Critical Analysis of Fanny Fern’s Social and Feminist Prose

Overview of Literary Significance. Fanny Fern (pseudonym of Sara Parton) stands as one of nineteenth-century America's most sharp-witted, satirical, and socially engaged journalists. Through her widely read columns and anthology series, Fern systematically dismantled Victorian gender norms, exposed socioeconomic stratifications, and critiqued the systemic hypocrisies of her era. By transitioning from localized domestic observations to expansive critique of institutional power structures, her oeuvre provides an essential literary foundation for American feminist commentary and social historiography.

Fern Leaves from Fanny’s Portfolio, Second Series (1854). The popular first series of Fern Leaves was quickly followed by a second series in the following year. As does the first, it contains both previously published and newly composed entries. Although Fern treats many of the same issues presented in the first series, the second moves from domestic matters to more expansive social and economic concerns. The tone is less cautious and subtle and more satirical and cynical. As her career progressed, Fern became increasingly outspoken and sardonic in her critique of social injustice.

Satirical Deconstruction in "Apollo Hyacinth." Perhaps Fern’s most famous work is "Apollo Hyacinth," a sharp indictment of a dandyish writer whose selfishness and hypocrisy lead him to associate only with those who can further his social position. Because Apollo Hyacinth considers himself a gentleman of fine breeding, he “never says an uncivil thing” (382). But, Fern skewers his character, noting his “sins of omission” as he avoids the troubles of others and feigns ignorance after the fact, thus not sullying his reputation by neglecting his family and friends. William Moulton’s exposure of Sara Parton as Fanny Fern revealed the true identity of Apollo Hyacinth to be Fern’s brother N. P. Willis. Fern’s portrait of the indifferent and self-absorbed character lurking under her brother’s elegant exterior satirizes those who appear cultured and refined but in reality lack “moral excellence”.

Socioeconomic Critique and Class Warfare. The second series also contains more direct criticisms of an unfeeling social hierarchy that allows citizens to fall into hopeless and desperate poverty. In "Dollars and Dimes" Fern notes, “An empty pocket is the worst of crimes” and mockingly reflects that without money one will not be well received by “good people” (212). She also indicts capitalism for causing a moral decline in those who attempt to climb to the top of the financial ladder. "Our Street" sympathetically describes the honest working-class men and women, starving homeless people, and child laborers of New York who walk among its more gentrified residents.

Publication Archival Record. Fern Leaves from Fanny’s Portfolio, Second Series has been republished twice, first in Ayer Publishing’s American Fiction Reprint Series (1971) and then in the Michigan Historical Reprint Series (2005). In addition, the full texts of both series are available online from several sources.

Analytical Discussion Parameters.
1st point: Consider the ethics involved in exposing the faults and flaws of a friend or family member as Fern does in “Apollo Hyacinth”. When is it appropriate to condemn that person publicly for undesirable behavior? When is it not?

2nd point: Several articles in the series illustrate the despair and misery of poverty. Does Fern identify the causes of such financial hardship? If so, what are they? Does she offer any solutions?

"Hints to Young Wives" (1852). "Hints to Young Wives" begins with Fern’s saying she would like to take all conduct books written for married women, which generally encourage them to be submissive and excel at housekeeping, and throw them on a bonfire along with the authors. The article describes a fictionalized “poor little innocent fool” (2,102) whose fawning, servile behavior toward her husband does nothing but earn his contempt since he knows he has her unwavering devotion. Fern suggests that the husband who does not turn tyrant with such treatment is rare. To illustrate this point Fern relates an incident when she is mending “Mr. Fern’s” coat and finds a love letter in his pocket, proof that obsequious behavior will cause a man to lose interest. While most 19th-century advice book authors emphasize the importance of homemaking and the supportive role of the wife toward her husband, Fern counsels quite the opposite. Not only does she warn that subservient behavior will harm the wife, leaving her with chattering teeth and a dislocated wrist, but she places responsibility for men’s dismissal of their wives’ ill-informed behavior. The marital power dynamic clearly demands that a woman maintain autonomy so her husband will not “turn on his heel and march off whistling ‘Yankee Doodle’” (2,102). An inequitable relationship, it seems, draws out the worst in all parties.

Rhetorical Persona and Vernacular Engagement. Further, Fern’s tone assumes an intimacy with the reader as she confesses her own failings in marriage, such as her willingness to drop everything to mend her husband’s coat, despite a “crucifying headache”. The anecdote establishes a conversational familiarity with the reader as well as Fern’s authority and credibility with regard to the subject. Similarly, vernacular phrases such as “them’s my sentiments” and “fiddlesticks” make the author’s persona seem approachable, more like a regular woman with common problems than a celebrated author.

Analytical Discussion Parameters.
1st point: What portions of “Hints to Young Wives” might have been perceived as scandalous at the time of its publication? What does Fern mean when she advises the woman whose husband treats her as a housekeeper to “fill that place and no other” (2,102)?

2nd point: Given that Fanny Fern is a pseudonym, what do you make of the fact that she relates an incident about “Mr. Fern” that puts him in an unflattering light?

3rd point: Fern writes that when she found her husband’s letter, “I dropped the coat, I dropped the work-basket, I dropped the buttons, I dropped the baby” (2,102) and then looked at herself in the mirror and warned herself not to be a fool again. How might you read this passage symbolically?

"Independence" (1859). "Independence" begins on the Fourth of July with Fern’s protesting, “I don’t feel patriotic” and declaring that although the United States promotes individual freedom, “as a woman, I shouldn’t know it” (2,107). She goes on to posit that “some orator” must have told her of her freedom, implying that while liberty is an admirable idealistic goal of American democracy, the possession of such independence for women is an illusion. She then asks a series of rhetorical questions such as “Can I go out of an evening without a hat at my side?” and “Can I be a Senator?” the obvious answer to all of which is no. She ends by griping, “Free! Humph!” (2,107).

Public Sphere and Political Disenfranchisement. Fern’s analysis of women’s roles here concentrates primarily on appearances in the public, rather than the domestic, sphere. Questions regarding what she cannot do are based on society’s expectations of her performance on the street, at a lecture, on a bus, and in politics or other public spaces. Her argument equates freedom and patriotism with participation in a public arena where she may openly acknowledge her opinions and rely on herself, as opposed to male guardianship. “Independence” ends by implicating the reader in Fern’s complaints, stating, “Can I even be President? Bah—you know I can’t” (2,107). By assuming the reader’s agreement with her statement, Fern reveals what she intimates her reader already knows: the truth of her grounds for feeling less than patriotic on Independence Day.

Satirical Subversion of Political Figures. Typically, Fern employs a humorous tone, praising George Washington even though he was a poor speller (a dig at the founding father in light of her own success as a journalist) and lamenting that she cannot see anything “pleasant” such as execution or a dissection. Her satiric manner utilizes humor to mitigate a controversial conviction that society should not exclude women from the sordid details of life, law, and science. To do so, Fern argues, flies in the face of democracy.

Analytical Discussion Parameters.
1st point: Compare and contrast “Independence” with W. E. B. DuBois’s “Of Mr. Booker T. Washington and Others” (1905). Although the two pieces were written approximately 50 years apart, both comment on the place of the author in terms of national identity and democracy. What similarities are there in what both have to say about what it means to be a minority (a woman or African American) in the United States? How do they differ?

2nd point: Consider the questions Fern asks about what she may and may not do as a woman. What sorts of practical ideas and customs does Fern critique? What sorts of abstract principles does she address? Is there any pattern to the order in which the questions are presented?

"The Working-Girls of New York" (1868). "The Working-Girls of New York" contrasts the “dainty fashionist” of elite society, who is well provided for by an uncaring husband or father, with the “care-worn working girl” of the laboring class and aligns the two as they ask the mutual question: “Is this all life has for me?” (2,107–2,108). Fern asserts that for all the efforts of her contemporaries, “a great book is yet unwritten about women” (2,108). She continues with a detailed description of the deplorable conditions faced by women in manufacturing jobs and factories, which produce luxuries like hoop skirts and jewelry that other women enjoy without a thought as to where they originated.

Class Duality and Industrial Exploitation. Fern’s attack on class-based inequities for women is twofold. First, she parallels the lives of upper- and lower-class women to show the commonality of women’s oppression no matter what their social status. Second, while she describes the life of the “fortunate” woman as one in which a husband provides material advantages but no emotional warmth, her primary focus is the working girl. With her audience of primarily wealthy and middle-class women firmly in mind, Fern’s article relates the day-to-day drudgery of those with long hours, noisy unventilated workspaces, physical discomforts, little food, squalid living conditions, and dirty clothes. Fern chastises the reader for not thinking of where her goods come from and at whose expense. She admonishes the well-to-do woman that she would not last five minutes in the oppressive environment suffered by the young women watching the factory clock. In an appeal to sisterly vanity, Fern divulges that because of the demands of industry, these “poor creatures” with lined faces are young in years only, not in appearance.

Analytical Discussion Parameters.
1st point: Reread the paragraph in which Fern discusses the “great book” she sees as yet unwritten about women. What texts, both fiction and nonfiction, do you think might qualify as the “bold, frank, truthful” book that Fern anticipated? In other words, since the mid-19th-century, what works have attempted to bring to light the issues Fern thought important for women’s rights?

2nd point: Fern specifically refers to New York as the place where the contrast between “squalor and splendor so sharply present[s] itself” (2,107). Research what New York (or other large cities such as Boston and Chicago) was like during the second half of the 19th century. What kinds of living and working conditions were there? Is Fern’s depiction justified? Why or why not?