In an unfinished but highly suggestive series of essays, the late Sarah Eisentein has focused attention on the evolution of working women’s values from the turn of the century to the First World War. Eisenstein argues that turn-of-the-century women neither wholly accepted nor rejected what she calls the dominant “ideology of domesticity,” but rather took this and other available ideologies-feminism, socialism, trade unionism-and modified or adapted them in light of their won experiences and needs. In thus maintaining that wages-work helped to produce a new “consciousness” among women, Eisenstein to some extent challenges the recent, controversial proposal by Leslie Tentler that for women the work experience only served to reinforce the attractiveness of the dominant ideology. According to the Tentler, the degrading conditions under which many female wage earners worked made them view the family as a source of power and esteem available nowhere else in their social world. In contrast, Eisenstein’s study insists that wage-work had other implications for women’s identities and consciousness. Most importantly, her work aims to demonstrate that wage-work enabled women to become aware of themselves as a distinct social group capable of defining their collective circumstance. Eisenstein insists that as a group working-class women were not able to come to collective consciousness of their situation until they began entering the labor force, because domestic work tended to isolate them from one another. Unfortunately, Eisenstein’s unfinished study does not develop these ideas in sufficient depth or detail, offering tantalizing hints rather than an exhaustive analysis. Whatever Eisenstein’s overall plan may have been, in its current form her study suffers from the limited nature of the sources she depended on. She use the speeches and writings of reformers and labor organizers, who she acknowledges were far from representative, as the voice of the typical woman worker. And there is less than adequate attention given to the differing values of immigrant groups that made up a significant proportion of the population under investigation. While raising important questions, Eisenstein’s essays do not provide definitive answer, and it remains for others to take up the challenges they offer.
252. Which of the following would the author of the passage be most likely to approve as a continuation of Eisenstein’s study? (A) An oral history of promotion women labor organizers (B) An analysis of letters and diaries written by typical female wage earners at the turn of the century (C) An assessment of what different social and political groups defined as the dominant ideology in the early twentieth century (D) A theoretical study of how socialism and feminism influenced one another at the turn of the century (E) A documentary account of labor’s role in the introduction of women into the labor force B是正确答案，但是我在原文没找到letters and diaries written by typical female wage earners at the turn of the century! 大家给看看是我的这篇文章又不全吗？？？多谢！！！
Whatever Eisenstein’s overall plan may have been, in its current form her study suffers from the limited nature of the sources she depended on. She use the speeches and writings of reformers and labor organizers, who she acknowledges were far from representative, as the voice of the typical woman worker.
第二段这边给出作者对E的批判: 所用的材料都取自the speeches and writings of reformers and labor organizers, 但不足以代表当代女性.....
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2004-7-21 03:14:00
楼主
