Pam Epstein's Open Salon Blog

Well at least he's honest

Thu, 2 Jun 2011 13:06:59 -0400

Matrimonials had a bad reputation. All the critics thought it was only gold-diggers and scalawags, or people who were totally desperate, who would ever use such a crass and horrible means of trying to find a spouse. Now I argue, quite convincingly (if I do say so myself), that in reality many of the people who used these ads were normal men and women who just couldn't meet anyone any other way for whatever reason. While there were certainly scoundrels and desperate people and gold-diggers who used matrimonials (and some things never change), I think the majority had good intentions.

All that being said, I come across an ad like this, and I think, no wonder these ads got a lot of heat! But, as my title says, at least he's not beating around the bush.

A noble Frenchman, of title, connected with highest families in France, but without means, wishes to marry lady or widow with means; correspondence strictly confidential. Address C. 580 Herald Uptown office.

!!!!

You know, there's a part of me that thinks this might just be for real. I feel like if he was lying about being noble and connected to titled families, he would try to be all romantic and say he was in exile or couldn't meet the girl of his dreams in France so he came to the land of opportunity...or whatever. Then, theoretically, he could sweep some naive girl off her feet and then abscond with all her money. But he's not appealing to anyone's romantic side. He is making a business deal. You support me with your money, and I will make you a marchioness or a comptess (is that the feminine form of compte?). There's no talk of love here.

On the other hand, however, the barefaced mercenary tone might convince some women that he's being honest for the same reasons I think so, while in reality he's just got an accent and still plans to run away with her money. Clever!

Did people really do this? It certainly shows up in novels all the time. Both sides benefit, if they're willing to sacrifice marital happiness (but who knows, maybe they could be happy!). I suppose a woman whose family was nouveau-riche, and therefore snubbed by the old-money crowd, might consider this a way to get revenge. "You treat me like dirt? How are you going to feel when you have to call me Duchess?" Besides, even sympathetic characters in Jane Austen novels openly admitted to this kind of thing (I'm looking at you, Colonel Fitzwilliam), so it's not like this was unheard of or even entirely frowned upon.

So...I'm on the fence. I'd tentatively buy this...but maybe not.

©2011 Pam Epstein

Orphan preferred

Wed, 18 May 2011 15:05:22 -0400

Why do all these men only want to marry orphans? Okay, one other guy. But I feel like I've seen this elsewhere. Anyway, one man or twenty men, it's weird and I want to know why.

An American gentleman, thirty years of age, wishes to form the acquaintance of some American lady (an orphan preferred), not less than 18 nor more than 24 years of age, with a view to matrimony. She must be of the highest respectability, prepossessing and genteel in appearance, of good education, accustomed to good society and of a loving disposition. Any lady answering the above can do so with the utmost confidence, as all communications will be strictly confidential, and letters returned when requested; for this means just what it says, nothing more and nothing less. Address for three days, giving real name and where can be seen (none others will be noticed), Knickerbocker, box 164 Herald office.

I call foul. None of this rings true to me. Here's what we know about the desired lady: she has no living parents, is very young, respectable, genteel, of good society, loving, and will give her real name and her address. Here's what we know about the advertiser: he's 30. Well, I guess at least he didn't say she must be wealthy to boot. However, just because he doesn't mention money doesn't mean he doesn't want it. It's actually somewhat clever, because by not saying you want a wealthy wife, people might be like, oh, he's not a gold digger, he must be sincere! But probably he's hoping some young, foolish, unprotected heiress will respond and he'll ignore everyone else. On the other hand, if you're hoping to seduce silly girls, this ad isn't really designed to draw them in. Knickerbocker, my friend, you're supposed to talk about how rich and loving and handsome you are if you want a romantic young miss to write you back. This ad is very no-nonsense. So, I dunno, maybe it is sincere? Maybe he's just kind of tactless and thoughtless and didn't really think through how this ad might come off?

But if sincere, why the preferred orphan? I hear-tell that sometimes in-laws can be a real nightmare, but are you really going to base your marriage choice on your concern that your wife's parents might be annoying and overbearing? Because otherwise I can't think of a single legitimate reason why you would "prefer" an orphan that isn't completely nefarious. I would imagine in the 19th century, an orphaned girl in her late teens or early twenties would be living pretty precariously and easily preyed upon, so it's hard for me not to be suspicious of Knickerbocker's motives here.

Speaking of that name, though, I was inspired to look up the origins of that word, which I amazingly never had done before, and I thought you'd like to know too! According to handy Wikipedia, Washington Irving wrote a book about New York City under the pseudonym Diedrich Knickerbocker, and ever since then it's been a term used to describe New Yorkers. Indeed, it's where the New York Knicks gets its name too. So now there's two things we know about Our Hero. He's 30 and he's a New Yorker. I'm still not sold.

©2011 Pam Epstein

Leaving a legacy

Mon, 9 May 2011 12:05:09 -0400

I find this ad both charming and a little weird. There's something a little...romantic and even heroic, I guess...about what this man is trying to do, but I have to wonder what lady would take him up on this offer. See for yourself:

Matrimonial. - A young unmarried cavalry officer, who intends to serve his country till "this cruel war is over," desires, should he be slain during the war, to leave an heir to his name and inheritance. He therefore wishes to open correspondence with a view to matrimony with a patriotic young lady of intelligence, accomplishments, common sense, &c. Address K, Nineteenth New York cavalry, Manassas Junction, Va.

The quote in here, "this cruel war is over," is the title of a song of the same name,

Dissed

Wed, 4 May 2011 17:05:19 -0400

These are two funny missed connections that were from the same day. They both seem just a little out of the ordinary, in that in both cases there is a decided brush-off involved. See for yourselves:

Will the lady that the car stopped for in Greenwich avenue on Tuesday last, and then refused to ride, have the kindness to send her name, stating if a meeting can be had, to G.F., box 13 station A.

Arion Ball - The lady who so ceremoniously removed the rose bud from a gentleman's coat at the Arion ball will please return it, and no questions asked, to Rose, station D.

These are...interesting. Okay, so the first one I initially thought the car must be a streetcar, right? (As in a trolley.) But if the lady waved down the car, which she must have done if it stopped for her specifically, why would she then decide not to get on? Could it have been some guy in his own carriage who stopped and tried to offer her a ride? That seems highly unlikely in that day and age, unless of course he thought she was a prostitute, in which case it would make a great deal more sense. Still, I don't think anyone ever called carriages "cars," so I'm not satisfied with that explanation anyway. I wonder if she waved down a streetcar, and G.F. was grinning at her and she was like, forget that, I'll take the next one. In which case G.F. is a dense idiot. But it is the interpretation which I am leaning toward. After all, he wouldn't send a message if she hadn't seen him (or at least I assume not, because not a respectable woman in the world would ever respond to an ad from someone when she didn't know a thing about what he looked like), but maybe he was so stupid as not to realize that it was his lecherous grin that kept her from boarding the streetcar? I dunno, but I can't come up with any scenario in which this guy comes off well. Conclusion: G.F. is daft.

Now the second ad is even more intriguing. A lady "so ceremoniously" takes a rose from, er, "Rose's" lapel at a party. I can totally see that. She's all flirty and batting her eyelashes at him or something and then takes the rose with her eyebrows arched and a suggestive smile (it's weird how minutely I can describe this, isn't it?) and there's nothing he can really do about it, even if he wanted to, because he is a gentleman and you can't rebuke a woman publicly. But, how came she to take his rose out of his lapel? If she didn't know him, did she literally just walk up to a total stranger at a ball and grab his coat? That's...ballsy. That's ballsy even today. I hate to fall back on the same old explanation of her being a prostitute (could prostitutes even getting into a fancy dress ball? I guess why not, if she's a high-class one) but I can't fathom another explanation, because if she was some working-class girl who didn't observe Victorian middle-class propriety she wouldn't be able to afford to get into such a ball. Ooohhh, maybe it was some kind of ritual? Like, maybe the women got to go up to men they find attractive and take the flowers out of their lapels? Rare moment when women could shed rules of etiquette? Like a Sadie Hawkins dance but not? But then how were they supposed to find each other, because no one else was posting ads like this?

So, fine, somehow or other a complete stranger comes up to this guy and takes away his rose very ceremoniously. We don't know why. But then he posts an ad and...asks for it back, no questions asked? Um, really? What kind of rose was this? Was it made of gold? Because after a day or so a normal rose is going to wilt and then I guess unless he planned on pressing it between the pages of Romeo and Juliet in his Shakespeare folio, he's going to have to toss it anyway. Maybe his real girlfriend gave it to him and he's like, if I don't get that back, and she figures out that some other girl has it, she's not going to be so pleased.

I have a feeling I'm reading a much more complex story into this scenario than really existed. Maybe this was actually a code for a drug deal gone wrong. Or maybe "roses" it's like when people on Craigslist were soliciting for sex by asking for or offering so many "roses".

Whatever the case, this is definitely something I've never seen before!

©2011 Pam Epstein

Pretty women

Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:04:19 -0400

Well, hello there! I haven't written in quite some time! Can't believe how time flies. Well, despite the fact that I am teaching today and still haven't finished my lecture (please don't tell my students), I feel so bad about being so remiss that I'm putting up an entry anyway. So here are two missed connection ads that are from 1853! I didn't even realize till recently that they went so far back. Some things never change. (Except the clothes.)

The two young ladies who were walking in Broadway on Thursday morning, between Canal and Broome streets, one wearing a brown silk bonnet and fur cape, the other a black velvet hat, with a fur cape, dark dresses, will oblige an admirer by sending their address to L.L., Herald office.

If the lady dressed in a watered striped silk, black velvet mantilla, and white satin hat, with feathers, who attended Wallack's Lyceum on Thursday evening, 6th inst., and upon leaving took one of the Fourteenth street line of stages, at the same time bowing twice to a gentleman standing upon the sidewalk, will condescend to address a note to Randolph, Broadway Post Office, granting an interview, it will be the means of conferring a great deal of happiness upon one who would be pleased to make your acquaintance.

The first one I just find amusing because you have one guy addressing two women. I always wonder how that can end well, unless he has a friend he wants to introduce to them. But if not, how can this work out? Is he going to date them both and decide which girl he likes best? Because that seems like a recipe for disaster.

But it's the second one which I love. First, I always think it's awesome when guys are able to describe the woman's clothing in such intimate detail. Honestly I can't remember what I was wearing three days ago, much less someone else, and - not to stereotype or anything - I do think guys tend to be less observant about women's clothing. However, her outfit sounds especially stylish, especially the mantilla (women wore mantillas in the States back then? Weird).

Then the rest of the ad is super adorable. I like the part about "it will be the means of conferring a great deal of happiness." Aw. That's cute. I would like it if meeting me would confer a great deal of happiness. (I like to think it does, sometimes!) That being said, him following her out of the theater and watching her get on a 14th St streetcar is a little weird because Wallack's Theater (according the the amazing interwebs) is on Broadway and Broome, which is nowhere near 14th St. And maybe she bowed at you because you were freaking her out, Randolph. I don't know - maybe that particular street car went up Broadway and then turned on 14th, and it was one he was familiar with, so he knew where it was going? I'm going to assume that's the case and give him the benefit of the doubt, mostly just because if she did get onto a 14th St stage at 14th St, she walked pretty far to get there.

Well, my lecture awaits. This is the last week of classes, hooray! Two months off from teaching. I love teaching and all, but two months off is even better (if only I didn't have a second job, but a girl's got to pay the rent!).

©2011 Pam Epstein