From Maternal Impressions to Eugenics: Pregnancy and Inheritance in the Nineteenth-Century U.S.

This essay examines the theory of maternal impressions, the belief that a woman's experiences or emotions during pregnancy could explain congenital disability or emotional/ behavior differences in her child and asks why this theory circulated as an explanation for disability seen at birth by both medical doctors and in literature for far longer than it did across the Atlantic. By presenting examples from nineteenth-century medical literature, popular fiction, maternal handbooks, and two canonical works of literature, Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter and Harriet Jacobs' Incidents in the Life of a Slave, I argue that maternal impressions worked to maintain anxiety for women, and particular white women, to ensure they felt responsible if anything was "wrong" with their child. Ultimately, I show how maternal impressions was both an ableist and racialized understanding of inheritance that wouldn't be discarded until the emergence of eugenics in the early twentieth century.

Between the town and the mountain: abortion and the politics of life in Edith Wharton's "Summer".

In the early twentieth century, American laws focused on women's reproductive capacities and were coalescing into the ethical and moral frameworks that subtend American reproductive politics today. Edith Wharton published her 1917 novel, Summer, at a time when anti-abortion sentiment was widespread in American culture. Through a reading of Summer, the article provides a theoretical and historical framework for understanding this new American obsession with the judicial regulation of women's reproductive options. In particular, I situate the novel's presentation of abortion within the tension between the carefully defined laws of North Dormer, the town in which the majority of the story takes place, and the lawlessness of the Mountain, a place that looms throughout the story as the protagonist's birthplace and a location of utmost abjection. The novel's profound insight is that power does not function unilaterally and individually but through and on the population. Furthermore, Wharton leaps ahead by recognizing that life is not simply that which lives but that which is recognized and embraced by the law. This realization, one that Wharton must have come to terms with through her painful work with World War I refugees, shapes Charity's character and her understanding not only of how reproduction is regulated but also of how living within this regulation and control generates the norm and offers the only possibility for a liveable and legible life.