor. The Victorian Domestic Servant. Princes Risborough: Shire, 1998. Print.
Pringle, Thomas. “Recollection of Maternal Tenderness, and Early Life.” Wesleyan Methodist Magazine, 3.2 (1823), 67.
-- Niki Wilkes
We yet may trace that sweeter life,
Now fading like a lovely dream,
Why cannot Fancy’s power redeem
The glowing hopes, the thoughts sublime,
The feeling of our early prime?-
Can haughty Science ever pour
Such blissful visions from her bower,
As when that mother’s warblings wild
Had sooth’d to rest her sickly child,
And o’ver my couch I dream’d there hung
Ethereal forms, with seraph-tongue,
Who told of former, happier spheres,
Exempt from pain, unstain’d with tears
And, when that gentlest human friend
No more her anxious eye could bend
On me, by young affliction prest
More close to her maternal breast,
I deem'd she still beheld afar
My sorrows from some peaceful star ;
In slumber heard her faintly speak,
And felt her kiss upon my cheek.
And oft, when through the solemn wood
My steps the schoolway path pursued,
I paused beneath its quiet shade
To view the spot where she was laid,
And pray, like hers, my life might be
From all ungentle passions free, --
Like hers, in pain or sorrow’s hour
My hope and stay that Holy Power,
To whom, even ‘mid delirium wild,
Her prayers consign’d her weeping child.
O sainted Spirit ! — (if thy care
An earthly wanderer yet may share !)
Still in celestial dreams return
To bid faith's failing embers burn —
While yet unquenched the smoking brand
By worldly passion's wasting hand !
Let fond remembrance oft restore
Each long-lost friend endeared of yore,
And picture o'er the scenes where first
My life and loveliest hopes were nurst ;
The heaths which once my fathers trod,
Amidst the wild to worship God ;
The sacred sabbath's mild repose ;
The social evening's saintly close,
When ancient Zion's solemn song
Arose the lonely banks among ;
The music of the mountain rills ;
The moonlight sleeping on the hills ;
The Starry Scriptures of the sky,
By God's own finger graved on high
On Heaven's expanded scroll — whose speech
To every tribe doth knowledge teach,
When silent Night unlocks the seals,
And to forgetful Man reveals
The wonders of eternal might
In living lines of glorious light!
Oh poor Davy. I think about how much he lost when he lost Mrs. Coppe- Oh I mean Mrs. Murdstone. (Oh, it makes my blood hot to think she had died with that name on her tombstone!) How I wish I could have been even half of a replacement for her. Perhaps if it wasn’t for those blasted Murdstones I could have been, though if it wasn’t for them, Davy would not have needed a stand-in.
It aches my heart to think what that poor boy went through. Sometimes I wish I had been that boy’s mother. Not because poor darling Mrs. Copperfield wasn’t any good. No, no, she was the saint this here poem talks about. I only wish this because then at least maybe it wouldn’t have hurt so much to lose her. I was removable, but I lived. She was not, but she was lost.
Still, at least Davy did have someone who could still kind of be that trace of sweeter life in a worldwide strife. And there were plenty of times that I was able to be that boy’s “gentlest human friend,” and I often pulled him to my own “maternal breast” (lost me a lot of buttons doing that, but anything for my boy). I only wish I could have protected him from those heartless Murdstones, but, unlike his real mother, I was dismissible. I could only be there from afar.
Editor’s Note: This poem is called "Recollection of Maternal Tenderness, And Early Life" by Thomas Pringle. It was printed in 1823, well before David Copperfield was published. I imagined that David was pretty old when he published his memoir though, so it seemed like it would have been appropriate for Peggotty to collect this poem and clip it.
I chose this poem because I thought it expressed the pain of David’s childhood and his love for his mother very nicely. I also saw Peggotty seeing this poem and thinking about David. I added musing about how she wished she could have done more for David, but because of her servant status, she could only do what the master and mistress of the house instructed. It is clear that Peggotty had an attachment to David, but she still could not protect him from the world because she had no power in the household. In many Victorian minds, a servant, especially a female servant, was to perform her duties without disturbing the family in any way. One housemaid once wrote, “it was assumed, I suppose, that the fairies had been at the room” (May 19). The Copperfields had given Peggotty much more liberty in that respect, but once the Murdstones entered the scene, they expected her to go back into that invisible role. They especially would not allow her to voice her opinion, reminding her that while she had been part of the family with the Copperfield, she was again a servant with the Murdstones. I think this post could give some light on how it would feel for a servant to be attached to a child they were helping to raise but with no control over their well-being.
May, Trevor. The Victorian Domestic Servant. Princes Risborough: Shire, 1998. Print.
Pringle, Thomas. “Recollection of Maternal Tenderness, and Early Life.” Wesleyan Methodist Magazine, 3.2 (1823), 67.
-- Niki Wilkes
This was many years ago, but being now in my current place, I’ve suddenly remembered it. It was an odd hour for it, but I heard voices in the parlor on the night of Master Davy’s being born.
First was a voice that I later learned belonged to Miss Betsey. “…I don’t mean that. I mean your servant.”
“Peggotty,” Mrs. Copperfield replied.
“Peggotty! Do you mean to say, child, that any human being has gone into a Christian church, and got herself named Peggotty?” That dreadful woman didn’t like my name, the name that I’d been called by ever since I came to work for Mr. Copperfield. It’s a name my brother and all of my family carry, proud as can be, and that Miss Betsey found it unsuitable.
“It’s her surname. Mr. Copperfield called her by it, because her Christian name was the same as mine.” I didn’t mind being called Peggotty instead of Clara. By now, Peggotty fits me better than my Christian name does.
“Here! Peggotty! Tea. Your mistress is a little unwell. Don’t dawdle.” I made my way into the parlor, worried about the poor girl, and wary of Miss Betsey.
It is strange to remember how I feared and disliked her so after that night, upsetting my poor darling girl and leaving us like she did. And now to think that I’m in her service, and nearly as friendly to her as I was to Mrs. Copperfield herself. She always calls me Barkis though, which is my married name, so it’s proper. She was certainly glad that I rid of myself of Peggotty, though, but I still feel that it’s a fine old name and I will always be glad to carry it!
Editor’s Note: Using a servant’s last name, or even giving them an entirely new name, especially if the name was already used by someone else, was actually common practice (Huggett 1977), so it’s not odd that the Copperfields did this. In fact, it may be more odd that Miss Betsey saw this as strange and assumed that ‘Peggotty’ was simply an odd first name. Miss Betsey is shown to refer to her servant, Janet, by her first name. In this way, Miss Betsey, despite her blunt mannerisms, might actually treat servants with more equality than most people in the era; the exclusion of personal names is a reflection of the exclusion of personal relationships between servants and their employers in the era (Huggett 1977) and is even slightly dehumanizing in that is reduces the servant to something less than an individual. Although Peggotty is always treated well by Mrs. Copperfield, and is friendlier with them than many servants may be, it seems that Miss Betsey might be the personal is more blind to class structure, despite her abrasive nature. This scene provides a large contrast to Miss Betsey’s attitude towards Peggotty at the end of the book, and Peggotty reflecting on this turn of events seemed appropriate.
Dickens, Charles. David Copperfield. 1992. London: Wordsworth Classics, 2000. Print.
Huggett, F. E. “Fallen Women.” Life Below Stairs: Domestic servants in England from Victorian times. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1977. Print.
-- Mariah Howell
First was a voice that I later learned belonged to Miss Betsey. “…I don’t mean that. I mean your servant.”
“Peggotty,” Mrs. Copperfield replied.
“Peggotty! Do you mean to say, child, that any human being has gone into a Christian church, and got herself named Peggotty?” That dreadful woman didn’t like my name, the name that I’d been called by ever since I came to work for Mr. Copperfield. It’s a name my brother and all of my family carry, proud as can be, and that Miss Betsey found it unsuitable.
“It’s her surname. Mr. Copperfield called her by it, because her Christian name was the same as mine.” I didn’t mind being called Peggotty instead of Clara. By now, Peggotty fits me better than my Christian name does.
“Here! Peggotty! Tea. Your mistress is a little unwell. Don’t dawdle.” I made my way into the parlor, worried about the poor girl, and wary of Miss Betsey.
It is strange to remember how I feared and disliked her so after that night, upsetting my poor darling girl and leaving us like she did. And now to think that I’m in her service, and nearly as friendly to her as I was to Mrs. Copperfield herself. She always calls me Barkis though, which is my married name, so it’s proper. She was certainly glad that I rid of myself of Peggotty, though, but I still feel that it’s a fine old name and I will always be glad to carry it!
Editor’s Note: Using a servant’s last name, or even giving them an entirely new name, especially if the name was already used by someone else, was actually common practice (Huggett 1977), so it’s not odd that the Copperfields did this. In fact, it may be more odd that Miss Betsey saw this as strange and assumed that ‘Peggotty’ was simply an odd first name. Miss Betsey is shown to refer to her servant, Janet, by her first name. In this way, Miss Betsey, despite her blunt mannerisms, might actually treat servants with more equality than most people in the era; the exclusion of personal names is a reflection of the exclusion of personal relationships between servants and their employers in the era (Huggett 1977) and is even slightly dehumanizing in that is reduces the servant to something less than an individual. Although Peggotty is always treated well by Mrs. Copperfield, and is friendlier with them than many servants may be, it seems that Miss Betsey might be the personal is more blind to class structure, despite her abrasive nature. This scene provides a large contrast to Miss Betsey’s attitude towards Peggotty at the end of the book, and Peggotty reflecting on this turn of events seemed appropriate.
Dickens, Charles. David Copperfield. 1992. London: Wordsworth Classics, 2000. Print.
Huggett, F. E. “Fallen Women.” Life Below Stairs: Domestic servants in England from Victorian times. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1977. Print.
-- Mariah Howell
Ladies' Sanitary Association. Rules for the Manners of Servants in Good Families. 1860.
"Rules for Good Servants:
Always move quietly about the house, and do not let your voice be heard by the family unless necessary.
When meeting any ladies or gentlemen about the house, stand back or move aside for them to pass.
Should you be required to walk with a lady or gentleman, in order to carry a parcel, or otherwise, always keep a few paces behind.
Do not smile at droll stories told in your presence, or seem in any way to notice, or enter into, the family conversation, or the talk at table, or with visitors; and do not offer any information unless asked, and then you must give it in as few words as possible. But if it is quite necessary to give some information unasked at table or before visitors, give it quietly to your master or mistress."
Hah! This may be true in most houses, but ol’ Peggotty’s got to take care of her darling and Master Davy. Mr. Copperfield never was a normal gentlemen, God bless his soul. When I first came to his service, I didn't expect him to be so casual with a servant. I was taught to be quiet and do my work and not get in anyone's way. Mr. Copperfield, though, was as nice and generous to me as could be, and when he brought home Mrs. Copperfield, I took a liking to her, like a mother. After Mr. Copperfield died, I was still just a servant, but it was quiet, and she enjoyed my company. Sometimes I have to be cross and tell my poor mistress what’s what, but I’d do anything for her. She and Master Davy are like my own. I may be a servant, but never have I felt out of place or unwanted in this household, at least not until that awful Murdstone came about. I know my darling girl still loves her cross ol’ Peggotty, even if I have to stay out of sight more. I sure do miss the evenings by the fire, reading with Master Davy and sewing with my poor darling girl. Now I’m reminded by those two awful souls that is my place, and as long as they’re around, I’ll have to be quiet in the ways I look after these two babes of mine. At least Miss Murdstone isn’t much better off than me with her brother around. She’s not as important as she wants to be, that’s for sure!
Editor’s Note: This excerpt from a ladies’ magazine shows that in many households, rules for interactions between the servants and the family were strict, but clearly in the case of the Copperfields, there was much more familiarity than what may have typically been seen. Female servants would often be tasked with the lowliest chores, and would often marry out after enough time working. However, older women, such as Peggotty, may have taken on a role such as housekeeper that was associated with higher status among servants (Mitchell 1996). Additionally, the aloofness of servants may have been partially from the fear of males in the household becoming involved with female servants (Huggett 1977). Together, Peggotty’s maturity and role, as well as the composition of the household, may have made relationships between the family and their servant easier. In a household with simply Clara and David, though, this would not have been a problem. Mr. Copperfield is rarely talked about, so I took some liberties with what his personality may have been like from Peggotty’s perspective. Census data for the period counted female family members who did household chores (like Miss Murdstone seems to) when taking count of the number of servants employed in England (Higgs 1983), which is why I added the comment about Miss Murdstone not being much more important than Peggotty herself.
Higgs, Edward. “Domestic Servants and Households in Victorian England.” Social History 8.2 (1983): 201-210.
Huggett, F. E. “Fallen Women.” Life Below Stairs: Domestic servants in England from Victorian Times. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1977. Print.
Mitchell, Sally. “Domestic Service.” Daily Life in Victorian England. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1996. 50-56. Print.
-- Mariah Howell
"Rules for Good Servants:
Always move quietly about the house, and do not let your voice be heard by the family unless necessary.
When meeting any ladies or gentlemen about the house, stand back or move aside for them to pass.
Should you be required to walk with a lady or gentleman, in order to carry a parcel, or otherwise, always keep a few paces behind.
Do not smile at droll stories told in your presence, or seem in any way to notice, or enter into, the family conversation, or the talk at table, or with visitors; and do not offer any information unless asked, and then you must give it in as few words as possible. But if it is quite necessary to give some information unasked at table or before visitors, give it quietly to your master or mistress."
Hah! This may be true in most houses, but ol’ Peggotty’s got to take care of her darling and Master Davy. Mr. Copperfield never was a normal gentlemen, God bless his soul. When I first came to his service, I didn't expect him to be so casual with a servant. I was taught to be quiet and do my work and not get in anyone's way. Mr. Copperfield, though, was as nice and generous to me as could be, and when he brought home Mrs. Copperfield, I took a liking to her, like a mother. After Mr. Copperfield died, I was still just a servant, but it was quiet, and she enjoyed my company. Sometimes I have to be cross and tell my poor mistress what’s what, but I’d do anything for her. She and Master Davy are like my own. I may be a servant, but never have I felt out of place or unwanted in this household, at least not until that awful Murdstone came about. I know my darling girl still loves her cross ol’ Peggotty, even if I have to stay out of sight more. I sure do miss the evenings by the fire, reading with Master Davy and sewing with my poor darling girl. Now I’m reminded by those two awful souls that is my place, and as long as they’re around, I’ll have to be quiet in the ways I look after these two babes of mine. At least Miss Murdstone isn’t much better off than me with her brother around. She’s not as important as she wants to be, that’s for sure!
Editor’s Note: This excerpt from a ladies’ magazine shows that in many households, rules for interactions between the servants and the family were strict, but clearly in the case of the Copperfields, there was much more familiarity than what may have typically been seen. Female servants would often be tasked with the lowliest chores, and would often marry out after enough time working. However, older women, such as Peggotty, may have taken on a role such as housekeeper that was associated with higher status among servants (Mitchell 1996). Additionally, the aloofness of servants may have been partially from the fear of males in the household becoming involved with female servants (Huggett 1977). Together, Peggotty’s maturity and role, as well as the composition of the household, may have made relationships between the family and their servant easier. In a household with simply Clara and David, though, this would not have been a problem. Mr. Copperfield is rarely talked about, so I took some liberties with what his personality may have been like from Peggotty’s perspective. Census data for the period counted female family members who did household chores (like Miss Murdstone seems to) when taking count of the number of servants employed in England (Higgs 1983), which is why I added the comment about Miss Murdstone not being much more important than Peggotty herself.
Higgs, Edward. “Domestic Servants and Households in Victorian England.” Social History 8.2 (1983): 201-210.
Huggett, F. E. “Fallen Women.” Life Below Stairs: Domestic servants in England from Victorian Times. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1977. Print.
Mitchell, Sally. “Domestic Service.” Daily Life in Victorian England. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1996. 50-56. Print.
-- Mariah Howell
Sarah Ellis, The Women of England: Their Social Duties and Domestic Habits (1839)
“There is but a very small proportion of the daughters of farmers, manufacturers, and tradespeople in England, who are ever called upon for their Latin, their Italian, or even for their French; but all women in this sphere of life are liable to be called upon to visit and care for the sick; and if in the hour of weakness and of suffering, they prove to be unacquainted with any probably means of alleviation, and wholly ignorant of the most judicious and suitable mode of offering relief and consolation, they are indeed deficient in one of the highest attainments in the way of usefulness, to which a woman can aspire."
I’m not very learned, and I don’t know all those fancy languages, but I know in my heart that I did more good taking care of my poor, sick darling girl than ever a man did with his foreign words. I cared for her day and night, even after she finally closed her sweet eyes that last time, with all I knew how to do. I eased her pain and her sorrow and her loneliness, and I’d do it over and over again for her. I was never destined to be a real doctor, or to be able to write books or play instruments. Everything I learned, I learned growing up and working hard. I didn't have much school, and the schooling I did have didn't teach me as much as my work has. In service, I learned cooking, cleaning, caring, and loving. I might just be a servant, but this was the most important thing I could have done for her, except for looking after Master Davy as he grows up.
Editor’s Note: This primary source reflects a view at the time about what roles and duties women should play. Although the article focused mainly on middle- and upper-class women and “Angel of the House” types, this passage seemed like something would apply to women of all classes, including servants. We don’t know Peggotty’s background, except for the fact that she comes from a fishing family, but it seems likely that a female servant could have been the daughter of a farmer or tradesperson, which is a common background for female servants (Mitchell). This would make this excerpt even more applicable to her. Additionally, it reflects the fact that Peggotty, like most servants at the the time, lacked a great amount of education (Mitchell). It also fits Peggotty because of her dedication to caring for those in need, including Clara, David, Barkis, Betsey, and others.
Ellis, Sarah Stickney. “The Women of England: Their Social Duties and Domestic Habits.” 1839. The Longman Anthology of British Literature. Vol. 2B. 4th Ed. Ed. David Damrosch. New York: Longman, 2009. 1525-26. Print.
Mitchell, Sally. “Domestic Service.” Daily Life in Victorian England. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1996. 50-56. Print.
-- Mariah Howell
“There is but a very small proportion of the daughters of farmers, manufacturers, and tradespeople in England, who are ever called upon for their Latin, their Italian, or even for their French; but all women in this sphere of life are liable to be called upon to visit and care for the sick; and if in the hour of weakness and of suffering, they prove to be unacquainted with any probably means of alleviation, and wholly ignorant of the most judicious and suitable mode of offering relief and consolation, they are indeed deficient in one of the highest attainments in the way of usefulness, to which a woman can aspire."
I’m not very learned, and I don’t know all those fancy languages, but I know in my heart that I did more good taking care of my poor, sick darling girl than ever a man did with his foreign words. I cared for her day and night, even after she finally closed her sweet eyes that last time, with all I knew how to do. I eased her pain and her sorrow and her loneliness, and I’d do it over and over again for her. I was never destined to be a real doctor, or to be able to write books or play instruments. Everything I learned, I learned growing up and working hard. I didn't have much school, and the schooling I did have didn't teach me as much as my work has. In service, I learned cooking, cleaning, caring, and loving. I might just be a servant, but this was the most important thing I could have done for her, except for looking after Master Davy as he grows up.
Editor’s Note: This primary source reflects a view at the time about what roles and duties women should play. Although the article focused mainly on middle- and upper-class women and “Angel of the House” types, this passage seemed like something would apply to women of all classes, including servants. We don’t know Peggotty’s background, except for the fact that she comes from a fishing family, but it seems likely that a female servant could have been the daughter of a farmer or tradesperson, which is a common background for female servants (Mitchell). This would make this excerpt even more applicable to her. Additionally, it reflects the fact that Peggotty, like most servants at the the time, lacked a great amount of education (Mitchell). It also fits Peggotty because of her dedication to caring for those in need, including Clara, David, Barkis, Betsey, and others.
Ellis, Sarah Stickney. “The Women of England: Their Social Duties and Domestic Habits.” 1839. The Longman Anthology of British Literature. Vol. 2B. 4th Ed. Ed. David Damrosch. New York: Longman, 2009. 1525-26. Print.
Mitchell, Sally. “Domestic Service.” Daily Life in Victorian England. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1996. 50-56. Print.
-- Mariah Howell
I saw this recipe the other day in Mrs. Beeton’s Book of Household Management. I think that Master David and Clara would enjoy it, so I have to remember to make it for them. I know that the book is for Clara to use, but she is so appreciative when I handle parts of household management myself. I'm sure she wouldn't mind me looking in the book from time to time. Clara was so young when Mr. Copperfield died and she has to spend her time with Master David. I'll be sure to pick up the ingredients next time I am shopping and surprise her with it.
PORK CUTLETS OR CHOPS.
I.
797. INGREDIENTS – Loin of pork, pepper and salt to taste.
Mode.—Cut the cutlets from a delicate loin of pork, bone and trim them neatly, and cut away the greater portion of the fat. Season them with pepper; place the gridiron on the fire; when quite hot, lay on the chops and broil them for about 1/4 hour, turning them 3 or 4 times; and be particular that they are thoroughly done, but not dry. Dish them, sprinkle over a little fine salt, and serve plain, or with tomato sauce, sauce piquante, or pickled gherkins, a few of which should be laid round the dish as a garnish.
Time.—About 1/4 hour. Average cost, 10d. per lb. for chops.
Sufficient.—Allow 6 for 4 persons.
Seasonable from October to March.
II. (Another Way.)
798. INGREDIENTS – Loin or fore-loin, of pork, egg and bread crumbs, salt and pepper to taste; to every tablespoonful of bread crumbs allow 1/2 teaspoonful of minced sage; clarified butter.
Mode.—Cut the cutlets from a loin, or fore-loin, of pork; trim them the same as mutton cutlets, and scrape the top part of the bone. Brush them over with egg, sprinkle with bread crumbs, with which have been mixed minced sage and a seasoning of pepper and salt; drop a little clarified butter on them, and press the crumbs well down. Put the frying-pan on the fire, put in some lard; when this is hot, lay in the cutlets, and fry them a light brown on both sides. Take them out, put them before the fire to dry the greasy moisture from them, and dish them on mashed potatoes. Serve with them any sauce that may be preferred; such as tomato sauce, sauce piquante, sauce Robert, or pickled gherkins.
Time.—From 15 to 20 minutes. Average cost, 10d. per lb. for chops.
Sufficient.—Allow 6 cutlets for 4 persons.
Seasonable from October to March.
Note.—The remains of roast loin of pork may be dressed in the same manner.
Editor’s Note: Many Victorian homes had multiple servants that fulfilled a variety of roles. The servants who worked in the kitchens were not the same servants who taught the children. The wealthier the home, the more servants they could afford. There were even servants that could be hired for a temporary time to give the illusion of wealth and affluence (Higgs 201). The Copperfield Family was middle class, but was trying to seem more affluent than they actually were. Peggotty had to have a lot of responsibilities for multiple reasons. One was that Clara was incapable of running her own house, so a lot of the responsibility fell on Peggotty. Another reason is that because the Copperfields were not as well off as they pretended, they could not afford multiple servants. Even though Mrs. Beeton’s book would have been meant for someone in Clara’s position, it would not be surprising if Peggotty had looked at the book at some point. Also, Mrs. Beeton’s book came out a bit later than the timeline of David Copperfield, but that type of book could have easily been in the Copperfield household.
Higgs, Edward. "Domestic Servants and Households in Victorian England." Social History 8.2 (1983): 201-210. Print.
-- Emma Brown
PORK CUTLETS OR CHOPS.
I.
797. INGREDIENTS – Loin of pork, pepper and salt to taste.
Mode.—Cut the cutlets from a delicate loin of pork, bone and trim them neatly, and cut away the greater portion of the fat. Season them with pepper; place the gridiron on the fire; when quite hot, lay on the chops and broil them for about 1/4 hour, turning them 3 or 4 times; and be particular that they are thoroughly done, but not dry. Dish them, sprinkle over a little fine salt, and serve plain, or with tomato sauce, sauce piquante, or pickled gherkins, a few of which should be laid round the dish as a garnish.
Time.—About 1/4 hour. Average cost, 10d. per lb. for chops.
Sufficient.—Allow 6 for 4 persons.
Seasonable from October to March.
II. (Another Way.)
798. INGREDIENTS – Loin or fore-loin, of pork, egg and bread crumbs, salt and pepper to taste; to every tablespoonful of bread crumbs allow 1/2 teaspoonful of minced sage; clarified butter.
Mode.—Cut the cutlets from a loin, or fore-loin, of pork; trim them the same as mutton cutlets, and scrape the top part of the bone. Brush them over with egg, sprinkle with bread crumbs, with which have been mixed minced sage and a seasoning of pepper and salt; drop a little clarified butter on them, and press the crumbs well down. Put the frying-pan on the fire, put in some lard; when this is hot, lay in the cutlets, and fry them a light brown on both sides. Take them out, put them before the fire to dry the greasy moisture from them, and dish them on mashed potatoes. Serve with them any sauce that may be preferred; such as tomato sauce, sauce piquante, sauce Robert, or pickled gherkins.
Time.—From 15 to 20 minutes. Average cost, 10d. per lb. for chops.
Sufficient.—Allow 6 cutlets for 4 persons.
Seasonable from October to March.
Note.—The remains of roast loin of pork may be dressed in the same manner.
Editor’s Note: Many Victorian homes had multiple servants that fulfilled a variety of roles. The servants who worked in the kitchens were not the same servants who taught the children. The wealthier the home, the more servants they could afford. There were even servants that could be hired for a temporary time to give the illusion of wealth and affluence (Higgs 201). The Copperfield Family was middle class, but was trying to seem more affluent than they actually were. Peggotty had to have a lot of responsibilities for multiple reasons. One was that Clara was incapable of running her own house, so a lot of the responsibility fell on Peggotty. Another reason is that because the Copperfields were not as well off as they pretended, they could not afford multiple servants. Even though Mrs. Beeton’s book would have been meant for someone in Clara’s position, it would not be surprising if Peggotty had looked at the book at some point. Also, Mrs. Beeton’s book came out a bit later than the timeline of David Copperfield, but that type of book could have easily been in the Copperfield household.
Higgs, Edward. "Domestic Servants and Households in Victorian England." Social History 8.2 (1983): 201-210. Print.
-- Emma Brown
I saw this poem and it reminded me of my poor dead Clara. She loved beautiful things and she was always such a pretty girl herself. I can picture her sitting and singing on a beautiful day in the garden at the old Rookery. I can understand why this poet was weeping for the loss of the woman - it is sad to see an innocent, pretty thing die.
Christina Rossetti's poem "Song"
“She sat and sang away
By the green margin of a stream,
Watching the fishes leap and play
Beneath the glad sunbeam.
I sat and wept away
Beneath the moon's most shadowy beam,
Watching the blossoms of the May
Weep leaves into the stream.
I wept for memory;
She sang for hope that is so fair:
My tears were swallowed by the sea:
Her songs died on the air” (1644)
Editor’s Note: This poem came out in 1848, so it is possible that Peggotty would have encountered it. She was not much of a reader, but she did like to listen to other people read. Peggotty had a lot of tragedy in her life, but her first big loss was when Clara Copperfield died. Rossetti’s poems often tackled issues such as gender or poverty (Poetry Foundation); however, this is less obvious in this particular poem. The line in the poem “her songs died on the air” suggests that either the woman has died or she has stopped singing. Peggotty, if thinking about Clara, would probably come to the conclusion that the poem was about nothing more than a lovely, dead woman. The spring imagery has connotations of innocence, and Clara was always seen as very young and innocent.
“Christina Rossetti.” The Poetry Foundation, 2015. Web <http://www.poetryfoundation.org/bio/christina-rossetti>
-- Emma Brown
Christina Rossetti's poem "Song"
“She sat and sang away
By the green margin of a stream,
Watching the fishes leap and play
Beneath the glad sunbeam.
I sat and wept away
Beneath the moon's most shadowy beam,
Watching the blossoms of the May
Weep leaves into the stream.
I wept for memory;
She sang for hope that is so fair:
My tears were swallowed by the sea:
Her songs died on the air” (1644)
Editor’s Note: This poem came out in 1848, so it is possible that Peggotty would have encountered it. She was not much of a reader, but she did like to listen to other people read. Peggotty had a lot of tragedy in her life, but her first big loss was when Clara Copperfield died. Rossetti’s poems often tackled issues such as gender or poverty (Poetry Foundation); however, this is less obvious in this particular poem. The line in the poem “her songs died on the air” suggests that either the woman has died or she has stopped singing. Peggotty, if thinking about Clara, would probably come to the conclusion that the poem was about nothing more than a lovely, dead woman. The spring imagery has connotations of innocence, and Clara was always seen as very young and innocent.
“Christina Rossetti.” The Poetry Foundation, 2015. Web <http://www.poetryfoundation.org/bio/christina-rossetti>
-- Emma Brown
Master David has been writing the story of his life and I was curious to see what he had said. I remember when Master David was living under the rule of that horrible Mr. Murdstone - I wanted to do all I could to make his life better. It was hard to relive that, but when I saw what he had written here I was so happy. I know he eventually found his Aunt Betsy to act as a mother to him after the loss of poor Clara, but I am glad that I was able to help him too. I have always thought of him as fondly as my own family.
“From that night there grew up in my breast a feeling for Peggotty which I cannot very well define. She did not replace my mother; no one could do that; but she came into a vacancy in my heart, which closed upon her, and I felt towards her something I have never felt for any other human being. It was a sort of comical affection, too; and yet if she had died, I cannot think what I should have done, or how I should have acted out the tragedy it would have been to me." (Chapter 4, pg 58)
Editor’s Note: In David Copperfield it seems that Peggotty has an unusually close relationship with the Copperfield family, her situation is not entirely unheard of. Though it would have been unusual for a family member to care much for the servants, some servants were very loyal to the family they served. Also, it was more likely for there to be a relationship with the servants and children of the family than with the adults because children were often kept separated from the family and raised by the servants. Murdstone alienated both Peggotty and David, so it makes sense that his behavior was what drove David to Peggotty.
Dawes, Frank. Not in Front of the Servants: A True Portrait of English Upstairs/Downstairs Life. New York: Taplinger Publishing Company, 1974. Print.
Dickens, Charles. David Copperfield. USA: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print
--Emma Brown
“From that night there grew up in my breast a feeling for Peggotty which I cannot very well define. She did not replace my mother; no one could do that; but she came into a vacancy in my heart, which closed upon her, and I felt towards her something I have never felt for any other human being. It was a sort of comical affection, too; and yet if she had died, I cannot think what I should have done, or how I should have acted out the tragedy it would have been to me." (Chapter 4, pg 58)
Editor’s Note: In David Copperfield it seems that Peggotty has an unusually close relationship with the Copperfield family, her situation is not entirely unheard of. Though it would have been unusual for a family member to care much for the servants, some servants were very loyal to the family they served. Also, it was more likely for there to be a relationship with the servants and children of the family than with the adults because children were often kept separated from the family and raised by the servants. Murdstone alienated both Peggotty and David, so it makes sense that his behavior was what drove David to Peggotty.
Dawes, Frank. Not in Front of the Servants: A True Portrait of English Upstairs/Downstairs Life. New York: Taplinger Publishing Company, 1974. Print.
Dickens, Charles. David Copperfield. USA: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print
--Emma Brown