Lucy Worsley's Suffragettes programme

Well, Lucy’s documentary made me realise how little I knew about the movement & made me hungry to learn more. I know she’s not to everyone’s taste, but she has her part to play & it was an accessible approach.

Thanks all for the tips re further reading/viewing.

Mary Beard is my hero. Helen Castor is brilliant too.

Lucy Worsley’s presenting style makes me feel like I’m 4 years old.

I prefer something a bit meatier than Worsley's output.

That said, she certainly makes engaging programmes, which can only be a good thing. This last, I think, didn't make it clear enough that she was focusing on militancy but there was plenty else going on. Nothing wrong with the focus: failure to provide adequate context was the problem.

Good, isn't it? Glad you guys agree!

Brilliant series and well worth another look.

Thank you LangCleg

Southfields - yes, I remember Shoulder to Shoulder, though not, alas, in detail. I'm reading Rise Up, Women at the mo' and like it, but the author is in the suffragette camp (I'm a suffragist ).

I did a course with FutureLearn earlier this year which I also liked. From Royal Holloway - it's called Beyond the Ballot and is over at the moment. IIRC it's rerunning later this year - history of the UK women's movement from 1866 to present. I ran out of time a bit so I've signed up again.

Im not in the UK so have only seen her program about Russia on netflix. I thought it was nice to see a woman presenting a history program, especially since it wasnt a history program about women. Didnt pay much attention to it though.

Well let us not forget that this is history for the mass market so they have to stage it and sell it a bit. Clearly lucy is a very talented and intelligent woman. Her credentials make an interesting read on wiki
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_Worsley

I find her presenting style very engaging. I always say that beuaty is to be admired but discretely and i also think there is a hint of naughtiness about her which she has learned to use to her advantage in the same way as Sara Cox's voice is her fortune.

Taxiparent

I think it's a myth that it was given as some kind of reward for war work or in appreciation of such.

When in 1918 the govt was about to give the franchise to more men, they were pretty much forced to extend it to women or else, as soon as the war ended, the militant suffragettes would have restarted the terrorist tactics once again and soon they'd all have been caught up in the cycle of imprisonment, hunger strike, release, recapture, and more women would have died.

Agree this is excellent!

I really dislike her general presenting style so I've avoided the series because I know that will frustrate me over the actual content.

KittyKlaws

Yes, I think that your mind probably filled in the blanks because you already knew the whole story of the suffrage and suffragette movements.

Does anyone remember the low budget "Shoulder to Shoulder" dramatic six-part series in the 1970s? I have it on DVD.

I can't bear the dressing up either. Lucy, step back, you are no actress. I prefer you as a historian.

Hate to be blunt

I didn't see the programme, well, 5 mins. I don't particularly like her presenting style and I hate all that dressing up and re-enacting scenes. I find it a bit dumbed down. I don't need to see someone in period costume to get the idea.
However, anything which teaches history and may get people interested is a very good thing .

1. It took one small aspect of the story: the violent incidents of the most militant years, and was therefore unbalanced and made it appear as though this is all they did.

I don't think it did that and I also have a fair knowledge of this movement (perhaps not as much as you). I didn't think it showed it as all they did - unless my mind filled in the rest. I do think it showed only one part of the movement and it would have been better as a series showing the other branches and women involved.

I'd be interested if there were particular books you recommended I've read 'Unshackled' , 'Rise up Women' and 'Deeds not words' and some others I can't remember the names of but are there any great academic books you think are worth reading? I'm keen to learn more.

I prefer this series:

Suffragettes Forever The Story Of Women And Power

Militancy was the ONLY way forward for these women. They had had enough.

Bit of background on the Ladies National Association.

discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/c1c3936d-51c6-479a-8629-37d52ad42c56

Yes, this is about the deregulation of legal prostitution, which clearly wasn't working. Josephine Butler campaigned for the punters to be criminalised. In the 19thC.

Women just didn't decide that militant action was needed (see last night's The Handmaid's Tale', it was years of suppression that led to this.

And all before the internet. And our 'friend' Google.

Whilst I though that aspects of the documentary were interesting, including the way in which the Suffragettes were very PR savvy, I agree that yet again the information was skewed towards the WSPU and completely neglected to discuss the contribution of the NUWSS pre 1906 and up until 1914.
I still completely disagree that the actions of the WSPU led to women getting the vote; they got attention and publicity and increased the membership of women’s suffrage movements, but they did not convince Parliament to give women the vote. In fact their militant actions, which were likened to terrorism in the program, only made parliament more determined not to give women the vote.
It was actions of women during WWI who stepped up into male roles on the home front in order to keep the country going that showed parliament that women were not the weak and feeble minded beings they were viewed as and were capable of voting. However even in 1918, the vote was only granted to them as amendments were needed to be made to voting rights to allow soldiers still oversees to vote. Also, it was ensured that only women over 30 could vote as if it had been opened up to all women it would have been likely that the female voters could have outnumbered the male voters and the government didn’t want the possibility of that happening.

Southfields. I agree that it's focus on the violence didn't give a balanced account. And I do find her presentation style patronising at times.

But, as I said, it did engage my dc who don't watch TV. So she must be doing something right. I suppose it should be used as a small part of the suffrage story and not the definitive guide.

• talking DOWN not don

Er, have I stumbled onto the wrong forum?

Shocked to my CORE at the sycophantic comments about Lucy, and the treating of her not as a serious historian but objectifying her as a bit of stuff to be drooled over!

Speaking as someone who has studied the suffrage movement at degree level, there were two enormous problems with the programme.

1. It took one small aspect of the story: the violent incidents of the most militant years, and was therefore unbalanced and made it appear as though this is all they did.

1. Lucy Worsley's lisping, breathless tones of over-excitement when she narrated the story reminded me of a nursery-nurse talking (don) to a three year old, trying desperately to get the child excited about something.

Bottom line: another wasted opportunity to tell the story of our greatest heroines. More dashed expectations from me.

Limpopo, my DP would definitely agree with you. She's his dream woman - petite, blonde, bobbed hair, delicate looking. I'm tall, dark haired, thick head of curls, NOT delicate looking Weird!

Have recorded this, looking forward to watching it

I watched it last week- absolutely fantastic and I learnt a lot. Made a promise to myself to ALWAYS use my vote after seeing how hard won it was.

Interesting to see how they played an extremely successful PR game at the start of their campaign.

Love Lucy Worsley- she did a fantastic series on Henry VIII’s wives as well which was v interesting