The Uses of Humour by the Women's

IRSH 52 (2007), pp. 259–274 DOI: 10.1017/S0020859007003239 # 2007 Internationaal Instituut voor Sociale Geschiedenis ‘‘Doing Something Silly’’: The Uses of Humour by the Women’s Social and Political Union, 1903–1914Ã Krista Cowman Summary: Investigations into uses of humour associated with the militant suffrage campaign of the Women’s Social and Political Union have been largely concerned with the satirizing of suffragettes. The uses that suffragettes themselves made of humour as a considered political tactic have been less considered. This paper explores three ways in which suffragettes turned humour to their advantage during their campaign: by deliberately adopting ‘‘silly’’ behaviours as a counterpoint to over-formal and male dominated Edwardian politics; by quick-witted retorts to hecklers who sought to disrupt suffragette meetings and finally as a means of venting private political dissent and alleviating some of the stresses of hectic political campaigning. The exploration of humour within the WSPU’s work reveals some of the links between humour and social protest in the early twentieth century, and considers the extent to which its use in public political behaviour might be gendered. In recent years, much has been made of the disjuncture between the flamboyant, militant campaign of the Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU) and its more sedate, Victorian predecessors.1 Whereas an earlier generation of suffragists had relied quiet methods to achieve their demands, the WSPU represented something quite different. Founded in 1903, it drew a line under Victorian tactics. Its roots lay in a number of new political and cultural currents which emerged in the twentieth century. Its founders had learned their politics in the Independent Labour Party in the 1890s, the decade when Britain witnessed a ‘‘flowering’’ of socialism, characterized by innumerable cultural phenomena.2 A sense of possibility Ã Many thanks to Simon Gunn for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper, and to Jon Lawrence for advice regarding election handbooks. 1. See for example Patricia Greenwood Harrison, Connecting Links: The British and American Woman Suffrage Movements, 1900–1914 (Westport, CT, 2000); Martin Pugh, The March of the Women: A Revisionist Analysis of the Campaign for Women’s Suffrage, 1866–1914 (Oxford, 2000); Sophia A. Van Wingerden, The Women’s Suffrage Movement in Britain, 1866–1928 (Basingstoke, 1999). 2. Eleanor Gordon, Women and the Labour Movement in Scotland, 1850–1914 (Oxford, 1991), p. 261. See also Stephen Yeo, ‘‘The New Life: The Religion of Socialism in Britain, 1883–1896’’, History Workshop Journal, 4 (1977), pp. 5–56. For links between the WSPU and the ILP, see Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.35.234, on 29 Sep 2021 at 01:51:08, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020859007003239 260 Krista Cowman pervaded all aspects of this work, moving politics beyond the domination of the Liberal and Conservative elites. Suddenly, individuals with no previous personal or familial connection to government found themselves speaking at public meetings, leading local branches, and even standing for election to various local authority boards. Women, who enjoyed full membership of the ILP and were eligible for election to many local government bodies, played a full part. Socialist women carried this sense of possibility into the WSPU. As the Union expanded into a national organization its membership broadened and imported other new cultural trends. There was a strong cohort of artistic, bohemian women in its ranks. Many of these were self-confessed ‘‘new women’’, those ‘‘smoking, cycling, defiant and desiring’’ embodi- ments of the ‘‘emerging form of emancipated womanhood [which] marked a new departure in femininity’’ at the end of the nineteenth century.3 The WSPU also attracted numbers of intelligent working-class girls who had taken advantage of the expansion of educational opportunities in the 1890s, often as pupil teachers then through University scholarships and extension schemes.4 The potent combination of such individuals in its ranks working amidst expanding definitions of femininity made the Union a unique presence in early twentieth-century politics in its aims, membership, organisation and particularly through its campaigning methods which challenged and expanded contemporary understandings of the political. The WSPU’s leaders emphasized its newness and novelty. Emmeline Pethick Lawrence, the Union’s treasurer, explained some of the key differences which distinguished the WSPU from its contemporary political organizations. The strongest and most apparent difference was in its lack of men at any level. The Union was: [:::] run by women, and supported by women, for women and in the interests of women and not run by men, and exploited in the interests of men or of some men’s political party [:::] this is an altogether new phenomenon of modern times and is inconceivable at first to the modern mind.5 Such arrangements in an age in which many political parties denied women formal membership were inconceivable to many Edwardian observers, and provoked bemused responses. The Union’s strangeness when compared Krista Cowman, ‘‘‘Incipient Toryism’? The Women’s Social and Political Union and the Independent Labour Party, 1903-14’’, History Workshop Journal, 53 (2002), pp. 128–148. 3. Angelique Wilson, ‘‘Introduction’’, in Angelique Wilson (ed.), Women Who Did: Stories by New Men and Women, 1890–1914 (London, 2002), p. xxxiii. For a much-cited pejorative view of such figures, see Eliza Lynn Linton, ‘‘The Girl of the Period’’, Saturday Review, 14 March 1868. 4. For a discussion of scholarship opportunities open to women, see Carol Dyhouse, No Distinction of Sex? Women in British Universities, 1870–1939 (London, 1995), pp. 28–33. 5. The Referee, 28 March 1907, cutting in Arncliffe Sennett Collection, British Library. Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.35.234, on 29 Sep 2021 at 01:51:08, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020859007003239 Humour and the WSPU, 1903–1914 261 with other political bodies and the numbers of somewhat bohemian young women who joined its ranks made it an easy target for humour, and it was not long before its unique manifestation of feminized politics became the butt of contemporary jokes amongst an uncomprehending public. However, jokes at its expense were not the only manifestations of humour to be associated with the WSPU. In many aspects of their public campaigning, suffragettes could be seen actively deploying humour as a deliberate tactic; to diffuse hostility, to gain suffragettes a hearing, or to emphasize the ridiculous aspects of their more inflexible opponents. Humorous tactics by suffragettes were sometimes dismissed as women ‘‘doing something silly’’, but served to win them attention in circumstances where female voices had traditionally been absent or silent.6 As the campaign increased in intensity humour also became a key means of alleviating stress, as shared jokes between WSPU members allowed them to give vent to critical feelings in a comparatively safe manner. SATIRIZING THE SUFFRAGETTE Satirical presentations of suffragettes crowded the popular Edwardian daily press. Katherine Kelly has noted how the suffrage movement and such papers, many of which began publication around the same time as the WSPU, combined to deliver ‘‘a new sense of urban life’’ to their readers.7 The prominent use that papers such as the Daily Mirror made of photography made the spectacle of the WSPU an irresistible topic for its front pages. The Daily Mail was equally fascinated and named the Union’s members ‘‘Suffragettes’’, adding the diminutive feminized ending to the word in an attempt to inject some gentle humour into their coverage of the WSPU’s campaign during the general election of 1906.8 Its aim was to use light humour to detract from the political dimensions of the WSPU by making it appear over-feminine and consequently somewhat frivolous. Nevertheless, the WSPU’s leader Christabel Pankhurst recognized that the title differentiated her Union from other groups of suffragists and was quick to adopt it although her suggestion that it ought to be pronounced with a hard ‘‘g’’, to underline that her members ‘‘were determined to get’’ to vote, was never followed.9 A level of gentle public lampooning attended the WSPU’s campaign for the next eight years. Initial press coverage reflected – and doubtlessly 6. Emmeline Pethick Lawrence, Votes for Women, 8 March 1908. 7. See Katherine E. Kelly, ‘‘Seeing Through Spectacles: The Woman Suffrage Movement and London Newspapers, 1906–13’’, European Journal of Women’s Studies, 11 (2004), pp. 327–353, 327. 8. Antonia Raeburn, The Militant Suffragettes (London, 1973), p. 11. 9. Christabel Pankhurst, Unshackled: The Story of How We Won the Vote (London, 1987), p. 63. Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.35.234, on 29 Sep 2021 at 01:51:08, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020859007003239 262 Krista Cowman encouraged – the attitude of amused interest with which much of the public responded to the Union’s attempts to colonize Edwardian political life. ‘‘Indulgent smile[s]’’ and ‘‘curiosity’’ typified this response.10 Tolerant indulgence which perceived a comic dimension within suffrage demon- strations continued in press reports even after they became more violent. Coverage of the deputations to Parliament organized between February 1907 and January 1913 combined outrage and humour. The Daily Express, describing the arrests of over seventy women in March 1907, detailed ‘‘individual fights and scrambles for the most part it must be admitted conducted with the greatest good humour and pleasantness on both sides’’. When faced with struggling suffragettes, the police ‘‘stood stock still and smiled’’.

Load more