Comparison of Fell, de Scudéry, and de Pizan

I read Margaret Fell’s “Women’s Speaking Justified, Proved, and Allowed by the Scriptures” in combination with Madeleine de Scudéry’s “Of Conversation” and “Of Speaking too much, or too little, And how we ought to speak.” The resulting comparison and contrast I performed using these two authors was very interesting; I found myself questioning why de Scudéry encountered far less opposition to her public voice than did Margaret Fell when these ladies were nearly exact contemporaries. (Fell: 1614-702, de Scudéry: 1607-1701).

I surmise that this was mainly the case because Margaret Fell was a religious leader, whereas Madeleine de Scudéry wrote comparatively less-harmful novels and conduct books. Fell (obviously) seeks to give women additional social space by expanding the role which her fellow Quaker’s allow for them. Aspects of her text seemed to possess considerable ethos; as I began reading than I have encountered straightaway in the writings of other rhetorician, because like a number of modern writers, Fell backs up claims with varied examples.

However, Madeleine de Scudéry’s accomplishments are not to be belittled; also, according to her introduction: after “the first novel gained great acclaim…” “…everyone quickly figured out who had written it.” From the early days of her career to its ending, everyone seemed more or less comfortable with her to the literary sphere (save for possibly her brother, on the occasion when de Scudery’s writing Artaméne under his name led to his near arrest) (763).

Madeleine de Scudéry’s choices in topics were probably deemed more acceptable in general than Fell’s not only because her subject matter was less controversial, but also because she was following a tradition established by Christine de Pizan and other similar authors. After all, de Scudery was clearly influenced by de Pizan; the former published a catalogue of famous women honoring “about the worth of women that Christine de Pizan and others had initiated in the fourteenth century” (762).

As for how well I did or did not connect with the actual excerpts from de Scudéry’s work, it amused me to read this instance of a rhetorical conduct guide, because “Of Conversations” (even more than de Pizan’s Treasure of the City of the Ladies) might aptly be called a what-not-to-do guide. It also seems loaded with references to living people, re-imagined as characters, whose conduct clearly seemed less than perfect in de Scudéry’s eyes. I guess this instance pointed subtlety supports de Pizan’s idea about the gentle, yet powerful sway the feminine voice can obtain, although it may lack the social strength that male writer’s voice.

All in all, I think these two pieces of writing reveal that an inevitable changes concerning the perceived rights and roles of women were in the works, no matter how strongly some tried to push back against them.