Guitars. A "Women's Instrument."

Yankee Brooke

Sergeant Major
Joined
Jun 8, 2018
Location
Philly burbs
So you like guitars, huh? We all do. When you think of one, you probably conjure up images of Eric Clapton, Bruce Springsteen, Slash, The Beatles, etc. Men playing everything from acoustic rock, to blues, country, rock n roll, all your favorites. They've been stereotyped as "rebellious" and played by every outcast, from your hippie pot smoking uncle, to some mohawked punk rocker, or some long haired white boy playing some overly aggressive and obnoxious heavy metal...but I digress.

They seem to have had a VERY different stereotype for our 1860's ancestors. They were primarily a "women's" instrument. Something you would pluck on at home, maybe while entertaining some guests or your family, but nothing more. It was one of the They seem to have had a VERY different stereotype for our 1860's ancestors. They were primarily a "women's" instrument. Something you would pluck on at home, maybe while entertaining some guests or your family, but nothing more. It was one of the few instruments considered proper for a woman to play.

parlor-guitar-1860.jpg


Orchestral instruments were a big fat no!

In 1783, German philologist and composer Carl Ludwig Junker wrote an essay explaining exactly which instruments were proper for women to play. Unsurprisingly, he “issued a strict ban on women playing what he regarded as male instruments,” which were most of them, according to Stenstadvold. Men played professional, orchestral instruments, while the guitar was seen mainly as an instrument to be played at home, by amateurs. For critics, this meant women.

The guitar was good for a woman, Junker and others argued, because orchestral instruments “threatened the concept of her ‘natural’ subservient role and compromised her decorum,” Stenstadvold writes. Female musicians could keep their bodies in graceful, feminine poses while playing. Musically, the critics thought, the guitar was also a perfect instrument for women because it was made for “simple, unpretentious music, most of all in a subordinate role as an accompanying instrument.”

Now the guitars of those days were way different, obviously, no electrics. No steel stringed acoustics either, those were invented in the early 20th century in order to be louder and cut through "the mix" when guitar started becoming more popular, and appearing in professional settings. The guitar was something similar to what we'd call a "classical," "Spanish," or "flamenco" guitar today. Small bodied, with animal gut strings(vs nylon typically found on those guitars today). They were not very loud, and so were not typically used in an orchestral setting. Usually only by themselves, at home, or perhaps in a smaller band, accompanying one other instrument.

I actually think the banjo was the "cool" instrument of the day, and served a role similar to guitar in our modern world. That is in almost every piece of music, played by a large number of people, including old timers and almost all rebellious youths, and readily available to those who wish to learn the instrument. But probably not for women, it seems all we were allowed was the guitar...

(The quote comes from here, btw): https://daily.jstor.org/at-first-the-guitar-was-a-womens-instrument/#:~:text=Men played professional, orchestral instruments,For critics, this meant women.&text=Even as it gained popularity,guitar as a lesser instrument.

b238c7dcd1653cbd04ffd9b47caa6d6f--guitar-collection-guitar-players.jpg
 
I really enjoyed reading your post @Yankee Brooke and had no idea that was the case. I guess the guitar was considered more 'genteel' and therefore that made it suitable for women. Although I struggle to see the issue with orchestral instruments for the most part. While the focus is on stringed instruments there seems to have been no problem with ladies learning how to play the piano. The other thing, of course, is your fingers need to harden up some to play the guitar. I wonder if any women had a problem with this? I tried learning at one stage and OUCH! It took a toll. Maybe that was the nylon strings. It's a beautiful instrument when played well - I prefer acoustic - and my daughter's boyfriend brought me to tears one day when he played "Blackbird" by the Beatles. I had to walk out of the room.
 
Last edited:
The other thing, of course, is your fingers need to harden up some to play the guitar. I wonder if any women had a problem with this?
I wanted to learn the guitar and took lessons until I discovered "your fingers need to harden up some to play" and as piano was my first love - I gave up the guitar. When I did some research on "Parlor Music", I discovered this neat illustration that combines both acceptable instruments for women in the era. I wonder when music stands were invented?

i_169.jpg
 
I wanted to learn the guitar and took lessons until I discovered "your fingers need to harden up some to play"
Yes, @DBF , it might be one of those things that takes us by surprise as seasoned guitarists make it look so effortless (as with anything). And perhaps women's hands are softer and need more toughening up in order to play, though I believe everyone has to go through that initial experience. I also have the complication of being left handed, so I will often try to learn to do things the right handed way which might also put a spanner in the works ... let's see how many excuses I can come up with for not persevering! I'm glad you have your first love and I'm sure it enriches your life greatly. And going by that image I'd say it must have put a real strain on people's necks, never mind their eyes, before music stands were invented. The pianist definitely has the better deal in that scenario!
 
The bit in your excerpt about women playing orchestral instruments is key - "keep their bodies in graceful, feminine poses." Imagine how shocking a woman cellist would have been - a lady spreading her legs to accommodate the instrument?! Or twisting her torso holding a violin. Musicians were often thought of as playing with passion, another unseemly thing for a lady. Gently strumming a guitar or playing the piano with legs together and back straight - those were fine. So silly to us today.
 
The bit in your excerpt about women playing orchestral instruments is key - "keep their bodies in graceful, feminine poses." Imagine how shocking a woman cellist would have been - a lady spreading her legs to accommodate the instrument?! Or twisting her torso holding a violin. Musicians were often thought of as playing with passion, another unseemly thing for a lady. Gently strumming a guitar or playing the piano with legs together and back straight - those were fine. So silly to us today.
The cello crossed my mind, too. Another enlightening comment and it does seem silly to us today. So interesting to know how women were perceived and the expectations placed on them in the circumstances. I would never have considered the playing of musical instruments as something to be controlled in that sense. The comment on "playing with passion" is a real eye opener.
 
I had heard the shape of the guitar was the reason for it's draw upon the feminine crowd.
Looking at the pictures you provide, I can see no difference to the modern guitar. I almost feel it was photo-shopped!
(I know it wasn't).
Lubliner.
 
I was gifted a guitar by a musician friend. He wanted me to learn to play and sing. I never got past learning the string names, because I feel like the guitar is too big for me. I think I will let my son be the string player in the family! (Violin, viola, mandolin and once in a great while the civil war style guitar).
 
I was gifted a guitar by a musician friend. He wanted me to learn to play and sing. I never got past learning the string names, because I feel like the guitar is too big for me. I think I will let my son be the string player in the family! (Violin, viola, mandolin and once in a great while the civil war style guitar).
Looks like there are a few 'failed' guitar players here :laugh: Don't forget you're voice is also a beautiful instrument @Mrs. V.
 
So you like guitars, huh? We all do. When you think of one, you probably conjure up images of Eric Clapton, Bruce Springsteen, Slash, The Beatles, etc. Men playing everything from acoustic rock, to blues, country, rock n roll, all your favorites. They've been stereotyped as "rebellious" and played by every outcast, from your hippie pot smoking uncle, to some mohawked punk rocker, or some long haired white boy playing some overly aggressive and obnoxious heavy metal...but I digress.

They seem to have had a VERY different stereotype for our 1860's ancestors. They were primarily a "women's" instrument. Something you would pluck on at home, maybe while entertaining some guests or your family, but nothing more. It was one of the They seem to have had a VERY different stereotype for our 1860's ancestors. They were primarily a "women's" instrument. Something you would pluck on at home, maybe while entertaining some guests or your family, but nothing more. It was one of the few instruments considered proper for a woman to play.

View attachment 390377

Orchestral instruments were a big fat no!



Now the guitars of those days were way different, obviously, no electrics. No steel stringed acoustics either, those were invented in the early 20th century in order to be louder and cut through "the mix" when guitar started becoming more popular, and appearing in professional settings. The guitar was something similar to what we'd call a "classical," "Spanish," or "flamenco" guitar today. Small bodied, with animal gut strings(vs nylon typically found on those guitars today). They were not very loud, and so were not typically used in an orchestral setting. Usually only by themselves, at home, or perhaps in a smaller band, accompanying one other instrument.

I actually think the banjo was the "cool" instrument of the day, and served a role similar to guitar in our modern world. That is in almost every piece of music, played by a large number of people, including old timers and almost all rebellious youths, and readily available to those who wish to learn the instrument. But probably not for women, it seems all we were allowed was the guitar...

(The quote comes from here, btw): https://daily.jstor.org/at-first-the-guitar-was-a-womens-instrument/#:~:text=Men played professional, orchestral instruments,For critics, this meant women.&text=Even as it gained popularity,guitar as a lesser instrument.

View attachment 390378
There's a long history of women playing lutes and harps, so it's possible that the notion of a dainty woman softly playing pretty melodies on a stringed instrument naturally applied to the parlor guitar as well. Your picture of the lady with a parlor guitar fits in quite nicely with the ladies below.

woman lute.jpg


woman lute2.jpg

woman lute3.jpg

harp 3.jpg


harp 2.jpg
 
I wonder if women were discouraged to learn orchestra instruments was due to the fact it was an all-male profession at the time and "heaven forbid" if a woman entered that man's world - on stage - in public - the scandal it would cause.
Definitely being on the stage was frowned upon, as actresses and other theatre jobs were seen as being equivalent to prostitution for a long time. That prejudice was mostly gone by the CW era and there were many revered female performers. Women were encouraged and expected to know some sort of musical performance though, as sharing music in the evenings was a common pastime. Only for family and friends though, not strangers.
 
The first two photos show a couple of ladies playing what we now call "parlor" guitars, because their soft voices are perfect for playing in a small space. Parlor guitars are still very popular. The ladies in the photos are playing very nice examples of professionally made instruments. Historic parlor guitars were also strung with gut, which is easier on the finger pads than steel wire. As a player and hobby builder, I can offer the insight that even today's larger guitars have narrower necks than the typical lute, which makes them a bit easier to navigate for a person with smaller hands. However, guitars achieve part of their range by having longer necks with more space in the fret intervals. This can require a real stretch--particularly on classical guitars, which have very long scale lengths. Most lutes achieve their range by putting many more strings on a wider, shorter neck. The mandolin (the smallest member of the lute family) is an exception and has a very narrow neck. Banjo necks are also more narrow. On fretted instruments, it seems everything is a matter of trade offs for playing ease and sound.
 
On fretted instruments, it seems everything is a matter of trade offs for playing ease and sound.
Essentially, yes. At least for us common folk. If Slash wanted his Les Paul to have a Stratocaster neck, well then Gibson is going to make one for him. OR rather a few. You and I, not so much. Particularly with acoustic guitars, you find a body shape that fits your playing style, but that you can still handle comfortably. @Mrs. V 's story is not at all uncommon, I wager she was probably given a dreadnaught, which can be tough to handle for many people, but it's the most common shape, because it's also most popular. I love mine, but I'm not exactly petite, I can see it being rough for a smaller person.

As for the finger tips, it only takes a couple of weeks to toughen up to the point you don't hurt after playing for a little while. I'm learning using justinguitar.com, and he recommends 20 minutes a day, 4 days a week for the first month. It worked well for me, that was the balance between playing enough to learn and develop, and not tearing up your hands. But yes, that turns many women off, now as I'm sure it did then.
 
Essentially, yes. At least for us common folk. If Slash wanted his Les Paul to have a Stratocaster neck, well then Gibson is going to make one for him. OR rather a few. You and I, not so much. Particularly with acoustic guitars, you find a body shape that fits your playing style, but that you can still handle comfortably. @Mrs. V 's story is not at all uncommon, I wager she was probably given a dreadnaught, which can be tough to handle for many people, but it's the most common shape, because it's also most popular. I love mine, but I'm not exactly petite, I can see it being rough for a smaller person.

As for the finger tips, it only takes a couple of weeks to toughen up to the point you don't hurt after playing for a little while. I'm learning using justinguitar.com, and he recommends 20 minutes a day, 4 days a week for the first month. It worked well for me, that was the balance between playing enough to learn and develop, and not tearing up your hands. But yes, that turns many women off, now as I'm sure it did then.
All I can say is it was given to me by someone who isn’t especially tall, but he is quite a bit um..larger than me! Someone told me that it is more of a classical guitar and meant to be played more in front of you rather than more in the horizontal plane..
 
Definitely being on the stage was frowned upon, as actresses and other theatre jobs were seen as being equivalent to prostitution for a long time. That prejudice was mostly gone by the CW era and there were many revered female performers. Women were encouraged and expected to know some sort of musical performance though, as sharing music in the evenings was a common pastime. Only for family and friends though, not strangers.
I can testify that such was still true in the late 1930s in Europe. My aunt went to Italy to sing opera and actually did well (and learned Italian; quite a feat for a woman from rural Georgia). Unfortunately (as it seems to me) she married an Italian whose family were bankers and well connected sorts. Anyway, I don't know the details of who said what when but after they married he told her she couldn't be on stage as that was considered very base and wouldn't be accepted by the family or the society in which they associated. She thus quit singing (but my mother had some 78s of her).

They had an interesting life but I can only feel that she must have been really hurt to have to abandon her passion just to marry that guy (who I thought was a jerk; and I did meet him when I was a kid).

I'd bet that particular prejudice persisted longer than we might imagine.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top