"the utility and beauty of Female Education"

Thoughts on James Milnor's address "On Female Education" and Paul Starr's chapters 2 & 3 in The Creation of the Media: Political Origins of Modern Communications

Starr's emphasis on American divergence and difference between American, English, and European public spheres was especially intriguing when compared with the article I found about female education. Even though Starr does not comment directly on the differences between English, French, or American female education, there are some interesting points that I would like to discuss based on my reading of both Starr's text and a commencement address delivered to the Philadelphia Academy by James Milnor, Esq. (reported in The Port-Folio, May 1809).

The editor prefaces Milnor's address by pointing out several differences between female education in America as compared to foreign women. His first argument is that American women and girls are NOT like foreign or French women. The orator is marking the differences by commenting on Rousseau's character Sophia (from "Emile, a celebrated Tract on Education"), whom he calls "quite a courtezan" [sic]. Such a title shows that she is not only intellectually inferior to American females, but that she is very likely sexually promiscuous. The editor seems to be dispelling contemporary beliefs that women who think are promiscuous or likely to be seduced (as in last week's discussion about novel reading leading to female depravity). He says, "But in America, [...] the women, with few, very few exception, are modest, prudent, and well informed. They have all the vivacity, all the spirit, all the talents, and genius of Sopia, without one particle of her infidelity, on the one hand, and of her levity on the other." The result of American education, the editor claims, "form accomplished daughters, and good wives." He then commends Philadelphia and Boston for their "sedulous care in the moulding of the minds, manners, and habits of women." All these claims and points support Starr's claims about America's communication and exchange of information taking divergent paths from British and European models. Or, at least, the American newspaper editors at the time were promoting a BELIEF that Americans were different than their European contemporaries; this belief likely helped form the developing American culture and was easily circulated in the print culture of the time.

By reproducing Milnor's speech, the editor of The Port-Folio is not only showing readers how different they are from (and indeed superior to) the Old World, but also is creating an instructive argument on why female education is important and how girls can/should be educated. And because this argument for female education appeared in the most successful monthly literary magazine of its time (according to Frank Luther Mott p. 223-46), it is likely that this argument had wide circulation throughout the new republic.

Milnor's speech itself is a good example of Starr's points about the revolutionary nature of female education and its role in creating a democratic nation. Starr illustrates the role of women in building up the new nation with his reference to Dr. Rush's 1787 essay about Republican Motherhood -- Rush "argued that women should receive an education so that they could instruct their sons in the principles of liberty and serve as 'stewards and guardians of their husbands' property'" (102). Likewise, Milnor, in 1809, commends the graduating class from the Philadelphia Academy to use their education not only for their own benefit, but as a tool to "prepare for the duties in life to which she may be destined" or, in other words, motherhood. Thanks to the explosion of print culture, the easy access of information, and a culture that promoted education, women were not only better educated but also better informed on how to teach their children. The curriculum the girls receive in reading, writing, composition, handwriting, arithmetic, geography, biography, history, and sacred music all allow her to "display" the "utility and beauty of Female Education."

However, [surprise!] a great obstacle to Milnor's version of "correct" education is novel reading. He advised the young ladies listening to/reading his address that even though there are a few honorable novels available, "it would be infinitely better for a young lady never to open one, than to seize them with total neglect of discrimination" [...]. This caution is ironic since these young women are supposedly well educated and have been given the charge as future mothers to educate the rising generation. Why, then, cannot they not be trusted with certain books? Obviously, it is as Starr says, even though education for women was "revolutionary" it was still limited (103).

This newspaper article, as read alongside Starr's two chapters, shows how interconnected information, education, and print culture were-- and how different and divergent the American path was from England and France. It is exciting to see the beginnings of female education for women and to know that its "utility and beauty" was just one of America's revolutions.