By the start of her second decade of marriage, Emma’s health had begun to fail. Somewhat frail even as a child, she suffered in adulthood from years of frequent childbearing and miscarriages, hard work, and inadequate housing and food. She also suffered the emotionally debilitating loss of her youngest child, Mark, who died of complications of scarlet fever shortly before his fourth birthday. Blaming their desperate poverty and striving to provide better for her other children, Emma landed a job at the Chattanooga News in 1914 and for several months wrote a column called “Fountain Square Conversations.” She lived in the Frances Willard Home for Working Girls and for a time enjoyed a bit of freedom from the daily toil of housekeeping and motherhood. That respite was not to last, “sacrificed,” as she put it, “to a man’s pleasure” (Journal, July 24, 1914).3 Pregnant again and ill, she had to resign from the News, only to lose the baby a few weeks later. Ultimately she was diagnosed with tuberculosis and confined for periods of varying duration in Pine Breeze Sanitarium in Chattanooga. Ill health and wracking poverty notwithstanding, Emma Bell Miles managed to publish or sell during her lifetime more than one hundred poems, including those in a self-published booklet called Chords from a Dulcimore; seventeen short stories; a series of newspaper columns; and two books. The second book, entitled Our Southern Birds, was completed during her last stay at Pine Breeze and was launched just two weeks before her death on March 19, 1919. She was thirty-nine years old.4
The seventeen short stories in this collection constitute all of Miles’s known fictional output. There were most likely other stories drafted, as indicated by her journal entries and letters. In his introduction to Once I Too Had Wings:The Journals of Emma Bell Miles, 1908–1918, Steven Cox lists titles of works that Miles says she has written and in some cases submitted for publication, but these have not come to light. However, I suspect that at least two of those in Cox’s list may have been published under titles other than the ones given in her journals and are in fact present in this collection.5 All of the major magazines of her era, such as Harper’s, Lippincott’s, Putnam’s, Century, Craftsman, and Red Book, have been thoroughly searched, as have the smaller, more obscure publications that she wrote for, including Mother’s Magazine, Youth’s Companion, Nautilus, and The Lookout. These seventeen stories are the result of those searches.
Some scholars have theorized that she may have allowed other writers to publish her work under their own names. Possibly that happened, for we know from her journals and letters that she collaborated extensively with Caroline Wood Morrison in 1908; she also wrote that she worked closely in 1908–10 with the sisters Alice McGowan and Grace McGowan Cooke, drawing illustrations and providing ideas for their books. All three of these collaborators, writers of some renown in Chattanooga, were publishing novels and stories set in Miles’s own home territory during the period from 1908 to 1910. A study of their work shows that they clearly benefited from Miles’s knowledge of the mountain people and her wordsmithing talents; what she gained from them is less clear. However, she may have allowed them to borrow her ideas, her drawings, and even her actual writing because they were better established than she and perhaps promised help in getting her work published.
Whatever the case, in the seventeen stories that we know were written by Emma Bell Miles (including one in collaboration with Caroline Wood Morrison), as well as in many of her poems and essays, her perceptions of men’s and women’s opposite realms of existence infuse the corpus of her work. Feminist that she is, her writings belong generally to the local color school, though literary historians usually claim that the local color movement was in decline by the time Miles began to publish.6 In the decade following her death, a new regionalism reached fruition, its proponents sharing a strong sense of place with the local colorists but imbuing their fiction even more overtly than most of their predecessors with social motives. According to critics Harry Warfel and Harrison Orians, “Authors wrote to support theses rather than to photograph a group of people against a setting.”7 Emma Bell Miles’s fiction and nonfiction stand between these two closely related impulses, her form and style taking their pattern largely from the nineteenth-century local colorists—that is, “photograph[ing] a group of people against a setting”; her purpose, however, with its intense seriousness, providing a bridge to the twentieth-century regionalists.
Miles’s stories can be profitably examined by these standards, for her whole body of fiction is a crusade for the liberation of women, coupled in her mind with the oppression of poverty. Yet Miles was well aware that poverty alone does not fetter women; in her Appalachian Mountain culture, as in most others throughout America, the traditions of the patriarchal society determined woman’s place.
Miles approached her subject matter at a time when the organized suffrage movement was still relatively new in the South, and virtually unknown in the mountain South. In her stories her vision of women and their utter dependence on marriage localizes itself to the Southern mountains, in reality her own Walden’s Ridge, Tennessee. Others were also writing about the Appalachian Mountains during this same period. “Somewhere on [her] blue horizon”8 reigned the queen of mountain fiction, Mary Murfree, whose view of the mountaineer fixed itself in the minds of Americans and to some extent remains there today. John Fox replicated Murfree’s picture to become one of the most popular authors in the country soon after the turn of the century. Dozens of other writers flocked to the Appalachians to view the scenery, to poke and prod the natives—if they dared—in their research for their next “piece.” Constance Fenimore Woolson put in her time on the Blue Ridge near Asheville; Joel Chandler Harris paid some visits to folks he knew up in North Georgia; Lucy Furman set up shop at Hindman Settlement School in Knott County, Kentucky. But Emma Bell Miles did not have to go anywhere: she looked out her door; she listened to Frank, to Grandma Miles, to sister-in-law Laura Hatfield, to Aunt Lucy, to her babies. She wrote about the Appalachian mountaineer from home, and the view looked different from there. In 1914, after she had already composed most of her fiction that came to print, she remarked to an unidentified correspondent, “To one who has lived the life, the ordinary novel of moonshine & rifles seems merely newspaper twaddle.”9
It is hardly a wonder that Miles should ignore, if not reject, the “otherness” of Appalachia that critic Henry Shapiro claims was not initiated by, but solidly established in, Murfree’s fiction.10 The perception of otherness actuated an opposition between Appalachia and the rest of America, a strange incongruity, for the mountain region had once been the frontier of America. Its settlers, both those who stayed and those who passed through, were America’s settlers. But somewhere along the way, partially because of the region’s insularity, the ordinary changes of civilization were arrested. Appalachia retained into the twentieth century folkways attributed to ages and places as diverse as Chaucer’s England and eighteenth-century America. In the fervid search for local color by those who lived beyond the mountains, the differences, the otherness, spotted among the mountaineers became a rich vein to be mined. In fiction the contrast, and ultimately the opposition, between the familiar and the unfamiliar has been emblemized by the conflict between insider and outsider, represented most often by moonshiners and revenuers, feudists and lawmen, mountain girls and city boys.
But little of that touched Emma Bell Miles. She “lived the life”; she did not need to create dramatic tension through conflict between insider and outsider. She saw it daily between insider and insider, between woman’s dream and her reality. She verbalized her own concept of the normalcy of Appalachian culture when she wrote in 1907 to Anna Ricketson, a friend by correspondence in New Bedford, Massachusetts: “It is often hard for me to notice points of difference between our way of life and civilization, I am so used to the backwoods.”11 Her fiction does not build from without, then, as does that of other writers about Appalachia in her time. It grows from within, showing respect for the traditional folkways that have sustained the mountain people, but at the same ti
me crying out against the cultural bonds that restrict, limit, and dehumanize the women. Her characters are mountaineers, but they are not peculiar or different from common people anywhere.
Three years elapsed between the publication of Miles’s fictionalized ethnography, The Spirit of the Mountains, and the first of what I am calling her “quasi-fictional” stories, a term not meant to diminish her work but rather to explain it as a type of discourse that draws from both literary and expository writing with a definite aim to convince and persuade. In a bit of prepublication criticism, she showed that she knew the qualities of her own writing, qualities that she seemed to consider detriments to her success. To Anna Ricketson she wrote in 1907 of her stories: “Mine generally lack the keen interest of action and plot which ‘The Circle’ [prize competition] makes a first consideration.” A few days later she continued, “I think my stories will never be popular; they are too serious. . . . Perhaps I shall acquire a lighter touch as the children grow older and the daily stress is somewhat relieved.”12
Two striking points emerge from this self-assessment. First, Miles is aware that her writing does something different from standard fiction; it lacks the “keen interest of action and plot.” At this stage in her life she could not recognize that the chronological mode of fiction with its past-tense narrative of “what happened” was not sufficient for her purposes, which tended toward a more generalized present-tense analysis of “what happens.”13 She wanted to write fiction, but her worldview demanded exposition. What emerged was a hybrid product that combined fabricated plots and characters based on her own experiences and observations, heavily laden with social commentary. Thus, she dubbed her stories “too serious.” Of course they were serious, because they carried her message to the world about the status of her gender; they were loaded with her moral conviction of wrong, which she could not express openly, even to herself, and so must camouflage in fiction. The second point to emerge from Miles’s statement is that in her own person she offered a perfect example of the cause she crusaded for. “Perhaps I shall acquire a lighter touch as the children grow older and the daily stress is somewhat relieved.”
Miles placed her first story, “The Common Lot,” in Harper’s Monthly Magazine in December 1908, where it appeared with three full-page illustrations drawn by Lucius Wolcott Hitchcock. It was the first of five stories by Miles that Harper’s would publish between December 1908 and November 1910. During this same period, notable authors such as William Dean Howells, Mark Twain, Rudyard Kipling, and Willa Cather were writing for Harper’s—thus putting Miles among heady company.
“The Common Lot” serves in many ways as her signature piece by probing the dilemma of the mountain woman’s lot in life: marriage versus spinsterhood. Sixteen-year-old Easter Vanderwelt examines the life of her married sister as she helps with the unceasing toil to meet the needs of the babies, the husband, the women themselves, the little house they live in. From tending the garden patch to milking the cows to nursing the ailing baby, sister Cordy confronts a new pregnancy and begins to mend the clothes that her last baby has barely outgrown. Death precedes birth, however, and Easter hears Cordy’s fatalistic declaration over her baby’s grave, “I’ve got no idy the next’ll thrive any better.”14 In a foreshadowing of her own plight years later, Miles has Cordy deliver the only prayer offered for her baby before its burial. Frequent pregnancies, the rigors of childbirth, and the specter of infant death define Cordy Hallet’s view of married life—and that of most mountain women.
With such a vision before her, Easter understandably fears marriage. Practicing the restraint that her times required, Miles can only imply that Easter’s fear is rooted in part in the sexual and biological demands of wifehood. Easter occupies the curious position, as many a rural child does, of having witnessed and assisted at births and deaths; she knows much of the elemental aspects of life. Yet the sex act and the workings of her own body represent mysteries that she is not sure she wants to fathom. Although she never verbalizes the cause of her worries, she shares her concern with Cordy. The sister replies, “You don’t need to be afeared. . . . You’d be better off with him [Allison, Easter’s suitor] than ye would at home, wouldn’t ye? Life’s mighty hard for women anywhars.” From this discussion and her own long consideration Easter comes to see that her choice is “slavery in her father’s house or slavery in a husband’s.” Harsh as such an assessment may seem, it depicts a woman’s view, unhampered by illusion, of what her culture has to offer. She ultimately chooses a husband and her own home, realizing that to refuse them means refusing “the invitation of life” and “the only development possible to her.”15 In so doing she has acknowledged the common lot of mountain women, and perhaps of rural women everywhere.
Miles softens her picture of woman’s toil and constriction with the promise of romantic love and spiritual fulfillment of sorts. Yet she persists in pushing the hardships to the forefront. Like other local colorists, she straddled a splintery fence between realism and romanticism. On the one side grew the rose and on the other the brier; their commitment to fidelity obliged local colorists to include both. Readers of the popular magazines, and consequently editors, seemed to prefer roses in their endings. Disturbing resolutions or indeterminate endings are rare exceptions in local color writing. Melodrama, defined as “an affirmation of a benevolent moral order in the universe,”16 is much more common.
In her presentation of the mountain woman’s experience, then, Miles runs the risk of uncovering the ugly, the lewd, the tragic. To ameliorate those revelations, she steps into most of her stories and works the details into a seemingly happy resolution. The reasons for her manipulation are more complicated than the mere satisfaction of reader expectation. We must remember that she was a crusader with an ideal worldview; in her personal life she summoned an eternally rebounding hope to help her cope with problems far greater than any she ever depicted in fiction. The stories become her wish-fulfillment of situations working out satisfactorily within the mountain culture. In her fictional sorties she spotlights the privation, subservience, and limitations of mountain women; but in her retreats she withdraws to the safety of compensations. The divisiveness in herself and her fiction probably swells from two factors. First, the mountain culture truly does offer rewards to women through the giving and nurturing of life, as Miles allows Easter Vanderwelt and her sister protagonists to see. And second, as spokesperson for her culture, Miles must bear in mind her personal relationship to the people about whom she writes; they are a proud and fiercely independent lot who look with suspicion at her work because it is alien to their largely oral culture. Her mother-in-law, Cynthia Jane Winchester Miles, allegedly remarked, “These here writers and type-writers will do to watch.” Is there any wonder that her daughter-in-law alternates her attacks with rewards?
As indicated earlier, “The Common Lot” in both title and subject matter can stand as Miles’s battle cry in her crusade. Almost all of the other stories are variations on its theme. In fact, the first seven published stories feature a girl or young woman as protagonist—one who faces the prospect of marriage or deals with the consequences of it. “The Broken Urn,” published in Putnam’s Magazine in February 1909, opens with two small girls already wearing the yoke of their gender, as shown in the play they engage in. They cook and clean in their rock playhouse; they piece quilt patterns from scraps of cloth cast off by grannies and cousins; and they talk of being married someday. But their paths are to diverge and their burdens to differ as they grow into womanhood. One stays on the mountain and marries her childhood sweetheart; the other weds the hotel proprietor’s son and leaves the highlands behind. Sarepta Kinsale’s battle with poverty, toil, and infant death is set against her childhood playmate’s wealth, idleness, and thriving baby. Yet Nigarie Stetson, the playmate who migrated from the mountain and formed a new life in a totally different culture, is the restless one, the malcontent. Sarepta is the character who grows into an “understanding of the quiet, unassailable d
ignity of her own position, and [learns] the intrinsic worth of usefulness as contrasted with the false value of unearned riches.”17
The story’s title comes from a quilt pattern that Nigarie and Sarepta as little girls had altered to make a whole vessel they called “the Friendship’s Urn.” Miles’s choice of “The Broken Urn” rather than “The Friendship’s Urn” as title suggests Nigarie’s incapacity to have a life filled to the brim as Sarepta can. Nigarie is the incomplete vessel that has no room for the pain and suffering Sarepta experiences, and also no room for the sublime happiness that is Sarepta’s as she fills her whole urn of life day after day with a mixture of the bitter and the sweet. Nigarie’s broken urn contains only fleeting moments of gaiety, only brief occasions of real usefulness, but she does offer the gift of life to Sarepta’s baby when she lifts him impulsively to her breast. “Why, he’s starved most to death. . . . I reckon you ain’t been able to nurse him. I wish I could—why couldn’t I?” It is her richest moment, this season in her friend’s humble home, where she coaxes a tiny life to blossom through the nourishment of her own body and receives in return nourishment for her soul. But it is not to last. Nigarie is the displaced mountaineer, one who longs to come home, but who cannot stay there when she arrives. In a moment of candor she confesses to Sarepta and her husband: “‘We’ve been everywhere, Sam and me. . . . I’ve lived at the sea-shore, in the West, and we had a winter in New York; but I always wanted, I think, to come back here—on a visit,’ she added the concluding words hastily, for she knew that no place on earth could hold her long.”18
The Common Lot and Other Stories Page 2