The Politics of Education in Dorothy Richardson’s Dental Record Writings: The Struggle Over Schooling in the Modernist Literary Field

Abstract

ABSTRACTDorothy Richardson is often posited as one of the originators of stream-of-consciousness style. However, she is less known for her non-fiction writing. This article examines a “comment” from Richardson’s column, “Comments by a Layman”, in the journal, The Dental Record. I argue that in the piece “A Liberal Education”, Richardson articulates a reformist socialism and sets herself apart from other modernists on the issue of education in that she wanted to reform actually existing institutions rather than conceive of new forms of education. In looking at Richardson’s writings as a form of what Pierre Bourdieu called “position-taking”, I seek to show the importance of her socialist non-fiction.KEYWORDS: Dorothy RichardsonNon-FictionModernismThe Dental RecordEducationPolitics Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 See Parsons, Theorists of the Modernist Novel.2 See Richardson, ‘Pointed Roofs’.3 For studies on modernist non-fiction, see Edbury and Fraser, Joyce’s Non-Fiction Writings; Lounsberry, Virginia Woolf, the War Without; and Cuddy-Keane, Virginia Woolf, the Intellectual. Only some of Richardson’s short stories and autobiographical sketches have been published in their own volume. See Richardson, Journey to Paradise. Certain pieces of her non-fiction pertaining to modernism were collected in the anthology, Scott and Broe, The Gender of Modernism.4 For the specific issues of The Dental Record with Richardson’s column, see Fromm, Dorothy Richardson, 427–8.5 ‘Preface’, 3.6 Bowler and Fifield, ‘Mediator as Crank’, 52.7 Ibid, 53. See also Bluemel, ‘Imperialist Dentistry’, 315.8 Pritchett and McCracken, ‘Writing Revolution’, 195.9 McCracken, Masculinities, 30. McCracken briefly mentions Bourdieu in his book on modernist masculinities in relation to both Joyce and Richardson, but it is to reference Bourdieu’s Masculine Domination. He does not discuss the theory of fields, positions, or position-takings.10 Bourdieu, ‘The Field’, 312–13.11 Bourdieu, Rules, 231 (emphasis in original).12 Williams, Marxism and Literature, 146.13 Ibid.14 Bourdieu, ‘Lecture’, 40.15 English, ‘Cultural Capital’, 368.16 Ibid.17 Gartman, ‘Bourdieu and Adorno’, 44.18 See Bourdieu’s extensive work on post-war French culture: Bourdieu, Distinction.19 Gartman, ‘Bourdieu and Adorno’, 56–7.20 Ibid., 48.21 English, ‘Cultural Capital’, 364. Robin Truth Goodman, in her introduction to a volume of essays on Adorno and modernism, echoes English’s point stating, "Adorno is so central to our current understanding of modernism that his inclusion is almost too obvious, too well-done, and too pat" (‘Introduction’, 1).22 English, ‘Cultural Capital’, 364.23 Adorno, Aesthetic Theory, 5.24 Speaking of the importance of sublimation and repression in Adorno, Max Paddison writes that for Adorno, following Freud, "Art’s attraction toward what has been repressed and to bringing it to expression has been its dominant feature since the emphasis on the New, the strange, and the fantastic that characterized the beginnings of romanticism in the early nineteenth century" (‘Adorno and Beyond’, 14-15).25 Bowler and Fifield, ‘Mediator as Crank’, 63.26 Fromm, Dorothy Richardson, 64.27 See her comment in The Dental Record from 1917 entitled ‘A Misunderstanding’. Here Richardson is having a debate with another writer from The Dominion Dental Journal on the work of dental secretaries and if the job can provide women with a lifetime career. Richardson argues against this notion, and in doing so refers to 'Layman’ as ‘him’: "If Layman had really made these two statements in one breath, his critic would have the right to call him not merely frivolous, but, quite simply, insane" (‘A Misunderstanding’, 169).28 Bluemel, ‘Imperialist Dentistry’, 313.29 Richardson and Prescott, ‘Seven Letters’, 107. Fromm documents how one of the central influences on Richardson’s politics was fellow author, H.G. Wells. She met Wells in 1896 and nine years later they would begin an affair together that makes the complexities of Wells’ influence difficult to untangle. Fromm, Dorothy Richardson, 30.30 Pritchett and McCracken, ‘Writing Revolution’, 201.31 McCracken, Masculinities, 74.32 Fromm, Dorothy Richardson, 3.33 Richardson, ‘Data’, 131.34 Fromm, Dorothy Richardson, 20.35 Richardson, ‘Data’, 134.36 Ibid.37 Fromm, Dorothy Richardson, 16.38 Richardson, ‘Data’, 136.39 Fromm, Dorothy Richardson, 20.40 Rosenberg, Dorothy Richardson, 19.41 Ibid.42 Ibid.43 Ibid, 26.44 Ibid, 27.45 Fromm writes that the situation was much more complex with Richardson’s actual affair with Wells: "while Dorothy agreed with Wells in principle, she was not as certain of his practice. Though he usually preached freedom, he was also revealing a decidedly tyrannical streak" (Fromm, Dorothy Richardson, 39). The culmination of her affair with Wells came in 1907, when Richardson became pregnant, but eventually miscarried (Rosenberg. Dorothy Richardson, 43). Rosenberg even writes that she was "Ill at the outset of her pregnancy, her health already poor after years of malnutrition, she still had to struggle through long days at Harley Street" (Dorothy Richardson, 43). The implication here is that the miscarriage resulted from a mixture of poverty and overwork. However, Wells’ own biographers have continually cast doubt on Richardson’s pregnancy and miscarriage. See West, H.G. Wells: Aspects of a Life; and Sherborne, H.G.: Wells: Another Kind of Life. It is important, then, to be wary of the way that Richardson herself is portrayed in regards to Wells. Certainly, he influenced her ideas, but Wells used his position and intellectual abilities often as a front for initiating his many extramarital affairs. It is this gender politics that is ever present in their relationship and needs to be considered when discussing the issue of political influence. In many ways, it can be said that Richardson learned as much about conservativism masquerading as self-serving liberation from Wells as she did about socialism.46 Richardson, ‘Data’, 137.47 Richardson, ‘A Liberal Education’, 62.48 Judge, ‘H.A.L. Fisher’, 5.49 Ibid., 6.50 Ogg, Herbert Fisher, 62.51 Judge, ‘H.A.L. Fisher’, 7.52 Fisher, ‘Preface’, viii.53 Wordsworth, ‘The Tables Turned’, 356.54 Ibid., 357.55 Bradshaw, ‘Very Centre’, 20.56 Woolf, ‘Sketch of the Past’, 153.57 The quote provides Bradshaw with the title of his paper on Fisher and Woolf, ‘The Very Centre of the Very Centre’. Woolf’s "stamping" quote is also used by Natasha Periyan when she introduces Fisher and the 1918 act in her book on the politics of the literature of the 1930s (Periyan, Politics of 1930s British Literature, 6).58 Bradshaw, ‘Very Centre’, 17.59 Woolf, Diary, 264.60 Fisher, ‘Preface’, xv.61 Fisher, ‘Educational Estimates’, 27.62 Fisher, ‘Education Bill’, 29-30.63 Ibid., 30.64 Sherington, ‘1918 Education Act’, 74.65 Tawney, ‘Keep the Worker’s Children’, 48.66 Richardson, ‘A Liberal Education’, 62.67 Sherington, ‘1918 Education Act’, 68. Sherington helps us to see the importance of this rhetorical style. Discussing a key architect of pre-cursor bills to the one of 1918, he notes how one of the pre-war secretaries of the Board of Education, Robert Morant, "failed to consult fully with educational opinion outside official circles" (‘1918 Education Act’, 68). Morant eventually had to resign from the post, but his reluctance to even discuss educational matters with other professionals was indicative of bureaucratic indifference. Morant’s action indicates how Richardson’s sense of politics, and the rhetorical style she developed to reflect this, were targeted correctly to address the insularity of British bureaucratic administration.68 Richardson, ‘A Liberal Education’, 62.69 Ibid.70 Strong, ‘Tommy’s Teeth’, 143.71 Ibid.72 Bluemel, ‘Imperialist Dentistry’, 30273 Strong, ‘Tommy’s Teeth’, 147.74 Richardson, ‘Eloquence of Facts’, 687.75 Strong, ‘Tommy’s Teeth’, 145.76 Richardson, ‘The Sweet Tooth’, 485.77 Richardson, ‘The New Age’, 222.78 Richardson, ‘A Liberal Education’, 62.79 Ruskin, ‘Modern Education’, 218.80 Richardson, ‘A Liberal Education’, 62.81 Ibid.82 Ibid.83 See Bluemel, ‘Imperialist Dentistry’, 304. Bluemel provides an analysis of Richardson’s complicity with and critique of imperialism.84 Richardson, ‘A Liberal Education’, 62.85 Ibid.86 Ibid.87 Ibid., 63.88 Ibid.89 Ibid.90 Ibid.91 Ibid.92 Ibid.93 Marinetti, ‘Necessity and Beauty’, 66.94 Breton, ‘Introduction to the Discourse’, 142.95 Polizzotti, Revolution of the Mind, 11, 14.96 ‘Long Live the Vortex’, 7.97 Ibid.98 Moody, Ezra Pound, 56–60.99 Ibid., 61.100 Miller, ‘Dreaming the Super-College’, 67.101 Ibid.102 Pound, ‘Patria Mia’, 70.103 Ibid., 71.104 Miller, ‘Dreaming the Super-College’, 69.105 Ibid., 75.106 Shuker, ‘H.G. Wells’, 58.107 Ibid., 60.108 Osborne, ‘One Great Epic Unfolding’, 9.109 Ibid., 7.110 Toye, ‘New Liberalism’, 157.111 Wells, ‘H.G. Wells on Education’, 1061.112 Ibid.113 Bowler and Fifield, ‘Mediator as Crank’, 53.