Abstracts
Abstract
There is a dearth of more substantial critical studies on Ann Yearsley’s tragic drama Earl Goodwin in general, and while the few out there have helpfully illuminated the play’s representation of the historical plight of women and the poor during Anglo-Saxon times, as well as its application to their current predicaments in Romantic-era England and France, they have tended to leave unexplored the ways in which Yearsley simultaneously is clarifying and extending her anger at and frustration with the class- and gender-based discrimination she experienced firsthand in the fallout with her mentor Hannah More over the profits from her first book. This article aims to fill this gap by delineating the many ways in which Earl Goodwin represents, on one level, her ongoing response to the defamation she suffered in the wake of More’s public campaign to ruin her reputation. Documenting the inextricability of the play’s explicit social and political critiques with Yearsley’s ongoing response to the More fiasco should in fact reinforce the extent to which her more familiar initial reactions are as fundamentally politically as they are personally motivated. Earl Goodwin offers readers a positive example of how to respond to abuses of power without resorting to revenge while still actively resisting, always refusing to airbrush the inequities she and others like her (women, the poor, and especially working-class women) continue to face day in and day out, enduring insult and injustice, but remaining undaunted in the commitment to the cause of beneficial social change.
Appendices
Works Cited
- Andrews, Kerri. Ann Yearsley and Hannah More, Patronage and Poetry. London: Pickering & Chatto, 2013.
- Burroughs, Catherine. “Introduction: Uncloseting Women in British Romantic Theatre.” Women in British Romantic Theatre: Drama, Performance, and Society, 1790-1840. Ed. Catherine Burroughs. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2000. 1-20.
- Cairnie, Julie. “The Ambivalence of Ann Yearsley: Laboring and Writing, Submission and Resistance.” Nineteenth-Century Contexts 27.4 (2005): 353-64.
- Feldman, Paula R., ed. British Women Poets of the Romantic Era: An Anthology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1997.
- Ferguson, Moira. “Resistance and Power in the Life and Writings of Ann Yearsley.” The Eighteenth Century 27.3 (1986): 247-68.
- Kucich, Greg. “Women’s Historiography and the (dis)Embodiment of Law: Ann Yearsley, Mary Hays, Elizabeth Benger.” Wordsworth Circle 33.1 (2002): 3-7.
- Newey, Katherine. “Women and History on the Romantic Stage: More, Yearsley, Burney, and Mitford.” Women in British Romantic Theatre: Drama, Performance, and Society, 1790-1840. Ed. Catherine Burroughs. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2000. 79-101.
- Pearson, Jacqueline. “Crushing the Convent and the Dread Bastille: The Anglo-Saxons, Revolution and Gender in Women’s Plays of the 1790s.” Literary Appropriations of the Anglo-Saxons from the Thirteenth to the Twentieth Century. Eds. Donald Scragg and Carole Weinberg. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2000. 122-37.
- Pietropoli, Cecilia. “Hannah More’s and Ann Yearsley’s Anglo-Saxon History Plays.” Women’s Romantic Theatre and Drama: History, Agency, and Performativity. Eds. Lilla Maria Crisafulli and Keir Elam. Farnham: Ashgate, 2010. 59-70.
- Waldron, Mary. “A Different kind of Patronage: Ann Yearsley’s Later Friends.” The Age of Johnson 13 (2002): 283-335.
- Yearsley, Ann. Earl Goodwin, an Historical Play. London: Robinson, 1791.
- Yearsley, Ann. Poems on Several Occasions. 4th ed. London: Robinson, 1786.
- Yearsley, Ann. Poems on Various Subjects. London: Robinson, 1787.