Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Bölünmüş bir Heterotopya: Louisa May Alcott’un 'Küçük Kadınlar' Romanında Emek Mekanları

Year 2022, Volume: 39 Issue: 1, 227 - 236, 30.06.2022
https://doi.org/10.32600/huefd.920078

Abstract

On dokuzuncu yüzyılın ikinci yarısında sanayileşmenin gelişimi ve yükselen göç dalgaları Amerikan işçi sınıfının koşulları üzerinde büyük etkisi olmuştur. Amerikan İç Savaşı ve sonrasındaki yeniden yapılanma süreciyle kesişen bu dönem, sendikalar örgütlemekte ve çalışma koşullarıyla ilgili birçok sorunu çözmekte daha güçlü ve kararlı bir emek hareketine tanıklık etmiştir. Louisa May Alcott, Küçük Kadınlar (1868) romanını böyle bir toplumsal ve ekonomik iklimde yazmıştır. Bu makale, Louisa May Alcott’un Küçük Kadınlar’daki karakterleri ve uzamı nasıl düzenlediğine bakarak, romanın mevcut emek koşullarının iki farklı heterotopya biçimindeki uzamsal kurgulanışını inceleyecektir. Foucault ve Harvey’nin uzam yaklaşımlarından yararlanan bu makale, March ailesinin evinin bir emek heterotopyası işlevi gördüğünü, Jo March’ın ise ona karşı kendi karşı-heterotopyasını kurduğunu ileri sürmektedir. Başka bir deyişle, March ailesinin evi Amerikan İç Savaşı döneminin emek koşullarını ele alır, eleştirir ve tersine çevirirken, Jo March kendi aile evinin düzenine karşı çıkmak için aynı işlemleri izler. Jo’nun karşı hamlesi, ona özgün ve bağımsız bir ses kazandıran yazma edimiyle belirlenmiştir. Ancak, daha da önemlisi, kendi çalışma koşullarını geliştirmesini sağlayan yazarlığının, yazmak için kullandığı tavanarasının ötesinde etkilerinin olmasıdır. Bu makalenin amacı, Jo March’ın karakterini her iki heterotopyadaki işlevine göre yeniden okumak ve onun, kız kardeşlerini güçlendirme çabasıyla, sürekli olarak ev emeği ve düşünsel emek heterotopyaları arasında arabuluculuk yaptığını göstermektir.

References

  • Alberghene, J. (1999). Autobiography and the boundries of interpretation. In J. Alberghene and B. Lyon Clark (Eds.), Little Women and feminist imagination: criticism, controversy, personal essays (pp. 347-376). London: Routledge.
  • Alcott, L. M. (1875). Work: a story of experience. Boston: Roberts Brothers.
  • Alcott, L. M. (1993). Hospital sketches. Bedford: Applewood.
  • Alcott, L. M. (2008). Little women. London: Vintage.
  • Brogan, H. (2001). The Penguin history of the USA. London: Penguin.
  • Çelikkol, A. (2015). The representation of family in African American literature: A psychoanalytic approach. PhD Dissertation: Istanbul University. Retrieved from: http://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi (Thesis number: 417827).
  • Çelikkol, A. (2019). Re-publicizing the nation: Slavery and the American Revolution. Litera: Dil, Edebiyat ve Kültür Araştırmaları Dergisi, 29(1), 41-58.
  • Engels, F. (1987). The condition of the working class. London: Penguin.
  • Fetterley, J. (1979). “Little Women”: Alcott’s Civil War. Feminist Studies, 5(2), 369-383.
  • Foner, P. (1972). History of labor movement in the United States. Volume I: From colonial times to the founding of the American federation of labor. New York: International Publishers.
  • Foucault, M. (1986). Of other spaces. Diacritics, 16 (1), 22-27.
  • Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and punish. New York: Vintage.
  • Gilbert, S. and Gubar, S. (2000). The madwoman in the attic: The Woman writer and the nineteenth-century literary imagination. New Haven and London: Yale Nota Bene.
  • Harvey, D. (2000). Spaces of hope. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Hetherington, K. (2003). The badlands of modernity: Heterotopia and social ordering. London: Routledge.
  • Hiebert Alton, A. (2001). Introduction. In A. Hiebert Alton (Ed.), Little Women (pp. 9-27). Peterborough: Broadview Literary Press.
  • Maruo-Schröder, N. (2018). Louisa May Alcott, Little Women (1868). In C. Gerhardt (Ed.), Handbook of American Novel of the Nineteenth Century (pp. 399-417). Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
  • May, V. H. (2011). Unprotected labor: household workers, politics, and middle-class reform in New York, 1870-1940. Chapell Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
  • McCaffrey, L. J. (1992). Textures of Irish America. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
  • Porter, M. S. (1893). Recollections of Louisa May Alcott, John Greenleaf Whittier, and Robert Browning. Boston: Collins Press.
  • Rishoi, C. (2003). From girl to woman: American women’s coming-of-age narratives. Albany: SUNY Press.
  • Showalter, E. (1991). Sister’s choice: tradition and change in American women’s writing. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • Soja, E. (1996). Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and other real-and-imagined places. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
  • Thernstrom, S. (1994). Poverty and progress. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.
  • Trachtenberg, A. (2007). The incorporation of America. New York: Hill and Wang.

A Heterotopia Divided: Spaces of Labor in Louisa May Alcott’s 'Little Women'

Year 2022, Volume: 39 Issue: 1, 227 - 236, 30.06.2022
https://doi.org/10.32600/huefd.920078

Abstract

In the second half of the nineteenth century, the development of industrialization and the surging waves of immigration had drastic effects on the condition of the American working class. Coinciding with the Civil War and the following Reconstruction era, this period saw a stronger and more determined labor movement in organizing trade unions and resolving several work-related problems. Louisa May Alcott wrote Little Women (1868) in such a social and economic climate. This essay will explore the novel’s spatial configuration of the existing labor conditions as two different heterotopias by turning to how Louisa May Alcott organized characters and space in Little Women. Drawing from Foucault and Harvey’s approaches to space, the essay will argue that the March family home functions as a labor heterotopia, and Jo March founds a counter-heterotopia against it. In other words, while the March house depicts, confronts and reverses the conditions of American labor in the Civil War era, Jo March attempts to follow the same procedure so as to counteract the order in her family home. Jo’s counteraction is determined by her act of writing, which gives her an individual and independent voice. Yet, more importantly, her authorship that lets her develop her own working conditions has effects beyond the garret she uses for writing. The purpose of this essay is to re-read Jo March’s character in terms of her function in both heterotopias, and to show that she constantly negotiates between these domestic and intellectual labor heterotopias in an attempt to empower her sisters.

References

  • Alberghene, J. (1999). Autobiography and the boundries of interpretation. In J. Alberghene and B. Lyon Clark (Eds.), Little Women and feminist imagination: criticism, controversy, personal essays (pp. 347-376). London: Routledge.
  • Alcott, L. M. (1875). Work: a story of experience. Boston: Roberts Brothers.
  • Alcott, L. M. (1993). Hospital sketches. Bedford: Applewood.
  • Alcott, L. M. (2008). Little women. London: Vintage.
  • Brogan, H. (2001). The Penguin history of the USA. London: Penguin.
  • Çelikkol, A. (2015). The representation of family in African American literature: A psychoanalytic approach. PhD Dissertation: Istanbul University. Retrieved from: http://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi (Thesis number: 417827).
  • Çelikkol, A. (2019). Re-publicizing the nation: Slavery and the American Revolution. Litera: Dil, Edebiyat ve Kültür Araştırmaları Dergisi, 29(1), 41-58.
  • Engels, F. (1987). The condition of the working class. London: Penguin.
  • Fetterley, J. (1979). “Little Women”: Alcott’s Civil War. Feminist Studies, 5(2), 369-383.
  • Foner, P. (1972). History of labor movement in the United States. Volume I: From colonial times to the founding of the American federation of labor. New York: International Publishers.
  • Foucault, M. (1986). Of other spaces. Diacritics, 16 (1), 22-27.
  • Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and punish. New York: Vintage.
  • Gilbert, S. and Gubar, S. (2000). The madwoman in the attic: The Woman writer and the nineteenth-century literary imagination. New Haven and London: Yale Nota Bene.
  • Harvey, D. (2000). Spaces of hope. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Hetherington, K. (2003). The badlands of modernity: Heterotopia and social ordering. London: Routledge.
  • Hiebert Alton, A. (2001). Introduction. In A. Hiebert Alton (Ed.), Little Women (pp. 9-27). Peterborough: Broadview Literary Press.
  • Maruo-Schröder, N. (2018). Louisa May Alcott, Little Women (1868). In C. Gerhardt (Ed.), Handbook of American Novel of the Nineteenth Century (pp. 399-417). Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter.
  • May, V. H. (2011). Unprotected labor: household workers, politics, and middle-class reform in New York, 1870-1940. Chapell Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
  • McCaffrey, L. J. (1992). Textures of Irish America. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
  • Porter, M. S. (1893). Recollections of Louisa May Alcott, John Greenleaf Whittier, and Robert Browning. Boston: Collins Press.
  • Rishoi, C. (2003). From girl to woman: American women’s coming-of-age narratives. Albany: SUNY Press.
  • Showalter, E. (1991). Sister’s choice: tradition and change in American women’s writing. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • Soja, E. (1996). Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and other real-and-imagined places. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
  • Thernstrom, S. (1994). Poverty and progress. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press.
  • Trachtenberg, A. (2007). The incorporation of America. New York: Hill and Wang.
There are 25 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects North American Language, Literature and Culture
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Sinem Yazıcıoğlu 0000-0003-4092-3152

Publication Date June 30, 2022
Submission Date April 19, 2021
Acceptance Date November 20, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2022 Volume: 39 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Yazıcıoğlu, S. (2022). A Heterotopia Divided: Spaces of Labor in Louisa May Alcott’s ’Little Women’. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 39(1), 227-236. https://doi.org/10.32600/huefd.920078


Creative Commons License
Bu eser Creative Commons Atıf 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.