Philo-Fiss's Letter To The Female Spectator

Book fifteen of the Female Spectator reproduces a letter from a man who calls himself the Philo-Naturæ. He gives advice to young women seeking to expand their thoughts, specifically in the field of Natural Philosophy. The author of the Philo-Naturæ’s letters is debatable; some contend it was a reader writing in, while others believe it was Haywood (Girten 57). Nevertheless, the letter highlights the expected role of women in the burgeoning field of natural philosophy. He advises readers: do not trouble yourself too much with complicated subjects, but rather engage, observe and record nature when ever possible. The Philo-Naturæ believes that women should not tax themselves too much trying to comprehend the difficult theories of Aldrovandus,

The Female Spectator responds, “He may, at least, assure himself of this, that our little society, who agreed to pass a few days at a country seat…will not go unfurnished with Microscopes, and other proper Glasses, in order to make those Inspections he recommends”( FS 3:140). The women arrive in the country and they are forced to stay indoors for several days because of the rain. Kristine Girten in “Unsexed Souls: Natural Philosophy as Transformation in Eliza Haywood's Female Spectator” argues that the rain the Society of women encounter in the country only shows how constrictive gender proves to be. First, the women are limited by society which requires them to remain at home to complete domestic chores, and then more dramatically, by nature that forces them to stay inside because of bad weather (FS 3:60-61). The only insect out after the rain are caterpillars, so they begin to study this small creature. Even though they are very common bugs, the women investigate and make astute observations. Furthermore, Girten contends that seventeenth and eighteenth century women were often criticized and satirized for caring too much for little objects. Knowing this, Haywood plays on the idea when describing how the women of the Female Spectator’s society examine small insects. Girten states, “In the hands of Haywood, it becomes a tool of

She retorts, “We may be enabled by it to entertain ourselves with the most agreeable ideas, and to entertain other, so as to render our conversation valuable to all who enjoy it” (FS 3: 141). It seems that Haywood is replying, very subtly, to the condescending tone of Philo-Naturæ’s advice. Paula Findlen acknowledges in “Ideas in the Mind: Gender and Knowledge in the Seventeenth Century” that women were reluctant to publically accept the role of a philosopher or a scientist. From the writing of the seventeenth century, Findlen concludes that numerous female scholars were learning and theorizing for their own happiness more so than recognition from society (229). It seems likely that Haywood’s views on learning were not changed much from her predecessors. The Female Spectator’s tone echoes the deflection of credit. Outwardly, the women in this circle focus on how learning can improve their ability to be solid participants in conversations, but there are subtle hints throughout that suggest otherwise. For example, the Female Spectator finds a breed of caterpillar that changes color. The “worthy” gentleman, whom they are staying with, calls it a “camelion” and believes it “changes it hue according to the weather”( FS 3:255). The Female Spectator wishes for more time in the country so as to be able to prove what she believes to be true: