One Saturday night (or it might have been Friday, I don't really remember, but that's beside the point), I watched Dangerous Beauty with some friends from the class. To our surprise, we thought it was an interesting film, and it kept our attention all the way through - however, for most of the movie we were trying to figure out where we had seen the actor who played Marco before (it's A Knight's Tale, in case you were wondering). I have to admit, I felt pretty bad for poor Veronica. All she wanted was to be with Marco, and things kept pulling them apart. However, she did do pretty well for herself, selling her body aside. And I also think that Marco was a little bit of an idiot, first turning her down, and then wanting her all to himself after she became independent. Make up your mind, man!
It shocked me at first that the most educated women were the prostitutes, but I guess they would need some substance for the pillow talk with their high-end clients. To be perfectly honest, I also thought it was unfair. If a woman wanted to learn, her best chance was to become a courtesan. It sort of stifles the woman empowerment a little. Also, I thought that the "learning how to be seductive" lessons mirrored slightly etiquette and "how to be a lady" lessons, minus the "how to touch a man" and "how to eat bananas" part.
I was also appalled that Veronica's mom encouraged her to become a prostitute, but after reading the Roper reading it made more sense to me. Not only was it the only way she could ever hope to get with Marco, but she also earned a great deal of money for her family. On a similar note, I was surprised that the mother, who was once a courtesan, was able to overcome the stigmas associated with her former profession and become a respectable woman.
Finally, I noticed that, like in the readings and in lecture, the local prostitutes were made available for visiting dignitaries. But then again, what else would you expect for a visiting king? Bring out the fine china, bake the best food, make the most desirable prostitutes available. You want to make a good impression, after all.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Prostitution: From Sinful Work to Crime - Perry 33-52, 137-152; Roper; Huppert 117-133
These readings surprised me in three ways...
I was also surprised at how the prostitutes were treated medically. I did not expect that they would be required to have medical examinations to ensure proper health, although I do think that, if prostitution is going to be legal, that is a very good idea.
Third, the justification for the public brothels was a little off to me. Men needed an outlet for their sexual desires, so public brothels were legalized so that they did not go around raping and pillaging and plundering, and yet women were supposed to be more lustful than men? It doesn't really make sense in my mind, although I suppose it does not need to make sense.
witches in Beauty and the Beast
so... in class today, we were talking about how, after the Protestant Reformation, people no longer needed the poor so that they could do good deeds and so that the poor would pray on their behalf. If a poor woman came begging at someone's door, they would be turned away and occasionally mutter under their breath. Then, when something bad happened in the homeowner's life, he would blame the poor woman, because she was obviously a witch that put a spell on him. This reminded me of my favorite movie, Beauty and the Beast!! Remember the prologue:
Once upon a time, in a far away land, a young prince lived in a shining castle. Although he had everything his heart desired, the prince was spoiled, selfish, and unkind. Then, one winter's night, an old beggar woman came to the castle, and offered him a single rose in return for shelter from the bitter cold. Repulsed by her haggard appearance, the prince sneered at the gift, and turned the old woman away. But she warned him not to be deceived by appearances. And when he dismissed her again, the old woman's ugliness melted away to become a beautiful enchantress. The prince tried to apologize, but it was too late, for she had seen that there was no love in his heart, and as punishment, she transformed him into a hideous creature and placed a powerful spell on the castle and all who lived there. Ashamed of his monstrous form, the beast concealed himself inside his castle, with a magic mirror as his only window to the outside world. The rose she had offered was truly an enchanted rose which would bloom until his twenty first year. If he could learn to love another and earn their love in return by the time the last petal fell, then the spell would be broken. If not, he would be doomed to remain a beast for all time. As the years passed, the prince fell into despair and lost all hope, for who could ever learn to love a beast?
Although it is not the same, because the witch was trying to see if he was kind or not, and she was actually a witch and not a poor beggar woman, I thought it was pretty similar to the story told in class.
and here is the link to the youtube video because I love love love Beauty and the Beast
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__x8CYAVMbk
Once upon a time, in a far away land, a young prince lived in a shining castle. Although he had everything his heart desired, the prince was spoiled, selfish, and unkind. Then, one winter's night, an old beggar woman came to the castle, and offered him a single rose in return for shelter from the bitter cold. Repulsed by her haggard appearance, the prince sneered at the gift, and turned the old woman away. But she warned him not to be deceived by appearances. And when he dismissed her again, the old woman's ugliness melted away to become a beautiful enchantress. The prince tried to apologize, but it was too late, for she had seen that there was no love in his heart, and as punishment, she transformed him into a hideous creature and placed a powerful spell on the castle and all who lived there. Ashamed of his monstrous form, the beast concealed himself inside his castle, with a magic mirror as his only window to the outside world. The rose she had offered was truly an enchanted rose which would bloom until his twenty first year. If he could learn to love another and earn their love in return by the time the last petal fell, then the spell would be broken. If not, he would be doomed to remain a beast for all time. As the years passed, the prince fell into despair and lost all hope, for who could ever learn to love a beast?
Although it is not the same, because the witch was trying to see if he was kind or not, and she was actually a witch and not a poor beggar woman, I thought it was pretty similar to the story told in class.
and here is the link to the youtube video because I love love love Beauty and the Beast
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__x8CYAVMbk
Witches in Harry Potter
Okay, so I know there are witches in Harry Potter. But what I am talking about are the medieval/early modern witches. Although the witches in Harry Potter look, for the most part, like normal humans, and unless they are really bad at hiding out in the Muggle (non-magical) world, it is impossible to tell if a person is a witch or just a woman. However, in the world of Harry Potter, there are hags, which conform to the earlier definition of a witch. According to the Harry Potter Lexicon, they are described as "fairy tale witches" and they "eat children." Although they do not really feature a lot in the books, they are mentioned in passing, such as in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone when Quirrell mentions a quarrel with a hag, in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets in Gilderoy Lockheart's book Holidays with Hags, and whenever the gang goes into the Hog's Head Pub in Hogsmeade or to Knockturn Alley.
and, since we're on the subject of Harry Potter, here are some magical Harry Potter pictures of me in England (yes, that is the flying Ford Anglia from Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets)
and, since we're on the subject of Harry Potter, here are some magical Harry Potter pictures of me in England (yes, that is the flying Ford Anglia from Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets)
Information from http://www.hp-lexicon.org/bestiary/bestiary_h.html
Criminalization of the Poor: Perry 153-176 and Huppert 101-117
In Catholicism, one of the ways an individual can get into Heaven is by doing good works. Therefore, men would build hospitals and women would become "Mothers of the Poor." They would take care of the poor in the hospitals as if they were their own children, nursing them back to health. The hospitals built were magnificent works of art, luxurious palaces of healing. Although I was impressed that they would build such amazing hospitals, I was initially surprised at how adorned they were. However, as I think about it more, it makes sense. Since they were doing this in God's name, they would want to make them ornamented and beautiful, like the Catholic Churches.
In order to beg, the poor had to be issued a special "beggar's license." Without it, if a person was caught begging, they would be severely punished. The beggar's license was meant to serve as a stigma, as well as prevent people from pretending to be deserving poor from earning money on the streets. I can see both pros and cons to this arrangement. The begging license would prevent those who did not need the money from begging (because, like the street performers in major cities, they could possibly have earned a lot of money in a day) and it would ensure that more of the money from good-deed doing Catholics went to people who actually needed it. However, it also branded the poor who possessed it, and they were marginal members of society, so it would be much more difficult for them to find legitimate jobs and pull themselves out of poverty.
The deserving poor were most often categorized as women, children, or the disabled. This was because women made less money than men, so if the man of the family died, a woman could not support herself, but if the woman of the family died, the man could support himself more easily. I expected that this would be the case, so I was not particularly surprised. However, although I did not expect this to be the case, it would have been nice if there had been some way to help the deserving poor besides allowing them to beg.
Some of the poor also turned to crime. I can see how this would be desirable, because it would seem that oftentimes an individual could earn a lot more money in a much shorter time by crime than by honest labor. In addition, there could have been a sort of Robin Hood complex going on where they justified their crimes by telling themselves that they need the money, whereas the people they are robbing do not.
Although most of this information did not faze me, I was shocked and slightly horrified by the baby transporters. I could not believe that people would actually do that, and that it seemed like there was so little concern for the high mortality rates of the infants. I can only imagine the position someone would have to be in to take up a job like that. Also, how were they not convicted of infanticide?
In order to beg, the poor had to be issued a special "beggar's license." Without it, if a person was caught begging, they would be severely punished. The beggar's license was meant to serve as a stigma, as well as prevent people from pretending to be deserving poor from earning money on the streets. I can see both pros and cons to this arrangement. The begging license would prevent those who did not need the money from begging (because, like the street performers in major cities, they could possibly have earned a lot of money in a day) and it would ensure that more of the money from good-deed doing Catholics went to people who actually needed it. However, it also branded the poor who possessed it, and they were marginal members of society, so it would be much more difficult for them to find legitimate jobs and pull themselves out of poverty.
The deserving poor were most often categorized as women, children, or the disabled. This was because women made less money than men, so if the man of the family died, a woman could not support herself, but if the woman of the family died, the man could support himself more easily. I expected that this would be the case, so I was not particularly surprised. However, although I did not expect this to be the case, it would have been nice if there had been some way to help the deserving poor besides allowing them to beg.
Some of the poor also turned to crime. I can see how this would be desirable, because it would seem that oftentimes an individual could earn a lot more money in a much shorter time by crime than by honest labor. In addition, there could have been a sort of Robin Hood complex going on where they justified their crimes by telling themselves that they need the money, whereas the people they are robbing do not.
Although most of this information did not faze me, I was shocked and slightly horrified by the baby transporters. I could not believe that people would actually do that, and that it seemed like there was so little concern for the high mortality rates of the infants. I can only imagine the position someone would have to be in to take up a job like that. Also, how were they not convicted of infanticide?
"After the Black Death" by George Huppert pages 1-66
The beginning of After the Black Death examines the lives of the inhabitants of the small, isolated village of Sennely. For the most part, life for the villagers was very difficult. There was little money and little food, and if there was a bad harvest there was not much to fall back on. Although the general assumption is that people from this time period married early, that is not the case. Couples would wait until after their parents had died to marry so that there were not as many mouths to feed. In addition, marriage was a contract, and two people did not usually marry for love.
In contrast, cities were large and luxurious. There were shops filled with food and drink in excess. However, not everyone who lived in the cities lived in the lap of luxury. A great deal of a city's inhabitants were poor or foreign. In essence, a city was a commune run by the bourgeoisie. They were the members of craft fellowships, the holders of the wealth, the voters. The marketplace was also a wonder to behold. Food prices were fixed, so there was no panic in the event of a bad harvest, no chance of bread riots in the streets.
Craft fellowships were extremely important. All members of the husbands Craft would be present at his wedding (because, of course, he would not get married unless he had a Craft). There was a strong sense of unity between the members of a Craft, but there was still a distinct hierarchy. Cities were split another way as well - into wards, or neighborhoods. Each ward was distinct, and there was a strong sense of pride in one's ward. One would be born into their ward, so it encompassed everyone, rich or poor, working or not, man or woman.
Since the marriage age was later, there were many unmarried young men on the streets with unfulfilled needs. There were rape gangs that would ravish young, unmarried women. In an attempt to remedy the situation, public brothels were instituted and prostitution was legalized.
Most cities were run by elected officials. Although, in practice, every male citizen was eligible to hold office, in reality the officials were mostly the wealthy elite. And these elite did not work. They produced nothing, so they sold nothing. But they did become rentiers (sellers of rentes, or cash advances, who received annual payments and interest). The Three Orders/Estates were the clergy (first estate), nobility (second estate), and everyone else (third estate). But it was unclear where the rentiers fit into all this. In order to be considered noble, they had to prove that their family had lived nobly for at least three generations. However, they were disliked by nobles and commoners alike, and kept mostly to themselves. Eventually they became their own class: the officeholders.
Like today, most people did not like to pay taxes. It was not uncommon for rebellions or protests to occur. Since it was usually the people who could not pay that were taxed the most heavily, there was some hatred for the elite and nobles. They maintained their control with violence and intimidation. This aristocracy was extremely small, and most of its wealth came from land. They often fought among themselves, competing in an attempt to increase their own status by belittling others.
In contrast, cities were large and luxurious. There were shops filled with food and drink in excess. However, not everyone who lived in the cities lived in the lap of luxury. A great deal of a city's inhabitants were poor or foreign. In essence, a city was a commune run by the bourgeoisie. They were the members of craft fellowships, the holders of the wealth, the voters. The marketplace was also a wonder to behold. Food prices were fixed, so there was no panic in the event of a bad harvest, no chance of bread riots in the streets.
Craft fellowships were extremely important. All members of the husbands Craft would be present at his wedding (because, of course, he would not get married unless he had a Craft). There was a strong sense of unity between the members of a Craft, but there was still a distinct hierarchy. Cities were split another way as well - into wards, or neighborhoods. Each ward was distinct, and there was a strong sense of pride in one's ward. One would be born into their ward, so it encompassed everyone, rich or poor, working or not, man or woman.
Since the marriage age was later, there were many unmarried young men on the streets with unfulfilled needs. There were rape gangs that would ravish young, unmarried women. In an attempt to remedy the situation, public brothels were instituted and prostitution was legalized.
Most cities were run by elected officials. Although, in practice, every male citizen was eligible to hold office, in reality the officials were mostly the wealthy elite. And these elite did not work. They produced nothing, so they sold nothing. But they did become rentiers (sellers of rentes, or cash advances, who received annual payments and interest). The Three Orders/Estates were the clergy (first estate), nobility (second estate), and everyone else (third estate). But it was unclear where the rentiers fit into all this. In order to be considered noble, they had to prove that their family had lived nobly for at least three generations. However, they were disliked by nobles and commoners alike, and kept mostly to themselves. Eventually they became their own class: the officeholders.
Like today, most people did not like to pay taxes. It was not uncommon for rebellions or protests to occur. Since it was usually the people who could not pay that were taxed the most heavily, there was some hatred for the elite and nobles. They maintained their control with violence and intimidation. This aristocracy was extremely small, and most of its wealth came from land. They often fought among themselves, competing in an attempt to increase their own status by belittling others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)