White Feathers and Wounded Men: Female Patriotism and the Memory of the Great War Author(S): Nicoletta F
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
White Feathers and Wounded Men: Female Patriotism and the Memory of the Great War Author(s): Nicoletta F. Gullace Source: The Journal of British Studies, Vol. 36, No. 2, Twentieth-Century British Studies (Apr., 1997), pp. 178-206 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/176011 Accessed: 02/05/2010 15:30 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of British Studies. http://www.jstor.org White Feathers and Wounded Men: Female Patriotismand the Memory of the Great War Nicoletta F. Gullace On August 30, 1914, AdmiralCharles Penrose Fitzgerald, an invet- erate conscriptionistand disciple of Lord Roberts, deputized thirty women in Folkstoneto hand out white feathersto men not in uniform. The purposeof this gesturewas to shame "every young 'slacker'found loafing aboutthe Leas" and to remindthose "deaf or indifferentto their country'sneed" that "British soldiers are fightingand dying across the channel.''1 Fitzgerald'sestimation of the power of these women was enormous. He warned the men of Folkstone that "there is a danger awaitingthem far more terriblethan anythingthey can meet in battle," for if they were found "idling and loafing to-morrow"they would be publicly humiliatedby a lady with a white feather.2 The idea of a paramilitaryband of women known as "The Order of the White Feather" or "The White FeatherBrigade" capturedthe imaginationof numerousobservers and even enjoyeda momentof semi- official sanctionat the beginningof the war. Accordingto the Chatham News an "amusing,novel, and forceful methodof obtainingrecruits for Lord Kitchener'sArmy was demonstratedat Deal on Tuesday" when the town crier paradedthe streets and "crying with the dignity of his ancient calling, gave forth the startlingannouncement: 'Oyez! Oyez!! NICOLETTAGULLACE is an assistantprofessor of history at the Universityof New Hampshire.The authorwould like to thankTom Laqueur,Eliga Gould,Sue Grayzel,and Susan Kent for advice and encouragementon draftsof this paper.She would also like to acknowledgethe staff of the ImperialWar Museum for theirabundant help in conduct- ing the research.The researchand writingof this articlewere supportedby the Fulbright Hays Commission,the Instituteon Global Conflictand Cooperationat the Universityof California,San Diego, and the JohnM. Olin Foundationin conjunctionwith the Interna- tional SecurityProgram at Yale University. I "Women's War:White Feathersfor 'Slackers,'" Daily Mail (August 31, 1914), p. 3. 2 Ibid. Journal of British Studies 36 (April 1997): 178-206 ? 1997 by The North AmericanConference on British Studies. All rights reserved.0021-9371/97/3602-0003$02.00 178 WHITEFEATHERS AND WOUNDED MEN 179 Oyez!!! The White Feather Brigade! Ladies wanted to present the young men of Deal and Walmer ... the Order of the White Feather for shirking their duty in not coming forward to uphold the Union Jack of Old En- gland! God save the King.' "3 Numerous women responded to the cry and began to comb the city placing white feathers in the lapels and hat bands of men wearing civilian clothes.4 The practice was widely imitated by women all over the country and continued long after conscription was instated in 1916, creating one of the most persistent memories of the home front during the war.5 Dr. M. Yearsley is one of many diarists who recalled that "young girls of all ages and styles of beauty, but particularly those of the type called 'Flappers,' were parading the streets offering white feathers to young men in mufti, with a fine disregard of discrimina- tion.... [I]t is an established fact," Yearsley insisted, that "one of these inconsequent children offered her emblem of cowardice to a young man on leave who had just been awarded the V.C."6 Despite such vivid recollections, the white feather campaign has generally received only passing attention from historians of the war. Feminist scholars in Britain and America, influenced in the early eighties by the women's peace encampment at Greenham Common, have focused almost exclusively on the much celebrated history of feminist pacifism.7 Responding to the work of Arthur Marwick, David Mitchell, and others,8 3 " 'WhiteFeathers' a Novel Methodof MakingYoung Men Enlist," ChathamNews (September5, 1914), p. 8. 4 Ibid. 5Although white featherswere given out in many partsof the country,the practice was most common in Londonand in port towns where the long historyof impressment may have createda culturefavorable to such coercive practices.For a sense of the geo- graphicalrange of white featherincidents, see ImperialWar Museumstaff, "GreatWar Index to Letters of Interest,"n.d., ImperialWar Museum, London (henceforthIWM). Accordingto one contemporary,the "idea spreadlike a virulentdisease." It is unclear exactly how the practicecaught on, but it is probablethat rumor,newspaper reports, and the depictionof the practicein populartheater and fiction helped spreadthe idea. See FrancisAlmond to the British BroadcastingCorporation (BBC), May 25, 1964, IWM, BBC GreatWar Series [hereafterBBC/GW], vol. ALL-ANT,fol. 339. 6 M. Yearsley, "Memoirs," IWM, Documents,DS/Misc/ 17, p. 19. 7 See, e.g., Claire M. Tylee, The Great War and Women's Consciousness: Images of Militarism and Womanhood in Women's Writings, 1914-64 (Iowa City, 1990); Cather- ine Foster, Women for All Seasons: The Story of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (Athens, Ga., 1989); Jill Liddington, The Road to Greenham Com- mon: Feminism and Anti-militarism since 1820 (Syracuse, N.Y., 1989); Margaret Kames- ter and Jo Vellacott, eds., Militarism versus Feminism: Writings on Women and War (London,1987); Jo Vellacott, "FeministConsciousness and the First WorldWar," His- tory Workshop23 (Spring 1987): 81-101; Joan MontgomeryByles, "Women'sExperi- ence of WorldWar One: Suffragists,Pacifists and Poets," Women'sStudies International Forum 8, no. 5 (1985): 473-87; Anne Wiltsher, Most Dangerous Women: Feminist Peace Campaigners of the Great War (London, 1985). 8 Arthur Marwick, Woman at War, 1914-1918 (London, 1977), pp. 35-36; David Mitchell, Women on the Warpath: The Story of the Women of the First World War (Lon- 180 GULLACE who recounted graphic tales of female war enthusiasm, the Greenham Common school tended to dismiss the white feather campaign as primar- ily misogynistic propaganda meant to discredit women and hide the more significant achievements of feminist pacifists.9 Although recent work in women's history has shifted attention away from the exclusive focus on pacifism,10 feminist scholarship has nevertheless failed to produce any detailed study of the very issue so painfully emphasized in the older historiography: that of women's participation in the recruiting campaign, particularly their wielding of the language of sexual shame to coerce young men into military service.11 The general exclusion of white feather giving from the feminist his- toriography, I would argue, is more the result of the shameful meaning this practice acquired after the war than of any absence of convincing sources testifying to its contemporary prevalence. Although Virginia Woolf may have been one of the first to suggest that the white feather campaign was more a product of male hysteria than of actual female practice, she has by no means been the last, and the continued skepticism surrounding this practice necessitates some discussion of historical sources.12The contemporary evidence consists primarily of local and na- don, 1966). This traditionhas also been passed down by word of mouth,in the form of anecdotalevidence that is often repeatedbut has not inspiredmuch detailedinvestigation. 9 See, e.g., ClaireM. Tylee, " 'Maleness Run Riot'-the GreatWar and Women's Resistance to Militarism," Women's Studies International Forum 11, no. 3 (1988): 199- 210; and Anne Wiltsher,p. 1. 10Several excellent studies of women's involvementin various aspects of the war have recentlyappeared, showing the growingbreadth of interestin the diversityof wom- en's experience. See, e.g., Susan Kingsley Kent, Making Peace: The Reconstruction of Gender in Interwar Britain (Princeton, N.J., 1994); Angela Woollacott, On Her Their Lives Munitions Workers in the Great War " Depend: (Berkeley, 1994); Philippa Levine, 'Walking the Streetsin a Way No Decent Woman Should':Women Police in World War I," Journal of Modern History 66, no. 1 (March 1994): 34-78. n Most feminist work that has dealt with this aspect of female militancyhas been in the fields of literarycriticism and political science andhas focusedon imagesof women in literaryculture. See, e.g., SandraM. Gilbert,"Soldier's Heart:Literary Men, Literary Women, and the Great War," in Behind the Lines: Gender and the Two World Wars, ed. MargaretHigonnet et al. (New Haven, Conn., 1987), p. 208; Helen M. Cooperet al., eds., Arms and the Woman: War, Gender, and Literary Representation (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1989), pp. xiii-24; Sharon Ouditt, Fighting Forces, Writing Women: Identity and Ideology in the First WorldWar (London, 1994), pp.