Animals and Women Feminist The

by Carol J Adams

  9. Of course, Woolf would turn to the "biography" of a dog in Flush (1933), a work that has not received its fair share of critical attention, particularly as Woolf reflects a tradition of Victorian animal discourse and "animal estate" fiction (e.g., Anna Sewell ’ s [1820 – 1878] Black Beauty [1877]).

  10. See Bell, Virginia Woolf, 1:73, 75, 146, 149; 2:37, 40, 60, 95, 96 – 97, 110 – 11, 117 – 18, 136 – 37, 144, 146.

  11. James Russell Lowell (1819 – 1891), Woolf ’ s "godfather" (the Stephen children were not baptized but were assigned "sponsors" [Bell, Virginia Woolf, 24 – 25]), also gave the young girl "a real, live bird in a cage, an incident that Virginia does not mention anywhere in her memoirs and yet caused Vanessa [Virginia ’ s older sister] to recall more than fifty years later the ‘ evil passions ’ this preferential gift aroused in her" (Dunn, 31).

  12. In his first endnote to the essay, McNeillie quotes Woolf ’ s diaries regarding the writing of "The Plumage Bill": "Now for oh Reviewing! — Three weeks I think have passed without a word added to Jacob [ Jacob ’ s Room ]. How is one to bring it through at this rate. Yet its [ sic ] all my fault . . . why take up the Plumage Bill for Ray [Strachey]? But after this week I do no more" [ Diary, 2:53). Woolf was indeed too busy to go to Regent Street when she began her essay on the Plumage Bill. Interestingly enough, one of the projects on Woolf ’ s mind was her 1922 novel Jacob ’ s Room, a passage from which Adams cites as a possible reference to a feminist-vegetarian perspective in Woolf ’ s work (Adams, 188). Earlier (1907 – 1913), Woolf had created a failed vegetarian in the character of Mr. Ambrose in The Voyage Out (198).

  13. Woolf would address the role of the female sale assistant in the short story "Mrs. Dalloway in Bond Street" (1923) and in the novel Mrs. Dalloway (15 – 19).

  14. Woolf also does not acknowledge in the essay itself the participation of women as spokespersons for the plumage trade. In her reply to Massingham ’ s critique of her essay ("Letter to the Editor," 244 – 45 n.4), Woolf does make a reference to E. Florence Yates, described by McNeillie as "a prominent campaigner on the part of the plumage trade" (245 n.4). (Miss E. Florence Yates should not be confused with the anti-plumage campaigner Colonel Sir Charles Yate [1849 – 1940], who introduced the 1920 Plumage Bill.)

  15. The observant reader will note that Lady-So-and-So wears her egret plume in her hair and not in a hat. At the time, the word millinery applied to any decoration worn on the head. Hats and hair ornaments were sold in the same establishments.

  16. The American-born Nancy Langhorn Astor, Viscountess Astor (1879 – 1964), was the first woman elected (1919) to Parliament. She was an active supporter of the Plumage Bill of 1920 (Doughty, 120).

  17. Oddly enough, Haynes recounts that Queen Mary, Princess Mary ’ s mother, did have one royal relapse into forbidden plumage in, of all years, 1920. Queen Mary wore an "osprey" at a royal garden party (30).

  As for Woolf, in 1926 Vita Sackville-West (1892 – 1962) observed Woolf in an ensemble (matching dress and hat) featuring "a sort of top-hat made of straw, with two orange feathers like Mercury ’ s wings" (quoted in Glendinning, 163). Jane Dunn, in her interpretation of Woolf ’ s experiences in the ensemble (212 – 13), finds Woolf ’ s attraction to the hat to be based on the ease with which it could be worn "because there could be absolutely no doubt as to which was the front and which the back" (Dunn quoting Sackville-West, 212). However, Sackville-West ’ s pronoun references in the passage are vague. Sackville-West could be referring to the dress and/or hat.

  Clive Bell, Virginia ’ s sometime "lover" (Bell, Virginia Woolf, 1:132 – 33; 2:85 – 86) and the subject of a letter written just before Woolf ’ s 1915 breakdown ("The thing is for us all to persuade [Clive] that the love of birds is the last word in Civilisation" [ Letters, 2:61; see note 1]), ridiculed Woolf ’ s hat and eventually the dress as well. Woolf felt that Bell, whom she once nicknamed "Parakeet" (Dunn, 97), and others attacked her on the occasion: "They pulled me down between them like a hare" (quoted in Dunn 213). What is interesting here is not only Woolf ’ s choice of a plumed top-hat in 1926 (an anticipation of the 1930s, particularly the cross-dressing elements of European bohemia later popularized by Hollywood) but also the issues of Woolf ’ s self-image and the animal/bird imagery used by Woolf to characterize herself and others.

  18. An illustration of this is found in Adams ’ s story of the "feminist vegetarian milliner" interrupting a 1907 National American Woman Suffrage Association meeting (172 – 73).

  19. Jane Marcus, in her study of Night and Day, notes the presence of birds and bird imagery in the novel ("Enchanted Organ, Magic Bells: Night and Day as a Comic Opera," 26). The comic opera of Marcus ’ s title is Mozart ’ s (1756 – 1791) The Magic Flute (1791) — an opera featuring a bird-catcher.

  20. McNeillie notes that Dame Butt "made her first professional appearance in opera" at Covent Garden on 1 July 1920 and that Princess Mary was in the audience [ Essays, 3:244, n.3).

  References

  Adams, Carol J. The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory. New York: Continuum, 1990.

  Adburgham, Alison. Shopping in Style: London from the Restoration to Edwardian Elegance. London: Thames and Hudson, 1979.

  Bell, Quentin. On Human Finery. 1947. Reprint, New York: Schocken Books, 1978.

  — — — . Virginia Woolf: A Biography. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1972.

  Bradley, Mrs. Meta. “ Letter to the Editor, ” The Woman ’ s Leader, 30 July 1920. In The Essays of Virginia Woolf, Volume Three: 1919 – 1924, ed. Andrew McNeillie, 245 n.4. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988. Partial citation by V. Woolf, “ Letter to the Editor, ” The Woman ’ s Leader, 6 August 1920.

  Bury, Shirley. “ Parisian Jewelry and American Patrons. ” Antiques, April 1992, 614 – 21.

  Doughty, Robin W. Feather Fashions and Bird Preservation: A Study in Nature Protection. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975.

  Dunn, Jane. A Very Close Conspiracy: Vanessa Bell and Virginia Woolf. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1990.

  Gardiner, James. Gaby Deslys: A Fatal Attraction. London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1986.

  Ginsburg, Madeleine. The Hat: Trends and Traditions. New York: Barrons ’ Educational Series, 1990.

  Glendinning, Victoria. Vita: The Life of Vita Sackville-West. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1983.

  Haynes, Alan. “ Murderous Millinery. ” History Today. July 1983, 26 – 30.

  Lynd, Robert. “ A Tragic Comedienne ” [Review of Night and Day by Virginia Woolf]. The Nation, 15 May 1920.

  Marcus, Jane. “ Enchanted Organ, Magic Bells: Night and Day as a Comic Opera. ” In Virginia Woolf and the Languages of Patriarchy, 18 – 35. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1987.

  — — — . “ Introduction. ” In Virginia Woolf and the Languages of Patriarchy, xi – xv. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1987.

  Massingham, H. W. “ Letter to the Editor, ” The Woman ’ s Leader, 30 July 1920. The Essays of Virginia Woolf, Volume Three: 1919 – 1924, ed. Andrew McNeillie, 244 n.4 (partial citation). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988.

  — — — . “ Wayfarer, ” The Nation, 29 November 1919.

  — — — . “ Wayfarer, ” The Nation, 10 July 1920.

  — — — . “ Wayfarer, ” The Nation & Athenaeum, 22 October 1922.

  McNeillie, Andrew. “ Introduction. ” In The Essays of Virginia Woolf, Volume Three: 1919 – 1924, xi – xxii. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988.

  Nicolson, Nigel. “ Introduction. ” In The Letters of Virginia Woolf, Volume Two: 1912 – 1922, ed. Nigel Nicolson and Joanne Trautmann, xiii – xxiv. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1976.

  O ’ Hara, Georgina. The Encyclopaedia of Fashion. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1986.

  Renza, Louis A. “ A White Heron ” and the Question of Minor Literature. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1984.

  Ribeiro, Aileen. Dress and Morality. New York: Holmes & Meier
, 1986.

  Ritchie, Trekkie. “ Introduction. ” In Flush, Virginia Woolf, vii – xvii. 1933. Reprint, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1983.

  Ritvo, Harriet. The Animal Estate: The English and Other Creatures in the Victorian Age. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987.

  Steele, Valerie. Paris Fashion: A Cultural History. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.

  Strom, Deborah. Birdwatching with American Women: A Selection of Nature Writings. New York: Norton, 1986.

  “ Wayfarer. ” [H. W. Massingham]. The Nation, 29 November 1919.

  — — — . The Nation, 10 July 1920.

  — — — . The Nation & Athenaeum, 22 October 1922.

  Woolf, Virginia. The Diary of Virginia Woolf, Volume One: 1915 – 1919, ed. Anne Olivier Bell. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1978.

  — — — . The Diary of Virginia Woolf, Volume Two: 1920 – 1924, ed. Anne Olivier Bell. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1978.

  — — — . The Essays of Virginia Woolf, ed. Andrew McNeillie. 3 vols. to date. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1986 – .

  — — — . Flush. 1933. Reprint, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1983.

  — — — . “ The Intellectual Status of Women. ” 1920. In The Diary of Virginia Woolf, Volume Two: 1920 – 1924, ed. Anne Olivier Bell, 339 – 40. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1978.

  — — — . Jacob ’ s Room. 1922. Reprint, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1950.

  — — — . “ Letter to the Editor, ” The Woman ’ s Leader, 6 August 1920. In The Essays of Virginia Woolf, Volume Three: 1919 – 1924, ed. Andrew McNeillie, 244 – 45 n.4. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988.

  — — — . The Letters of Virginia Woolf, Volume One: 1888 – 1912, ed. Nigel Nicolson and Joanne Trautmann. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1976.

  — — — . The Letters of Virginia Woolf, Volume Two: 1912 – 1922, ed. Nigel Nicolson and Joanne Trautmann. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1976.

  — — — . “ Mr. Hudson ’ s Childhood ” [Review of Far Away and Long Ago: A History of My Early Life by William H. Hudson], 1918. In The Essays of Virginia Woolf, Volume Two: 1912 – 1918, ed. Andrew McNeillie, 298 – 303. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988.

  — — — . Mrs. Dalloway. 1925. Reprint, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1953.

  — — — . “ Mrs. Dalloway in Bond Street. ” 1923. In The Complete Shorter Fiction of Virginia Woolf, 1st ed., ed. Susan Dick, 146 – 53. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1985.

  — — — . Night and Day. 1919. Reprint, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1948.

  — — — . “ On a Faithful Friend. ” 1905. In The Essays of Virginia Woolf, Volume One: 1904 – 1912, ed. Andrew McNeillie, 12 – 15. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1986.

  — — — . “ Oxford Street Tide. ” 1932. In The London Scene: Five Essays by Virginia Woolf, 16 – 22. New York: Frank Hallman, 1975.

  — — — . “ The Perfect Language. ” 1917. In The Essays of Virginia Woolf, Volume Two: 1912 – 1918, ed. Andrew McNeillie, 114 – 19. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988.

  — — — . “ The Plumage Bill, ” The Woman ’ s Leader, 23 July 1920. Reprinted in The Diary of Virginia Woolf, Volume Two: 1920 – 1924, ed. Anne Olivier Bell, 337 – 38. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1978. Also reprinted in The Essays of Virginia Woolf, Volume Three: 1919 – 1924, ed. Andrew McNeillie, 241 – 45. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1988.

  — — — . A Room of One ’ s Own. 1929. Reprint, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1957.

  — — — . Three Guineas. 1938. Reprint, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1966.

  — — — . To the Lighthouse. 1927. Reprint, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1955.

  — — — . The Voyage Out. 1915. Reprint, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1948.

  — — — . The Years. 1937. Reprint, New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1965.

  Appendix: “ The Plumage Bill ” by Virginia Woolf

  (from The Woman ’ s Leader, 23 July 1920)

  If I had the money and the time I should, after reading ‘ Wayfarer ’ , in the Nation of 10 July, go to Regent Street, buy an egret plume, and stick it — is it in the back or the front of the hat? — and this in spite of a vow taken in childhood and hitherto religiously observed. The Plumage Bill has been smothered; millions of birds are doomed not only to extinction but to torture; and ‘ Wayfarer ’ s ’ comment is, “ What does one expect? They have to be shot in parenthood for child-bearing women to flaunt the symbols of it, and, as Mr Hudson says, one bird shot for its plumage means ten other deadly wounds and the starvation of the young. But what do women care? Look at Regent Street this morning! ” One can look at Regent Street without leaving one ’ s room. The lower half of the houses is composed of plate glass. One might string substantives and adjectives together for an hour without naming a tenth part of the dressing bags, silver baskets, boots, guns, flowers, dresses, bracelets and fur coats arrayed behind the glass. Men and women pass incessantly this way and that. Many loiter and perhaps desire, but few are in a position to enter the doors. Most of them merely steal a look and hurry on. And then there comes on foot, so that we may have a good look at her, a lady of a different class altogether. A silver bag swings from her wrist. Her gloves are white. Her shoes lustrous. She holds herself upright. As an object of beauty her figure is incomparably more delightful than any other object in street or window. It is her face that one must discount, for, though discreetly tinted and powdered, it is a stupid face, and the look she sweeps over the shop windows has something of the greedy petulance of a pug-dog ’ s face at tea-time. When she comes to the display of egret plumes, artfully arranged and centrally placed, she pauses. So do many women. For, after all, what can be more etherially and fantastically lovely? The plumes seem to be the natural adornment of spirited and fastidious life, the very symbols of pride and distinction. The lady of the stupid face and beautiful figure is going tonight to the opera; Clara Butt is singing Orpheus; Princess Mary will be present; a lemon-coloured egret is precisely what she wants to complete her toilet. In she goes; the silver bag disgorges I know not how many notes; and the fashion writers next day say that Lady So-and-So was “ looking lovely with a lemon-coloured egret in her hair ” .

  But since we are looking at pictures let us look at another which has the advantage of filling in certain blank spaces in our rough sketch of Regent Street in the morning. Let us imagine a blazing South American landscape. In the foreground a bird with a beautiful plume circles round and round as if lost or giddy. There are red holes in its head where there should be eyes. Another bird, tied to a stake, writhes incessantly, for red ants devour it. Both are decoys. The fact is that before “ the childbearing woman can flaunt the symbols of parenthood ” certain acts have to be devised, done, and paid for. It is in the nesting season that the plumes are brightest, So, if we wish to go on making pictures, we must imagine innumerable mouths opening and shutting, opening and shutting, until — as no parent bird comes to feed them — the young birds rot where they sit. Then there are the wounded birds, trailing leg or wing, as they flutter off to droop and falter in the dust. But perhaps the most unpleasant sight that we must make ourselves imagine is the sight of the bird tightly held in one hand while another hand pierces the eyeballs with a feather. But these hands — are they the hands of men or of women? The Plumage Bill supporters say that the hunters ‘ are the very scum of mankind. ’ We may assume that the newspapers would have let us know if any of the other sex had been concerned in it. We may fairly suppose then that the birds are killed by men, starved by men, and tortured by men — not vicariously, but with their own hands. “ A small band of East End profiteers ’ supports the trade; and East End profiteers are apt also to be of the male sex. But now, as ‘ Wayfarer ’ says, the birds ‘ have to be shot in parenthood for child-bearing women to flaunt the symbols of it ’ .

  B
ut what is the nature of this compulsion? Well, men must make their livings, must earn their profits, and must beget children. For though some people say that they can control their passions, the majority maintain that they should be protected from them rather than condemned for them. In other words, it is one thing to desire a woman; quite another to desire an egret plume.

  There remains, however, a body of honourable and disinterested men who are neither plume hunters, profiteers, nor women. It is their duty, as it is within their power, to end the murder and torture of the birds, and to make it impossible for a single egret to be robbed of a single plume. The House of Commons took the matter up. The Plumage Bill was sent to Standing Committee C. With one exception each of its sixty-seven members was a man. And on five occasions it was impossible to get a quorum of twenty to attend. The Plumage Bill is for all practical purposes dead. But what do men care? Look wherever you like this morning! Still, one cannot imagine ‘ Wayfarer ’ putting it like that. ‘ They have to be shot for child-begetting men to flaunt the symbols of it. . . . But what do men care? Look at Regent Street this morning! ’ Such an outburst about a fishing-rod would be deemed sentimental in the extreme. Yet I suppose that salmon have their feelings.

  So far as I know, the above, though much embittered by sex antagonism, is a perfectly true statement. But the interesting point is that in my ardour to confute ‘ Wayfarer ’ , a journalist of admitted humanity, I have said more about his injustice to women than about the suffering of birds. Can it be that it is a graver sin to be unjust to women than to torture birds?

  12

  Brian Luke

  Taming Ourselves or Going Feral? Toward a Nonpatriarchal Metaethic of Animal Liberation

  Animal liberationists oppose the institutionalized exploitation of animals in such industries as animal farming, animal vivisection, and sport hunting. Ethically, animal liberation involves recognizing the moral significance of the severe harms done to animals through these institutions. In this essay, I focus on the metaethics of animal liberation, that is, on the meaning of animal exploitation for people, the moral agents who sometimes support and sometimes oppose animal exploitation. The points made here are relevant to issues such as why people support animal exploitation and what this does to them; how people come to oppose animal exploitation; and how we might best understand the social function of animal liberationist ethics.