Abstract of Griffin's "Awful Disclosures: Women's Evidence in the Escaped Nun's Tale"

Work Cited:

Griffin, Susan M. "Awful Disclosures: Women's Evidence in the Escaped Nun's Tale." PMLA: Publications of the Modern Language Association of America 111.1 (1996): 93-107. JSTOR. Web. 20 Sept. 2010.

Abstract of Griffin’s Awful Disclosures: Women’s Evidence in the Escaped Nun’s Tale

            Susan Griffin carefully analyzes a variety of escaped convent narratives to build up to her claim that the escaped nun’s tale reveals “the fundamental weakness of the female self on which the future of American Protestantism rests,” and that the woman who writes the tale incriminates herself and her entire gender (105).  Griffin offers a historical background of the genre, and she presents both sides of the dispute regarding whether the narratives were authentic and credible.  She describes the widespread Anti-Catholicism during the antebellum period, which contributed to the popularity of Reed’s and Monk’s narratives at the time they were published.  She also explains how the narratives were instruments of a larger ongoing religious debate (96).  Furthermore, Reed’s and Monk’s stories follow a “set fictional precedent,” and she explains that Reed presents a more believable argument than Monk.  Monk’s credibility was later questioned after two searches of the convent, which revealed that her drawings and descriptions of the convent did not match its actual appearance.  Griffin carefully explains methods the writers and their publishers utilized to gain credibility, such as including introductions by men assuring the public of the women’s noble motives for publication (a warning to other young women) and scholarly footnotes, cross-references, appendixes, maps, and diagrams.  The narratives often refer to ostensible evidence, such as letters, that purportedly could not be presented because they contained inappropriate language or were stolen.

After laying a historical foundation and describing the common elements of escape convent narratives, Griffin begins to set up her argument.  She explains that the publishers and writers present the female as innocent and naïve, deceived by the priests and nuns.  She gives numerous examples from the narratives of the heroine fainting when faced with rape or disturbing incidents in the convent.  One ex-nun describes a scene in which she reveals that the priest raises poisonous herbs for murderous purposes, but she says that “she ‘did not know what to make of’” his actions, thus pleading ignorant and naïve to the situation.  Griffin asserts that the women did this as a defense mechanism, as the readers would otherwise label them as unreliable (since they gave their oaths to the convent and then backed out).  Another nun even claims that she was unconscious during her vows and the nuns took her silence as consent. Therefore, the women and their publishers aim to convince Protestant readers that the women preserved their integrity, even though they temporarily joined the Catholic Church (102).

From there, Griffin explains that these tales are stories of spiritual seduction used to define and control women’s religion.  Upon critical reading, these narratives “illustrate the young women’s incapacity to be trusted:  her testimony is essential to unveiling the truth, but it also proves her vulnerability and fallibility” since the testimony of a woman cannot stand on its own as evidence (104).  It must be supported with some sort of apparent proof.  Thus the publishers must assert control and “support” the women’s stories, much like the Catholic Church is presented as a tool to control young women.  This is where she inserts her thesis statement that focuses on the weak portrayal of females.  She asserts that by writing their stories, these escaped nuns are incriminating themselves and their sex.

I believe that Griffin approaches the topic persuasively. Instead of presenting her thesis statement in the beginning, she builds up to it. She begins by laying out the historical scene—the extreme Anti-Catholic view of many Protestants, the popularity of the escaped convent narratives, the dispute over the authenticity of the stories, the elements of the genre, the focus on women’s spirituality during that time, etc.  Then she constructs her argument by using case studies of various escape convent narratives, especially Monk’s, Reed’s, and Rosamond’s.  She occasionally refers to several parodies written to refute these women’s stories.  She supports all of her ideas with careful examples from the texts and she unpacks her argument thoroughly and carefully.  I found the “build up to a thesis” approach very effective in this case.  I honestly did not see many gaps in her argument.  If I were to make a suggestion, I would ask Griffin to address the fact that women, although they had to “incriminate themselves,” achieved publication during a time when female publication was a difficult accomplishment.  I would be interested to see if and how Griffin would refute that this minimizes their weak portrayal.  Although they had to endure public scrutiny, wouldn’t at least some women argue that this self-incrimination was worth the publication—the ability for a woman’s voice to live beyond her grave?  Other than this point, I felt that Griffin’s essay was informative and persuasive.

Furthermore, I intend to refer to the historical information in my paper.  Many of my historical questions are answered in the beginning of this article.  It presents an overview that draws from a wealth of sources, 66 to be exact, some of which I am adding to my preliminary bibliography today.  The article also points me in the direction of a claim for my paper.  While it is not a definitive claim yet, I am inspired to explore the theme of manipulation in Reed’s narrative.  I would like to observe how Protestant male publishers manipulate Reed, the publisher’s introduction manipulates the reader, nuns and priests manipulate Reed, and Reed manipulates the reader.  Griffin also gave me the idea to use the theory of masquerade in my essay.  Does Reed use her femininity as Griffin suggests?  Does she plead innocence in hope that the reader will excuse her decision to join the convent?  Does she use her femininity as a manipulation tool?  Does she remove her femininity and put it back on when convenient?  I will examine the text and my secondary sources more carefully to see if this question can be answered.  Therefore, I found this article very important.  Griffin’s argument planted a seed in my mind, one that I hope will only grow as I read more articles.  This article would definitely benefit my classmate Lesley too, as she is reading Monk’s Awful Disclosures of the Hotel Dieu Nunnery of Montreal, another popular escape convent narrative.  Overall, I sense that I am a step closer to my final product.