Anger in the House. Family issues.

The article, “Anger in the House: Fanny Fern’s Ruth Hall and The Redrawing of Emotional Boundaries in Mid-Nineteenth Century America,” by Linda Grasso, helps us understand the necessity that women have for literature as an outlet for anger. The article talks about Ruth Hall and the negative feedback she got from people because they thought her work was too angry, un-lady like, and against family. Elizabeth Cady Stanton felt as though she had to defend a colleague and revered her work as “an inspiring act of resistance against the ‘romance’ of dependency” (Grasso 252). Unlike Staton, there were other female activists who didn’t appreciate Fern’s attitude about family relationships or the position of women in society. Women like Caroline Dall who made their voices heard by cracking down on Fern’s writing. Dall describes Fern’s writing as “devoid of good character and sound morals, she also lacks talent. In order to discredit Fern's authority to speak anger in public, Dall judges the novel on aesthetic grounds and pronounces it wanting” (Grasso 256). Also the changing image of the all forgiving Christ made Fern sound as if she were writing something that went against the beliefs of any good Christian. We see this when Grasso states that “when  a forgiving, turn the other cheek, Christ-like model  becomes  the only justifiable "womanly" response to injustice, women  are left without a way to express anger that does not automatically threaten their gendered source of power” (Grasso 259).

From the beginning I was drawn to what was said about Fern once everyone knew who she was, “Vulnerable and exposed, Fern was lambasted for expressing "unfemininely bitter wrath and spite" against the male members of her own family. Accused of "demean[ing] herself as no right minded woman should have done," her most heinous crime was engaging in unfilial behavior” (Grasso 253). Evidence of this can be seen when Ruth requests employment from her brother, and in turn he sends her back a condescending letter telling her that she isn’t worth the sacrifice of employment because she just isn’t a good writer. “I have looked over the pieces you sent me, Ruth. It is very evident that writing never can be your forte; you have no talent that way. You may be employed by some inferior newspapers, but be assured your articles never will be heard of out of your own provincial little city” (Fern 221-22). We see that in her writing Fern lets we know that her brother was being an unpleasant person to talk to and for her even to ask for help from that man must have meant that she really needed it. Her brother with no remorse clearly refuses employment.