The role of a man and a woman in human society has been a burning question since human society appeared. Many researchers from different scientific fields devote much time and effort to the study of gender roles in society in general and in separate communities as well. The present paper is devoted to the analysis of the article under the title “Male Space and Female Space within the Provencal Community” by Lucienne Roubin.
In the introduction to the article, the authoress offers a brief description of her research, she acquaints the audience with her methodology, and it is as follows: “direct observation, archival research, and comparative methodology” (Roubin 152). It is possible to state at once that the methods used by Roubin can be characterized as objective, reliable, diverse, and scientifically proven. She also states the brief results of her study, mentioning two forms in the institution under study, French province of Provence. They are the traditional form and the present-day form. Ruben promises to analyze the second form to trace the evolution of male society in order to clarify the mechanisms of its existence and development.
The author makes use of a subheading “Two Universes”, describing the enormous gap between male and female components of society that are so detached from each other. Among the main components of male space in Provence, Roubin mentions wine cellars as male domain that has remained till nowadays (154). Other components of male space are the village square and the church chancel. The latter is, evidently, appropriated by men unfairly as the primary function of the church is to unite all village dwellers instead of separating them. The village square is described by the author as “the very heart of male space” (Roubin 154). Women are allowed to cross it but they never stop to have a talk. There is a tendency of weakening of male space as it spreads out from the village square. For instance, if the fields are considered to be male space as well, women are allowed to enter it as they provide necessary help for men. In Provencal village, they stress the municipal male role more than the agrarian one (Roubin 156). Still, it seems that the author’s explanation of the attitude of a man and land seems difficult and needs a deeper explanation.
A separate section of the article is devoted to the concept of female space. In comparison with male space, this one is, evidently, narrower and more cohesive. An interesting idea is offered by the author who states that there is certain discrepancy between patterns of female behavior and the real conduct of women. She ascribes this discrepancy to the gender of ethnologists, who are preferably male. Thus, legally a woman was presented as a minor individual guided by male authority (father, husband). In fact, the status of a woman depended on land ownership and a husband and a wife often were in relationship of cooperation and competition instead of subordination.
Roubin contrasts two “universes” of the Provencal citizens based on their cohesiveness. The space of women is dominated by them only; women observe the rules and etiquette typical of their villages (Roubin 157), though these groups were temporary and flexible. Besides, a peasant’s house was also controlled by women as they were the sovereigns of the kitchen that used to be the central room in a house. We have mentioned the church chancel earlier as the realm of men, there was also a special space in a church that belonged to female space and there was a strict hierarchy among women and places they occupied. If fields were parts of male territory, gardens were female space.
The fact that a woman was a mother contributed to the extension of her space. In fact, it was not extension exactly; it can be described as the strengthening of her role in a house. The authoress equates the kitchen to the village square, making them two centers of the analyzed spaces. In this relation, the detachment of chamberette-clubs for women and their appreciation by men become absolutely evident.
As the author suggests, the separation of the spaces needed some points of contact and there were special occasions and officers to oversee them. Roubin singles out the groups on the basis of age distinction, mentioning the election of the Abbot. Among his chief duties, she mentions the collection of the pelote, “a fee imposed upon all newlyweds” (Roubin 163). She traces the presence of the remnants of this fee collection in contemporary Provence. Among other duties of the abbot was the preparation of the annual patron saint’s day. The signs of this officer can be observed nowadays as well under the name the Feast Committee (Roubin 165). Women also had the counterpart of the Abbot, the Abbess. The young woman was influential in community but her authority was not so strong as the Abbots.
The authoress devotes a separate section to the newlyweds, explaining this by their intermediate status between the youth and the adult citizens. The main focus of the section is on the male participants of the rituals. Newlyweds were to pay special tribute as it has been mentioned above already and the town captain collected it. Still, one more principal function of the heads of the families and the town captain was the defense of the town and the performance of the rituals of hospitality. The bravade reflected the social stratification of the town and it was controlled by the town captain. Due to the status of the house as the realm of a woman, there was no such festival controlled by them. However, we think that there was no necessity of such a festival since defense of the village was, evidently, the duty of male citizens.
Roubin also dwells on the veneration of tutelary powers as the necessary element of the culture of Provencal community that has survived up to the present. Still, the author’s motivation for its detailed study is not very clear. The only conclusion that can be drawn from the description is that the veneration was a part of male universe.
The last but one section of the article provides necessary information concerning the festivals as the means of integration of the whole community. Roubin states that “free competition transcends family ties and unites the town in its admiration of the victors” (177). Finally, the main idea of the final section is that the chief function of village festivals was to unite all members of community together, to establish the link between the sexes.
The language of the article and the manner of presentation of the material by the author are accessible, the subsequent sections explain the concepts that seem difficult at first, so that by the end of the article the authors’ idea is absolutely clear.
As for the personal examples of the concepts used by the author, it is necessary to mention that female space in our community has much in common with the female space in Provencal region. This can be explained by the primary role of a woman in society: she is a mother; her primary duties are to give birth to children and to bring them up by our religious traditions. However, there is a difference between the status of the house in its relation to women. According to Islamic traditions, the private part of a house is the realm of a woman while the public part is male space. Still, there is a segregation of society into two spaces, male and female. Men perform the same functions as Provencal men do: they should defend and support their families.
Concluding, it is possible to state that the spaces of a man and a woman have been determined historically in many cultures. Certainly, marriage and traditions are the factors that constitute the points of intersection of female and male spaces.
Works Cited
Roubin, Lucienne. “Male Space and Female Space within the Provencal Community.” Rural Society in France. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1977: 152-180.