Thursday, February 10, 2011

Although our readings were pretty clear and easy to interpret, I feel as though they left me with more questions than answers.
Clearly women played a huge (but quiet) role in revivalism. What's not so clear to me is why. As we learned last semester, women, particularly in the church, didn't have much power. Especially in a widespread movement such as this one. Not only did women not have much power in society, they were seen as (in a way) secondary members to churches to their husbands. It was the men who ran the services, studies and the ones who were allowed to explore religion in a collective way. Women were expected to sit and listen. If they were denied participation, why were they so interested in religion and eager to become members of churches. It doesn't makes much sense to me. It's like giving a kid a basked of Halloween candy and saying they're not allowed to eat it. Why would any kid enjoy a Halloween like this?


My initial reaction to Mary Ryan's article was "who cares about this town?" and my second reaction was "wow, she had some amazing data to work with". What I found curious was the very specific years she gives as "revival periods". Johnson said in his history book that the 2nd Great Awakening has not clear start and end. So how did Ryan nail down such specific dates? What was it about these particular years (especially because they were so close together in time yet separate periods in her article) that made them revival-ing?

1 comment:

  1. Clara,
    Darn: I just lost a long response. I'll try not to this time.
    1) RE: 19th century women's participation in Protestant churches. Ann Douglas has characterized the era as one in which religion was "feminized" because so many woman found so many ways to take part in and influence those church even as the churches remained in the hands of men. I'd be delighted to talk to you more about this.
    2) Mary Ryan. Yes, she had great materials and made good use of them. She can give precise dates because she is working with a small, local case while Johnson, Noll, Williams, etc. are speaking of a movement that encompassed thousands of locations.
    LDL

    ReplyDelete