Mrs. C.E. Humphry a.k.a. Mrs. Humphry Charlotte Eliza Humphry, née Graham, was born at County Tyrone, the daughter of Rev. James Graham and his wife Eliza. Her father was the Senior Curate of St Columb's Cathedral and Surrogate of the Diocese of Londonderry; he published a series of essays in opposition to Puseyite tractarianism and died when Charlotte was less than two years old. Charlotte was educated in Dublin. In adulthood she moved to London; by 1871 she was teaching English in a boarding school for girls near Paddington. She then had a secretarial role on the Drawing Room Gazette. Charlotte often working under the pseudonym "Madge", began writing the "Girl’s Gossip" column in Truth in 1873. The opportunity was offered by Henry Du Pré Labouchère and continued it throughout her career. She was one of the first female journalists to write a regular column devoted to women's issues. At the beginning of her career, there were very limited spaces devoted to women in newspapers and magazines. In 1874 she become editor of Sylvia's Home Journal. She married Joseph Albert Humphry on 5 March 1881. Her daughter, Helen Pearl, was born in the following year. She wrote, edited and published many works throughout her career and is perhaps best known for originating what was known as the "Lady’s Letter"-style column she wrote for the publication Truth, read throughout the British Empire. She was one of the first woman journalists in England.
Manners for Women is said to be a 1993 reprint of the book of the same name published in 1897. At first, I wasn’t convinced that it wasn’t a parody of such a book, but Internet sources (at least) tell me otherwise. The word out there seems to be that this is the genuine article, although I’m still not entirely convinced.
What made me think it’s a satire of a manners book? Besides my naturally suspicious nature? Such ‘modern’ comments as:
(I)t would be a good day when a League for the Mitigation of Outlay on Marriages should be started …
Doubts aside, Manners for Women was enjoyable to hold and read: it measures 4″x7″ (10cmx20cm), is soft-covered & light, and printed on an ivory matte paper. The advice is interesting: said to be aimed at the middle or merchant class – those who did not have these manners ‘bred’ into them as the gentry did, but who wished to be able to hobnob with them. But the language has a modern feel to it, certainly not as ‘wordy’ as a newspaper or a magazine of the era, and seems many times to accommodate today’s sensibilities:
At this end of the century one is first a woman, then a possible wife. There is one’s own life to be lived, apart from the partnership that may be entered into by and by. The idea used to be that it was a wife’s duty to sink her individuality completely, and live only for her husband.
Really, were attitudes this enlightened then? If so, the author writes with wit and candor, and with foresight beyond her times.
postmanGenuine or a clever counterfeit, Manners for Women certainly shows that some things change:
In the country house there are usually but two, or at most three, postal deliveries daily, and the “rat-tat” [of the postman’s knock to pick up mail] is seldom, if ever, heard.
while others stay the same:
Nowadays (…) we live at such high pressure that it is only from friends living abroad that we ever expect a real letter.
Plus ce change plus c’est le meme chose
I’m looking forward to reading the author’s companion book “Manners for Men”.
What I expected? A stuffy book of etiquette and Victorian gender roles. Instead, I got a hilariously satirical book of advice and social commentary. Seriously. I laughed a lot. I had to double check this wasn't a 21st century spoof of Victorian manners and was indeed published in 1897, just a few years after The Picture of Dorian Gray was published. I found Mrs Humphry's wit and progressive views toward women refreshing and will most definitely be reading Manners for Men. I found that the advice ranged from still applicable today to laughably outdated, yet all entertaining. And the section on how to laugh? Savage.
This wasn't anywhere near as interesting as I'd hoped. It is mostly vague generalities, very few specific suggestions for an 1897 woman to follow. I bet it wasn't much use to women of the day, and I doubt it's much use to historians, either, sadly. There were some impressive menus and also the guidelines for mourning attire were specific.