Miss Annie S. Swan recently owned to an income
of about £1,000 a year, and Miss Yonge made a handsome fortune by her
novels. Successful playwrights also make a good deal of money; but it
is doubtful whether any woman comes under this category as yet.
[1] George Eliot received £8,000 for _Middlemarch_, but Mrs.
Humphry Ward is said to have received £18,000 for _David
Grieve_.
=Journalism.=--At the present moment journalism appears to be the
fashionable literary pursuit for women, and their contributions to
the daily and weekly papers have increased enormously during the
last few years. The general lightening of the cargo which has taken
place throughout the periodical press has greatly contributed to this
result; for women writers have usually a light touch, and an apparently
inexhaustible power of turning out bright and readable, though often
flimsy, articles upon social subjects. In the department of dress
they of course reign supreme, and few newspapers can now afford to
despise this erstwhile frivolous subject. The writers who discourse
upon fashion, however, have, as a rule, had little literary training;
and through their efforts a kind of press jargon has been evolved,
wonderful alike in grammar, in phraseology, in similes. But this is
the least creditable form of feminine journalism, and we will not
linger over it. In many of the papers written for women (and to which,
of course, women largely contribute) there is very fair writing upon
a great variety of subjects. Women have occasionally been successful
in the main walks of journalism, but the position of the lady who
represents the _Daily News_ in Paris is probably unique. As a rule
women keep to their special department, chronicling the doings of
London society, and taking charge of the lighter topics generally,
while their _confrères_ are dealing with politics and diplomacy.[2]
This new development of journalism affords an example of the results
which may be expected to follow when women are allowed free play to
their activities in other directions. They will not always simply
duplicate the work of their male predecessors, but will enlarge the
field of operations by striking out a line of their own.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account