What do you think?
Rate this book
Etta Lemon: The Woman Who Saved the Birds
'A great story of pioneering conservation.' - Kate Humble
A heroine for our times, Etta Lemon campaigned for fifty years against the worldwide slaughter of birds for extravagantly feathered hats. Her legacy is the RSPB, grown from an all-female pressure group of 1889 with the splendidly simple pledge: Wear No Feathers.
Etta’s long battle against ‘murderous millinery’ triumphed with the Plumage Act of 1921 – but her legacy has been eclipsed by the more glamorous campaign for the vote, led by the elegantly plumed Emmeline Pankhurst.
This gripping narrative explores two formidable heroines and their rival, overlapping campaigns. Moving from the feather workers’ slums to high society, from the first female political rally to the rise of the eco-feminist, it restores Etta Lemon to her rightful place in history – the extraordinary woman who saved the birds.
A heroine for our times, Etta Lemon campaigned for fifty years against the worldwide slaughter of birds for extravagantly feathered hats. Her legacy is the RSPB, grown from an all-female pressure group of 1889 with the splendidly simple pledge: Wear No Feathers.
Etta’s long battle against ‘murderous millinery’ triumphed with the Plumage Act of 1921 – but her legacy has been eclipsed by the more glamorous campaign for the vote, led by the elegantly plumed Emmeline Pankhurst.
This gripping narrative explores two formidable heroines and their rival, overlapping campaigns. Moving from the feather workers’ slums to high society, from the first female political rally to the rise of the eco-feminist, it restores Etta Lemon to her rightful place in history – the extraordinary woman who saved the birds.
320 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 2021
48 people are currently reading
3500 people want to read
About the author
Tessa Boase
9 books53 followersTessa Boase grew up in the Ashdown Forest, Sussex; studied English at Oxford and Italian in Florence; and has worked for a variety of magazines and national newspapers including The Daily Telegraph.
As a freelance journalist she's written widely on society, the environment, the food chain, and the link between all three. As a narrative non-fiction author, her interests lie in uncovering stories of invisible women, from the 19th and early 20th-centuries.
She's married with children, and lives between the Sussex coast and a farmhouse in the Sabine Hills, Italy, where she produces olive oil.
As a freelance journalist she's written widely on society, the environment, the food chain, and the link between all three. As a narrative non-fiction author, her interests lie in uncovering stories of invisible women, from the 19th and early 20th-centuries.
She's married with children, and lives between the Sussex coast and a farmhouse in the Sabine Hills, Italy, where she produces olive oil.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 79 reviews
July 25, 2021
My thanks to Aurum Press and NetGalley for a review copy of the book.
Etta Lemon: The Woman Who Saved Birds tells the story of Margaretta ‘Etta’ Lemon, who worked for around five decades to bring an end to a cruel practice—the slaughter of millions of birds every year, simply for the millinery industry—and who was also a founding member of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. But really (and the title is something I will come back to later in this review), it is much more. In fact, the book is the story of the broader campaign that took place to save the birds and to get parliament to ban trade in feathers (of which Etta was a prominent member) as also another powerful campaign that was being run alongside by an equally powerful, and perhaps a woman who stood out more, Emmeline Pankhust, the charismatic leader of the suffragettes. The two movements ran somewhat parallelly and even contrary to each other for while Mrs Lemon sought a ban on plumes (and indeed whole birds) on hats, Mrs Pankurst’s ladies were encouraged to be more fashionable and lady-like which included flaunting these elaborate creations; Mrs Pankurst sought the vote for women while Mrs Lemon opposed it! Etta Lemon and Emmeline Pankhust had roughly similar backgrounds but their inclinations and reactions to fashion, politics, and the Victorian society they belonged to were entirely opposite to one other.
But our story doesn’t really even begin with these formidable ladies. Rather, Boase introduces us to Alice Battershall, a young factory worker, who worked like hundreds of others in skilled and unskilled employments in the feather trade—from cleaning and washing to curling, thickening, and dyeing, among many stages before the plumes were ever affixed to a hat--and, mostly, for a pittance. To these hundreds of poor young women, feathers represented not a living thing (in fact, few had ever had any real contact with birds having lived in the city all of their lives), but certainly a living, ready money (feathers stolen at work), and a symbol of respectability and acceptance. And the work had its own problems—for employment was seasonal and the girls had to find other work when feather work closed after each season.
But the other side of the picture was that the millinery trade led to the massacre (a lot of it excessively cruel, like the egrets who were hunted during their mating/hatching seasons when feathers were at their most beautiful, leaving thousands of chicks to literally starve to death) of millions of birds every year. One estimate that the author mentions is by Frank Chapman which was 5 million birds killed annually in America alone. And it wasn’t just feathers but whole wings or even whole birds affixed to hats in what would certainly look grotesque to us today but was the height of fashion in its day. But fashion demanded it, the shops continued to sell (it was a profitable trade) and the ladies to buy. So, the ladies who set out to protect the birds had a formidable task before them.
And ladies they were. The society’s start can be traced to the individual efforts of some of the ladies, like Etta Lemon herself who sent letters to the women she observed at church wearing these offending creations (they made her shudder, too)—and ultimately to tea parties. A ladies’ tea party may not be viewed too seriously but at a time when women lacked places to meet, two sets of ladies Emily Williamson with her Society for the Protection of Birds in Manchester, and Eliza Phillips with her Fur, Fin and Feather Folk in Croydon (of which Etta Lemon was a part) began their campaigns. Eventually, the two were combined and absorbed by the RSPCA but continued to remain for a while a society run by women. And while it may have been scoffed at by more ‘scientifically minded men’, the women managed to increase their membership manifold, and bring in funds too, though ultimately men too were made members, and they had to look at influential ones for support.
But the fact remains, these were women in a world of men—and were not spared slights or derision but still persisted with their campaign. They had impressive organisational skills (Etta Lemon in particular), and their campaigns included both directly targeting wearers (with pamphlets and such) and even manufacturers, to trying to push through a bill for banning this cruel practice through the influential male members of the society. But politics and compromise were very much a part of the process, for the issue of game birds raised by member Julia Andrews was shut down and Miss Andrews even removed, with the society declaring that its focus would remain the millinery trade. Politics reared its head at other times too, in Mrs Lemon’s later days when she was pushed out of the society she cared about so much.
Alongside, we follow Mrs Pankhurst’s story and the suffragette movement which resorted to violent protest and means to put forth the claim for votes for women; they too faced derision, cruelty, like force feeding when they went on hunger strike in prison or even violence/assault during protests. Mrs Pankhurst’s own interest in fashion and shopping was passed on to her fellow campaigners who were encouraged to look their best, and it was sometimes ladies who were members of both movements who achieved some success in preventing them from wearing feathered hats.
Both movements involved decades of struggle and considerations of politics, fashion and of course economics. And it wasn’t their efforts alone, but also changes in circumstances which ultimately bore fruit.
This was a well-written and excellently researched (even Alice Battershall’s life is well traced) book which proved to be an engrossing read for the most part. I enjoyed following the journey of the two campaigns—their successes and failures, the ways in which they intertwined, and the stories of the two formidable ladies—Etta Lemon and Emmeline Pankhust—who played crucial roles in each (there were many others too, like Winifred Duchess of Portland in the bird campaign; Millicent Fawcett leader of the suffragists; and even Mrs Humphry Ward, prominent among the Anti-suffragists, among many more whose contributions we learn about as well).
What I especially liked about the book was the well-rounded and holistic picture it paints for us—we see the perspectives of the young girls who worked with feathers and for whom they were a symbol of respectability, to the suffragettes like Mrs Pankhust to whom too, these were a symbol of their femininity which was the basis on which they sought the vote; we peep into glamourous boutiques, and also into a hunt for egrets—the hunter thrilled with the money he makes from one trip (as indeed did the traders who interests weighed with politicians for a long enough time to see the plumage bill shelved many times for over a decade); and of course those, like Mrs Lemon who felt for the birds and could not bear to see them adorning the hats of the fashionable ladies of the day, to even Winifred Portland who had to tread a middle way for while she was a passionate animal lover, a vegetarian and hated blood sport, her husband hunted with equal passion, and she had to balance her role in the RSPB with her role as society hostess.
The book was an eye opener for me in many ways; I did know about feathers on hats as a fashion but did not have an idea of the extent of this practice and trade—I didn’t know how many species of wild birds were driven to the brink of extinction, or that the creations had full wings, or even entire birds on them. The thought was so repulsive and off putting (mild words compared to what I felt), but then I realised that this was also a time when people did wear furs too, and with heads and tails attached! I honestly was not aware of the extent of cruelty involved in the practice as well, like the egret hunting I mentioned earlier—and it was these images that served strongly—though the lens of a camera and in the powerful words of Virginia Woolf that did sent a shudder through people, much more than pamphlets and other campaigns could achieve. (And speaking of pictures, I must mention that the images in the book are really high quality which I appreciated a lot.)
Of the suffragettes too, I learnt a lot—especially all they had to go through in their campaigns—the violence and cruelty, the slights and sneers—the victory is a hard won one (which we perhaps don’t appreciate enough). (Also, to tell the truth, I didn’t quite know the difference between suffragettes and suffragists before reading this either).
From these and Boase’s writing, we get a good sense of out two heroines, Etta Lemon and Emmeline Pankhurst—where they came from, what drove them, and their lives, thoughts and ideas which moved in very different directions to each other.
This was a very interesting and enjoyable read overall, but I did have one criticism or complaint and this was the title itself—reading the title and description of the book, I had expected a book focused more on Etta lemon and the movement for the protection of birds; the suffragette movement I’d expected to go into, but only to an extent, but when I found so much of the book devoted to that, while I did enjoy reading the details there were times when I wondered why we were going on such a tangent, and was even slightly losing interest. Later I found that another edition (the hardback) of the book is titled Mrs Pankhurst’s Purple Feather. But this too, I feel doesn’t capture the whole essence of the book---If I had known from the beginning that this was about both ladies and both movements—Etta and Emmeline (like one of the chapters), I think I’d have been able to appreciate it much more when reading.
But a really good and engrossing read otherwise.
4.25 stars!
Etta Lemon: The Woman Who Saved Birds tells the story of Margaretta ‘Etta’ Lemon, who worked for around five decades to bring an end to a cruel practice—the slaughter of millions of birds every year, simply for the millinery industry—and who was also a founding member of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. But really (and the title is something I will come back to later in this review), it is much more. In fact, the book is the story of the broader campaign that took place to save the birds and to get parliament to ban trade in feathers (of which Etta was a prominent member) as also another powerful campaign that was being run alongside by an equally powerful, and perhaps a woman who stood out more, Emmeline Pankhust, the charismatic leader of the suffragettes. The two movements ran somewhat parallelly and even contrary to each other for while Mrs Lemon sought a ban on plumes (and indeed whole birds) on hats, Mrs Pankurst’s ladies were encouraged to be more fashionable and lady-like which included flaunting these elaborate creations; Mrs Pankurst sought the vote for women while Mrs Lemon opposed it! Etta Lemon and Emmeline Pankhust had roughly similar backgrounds but their inclinations and reactions to fashion, politics, and the Victorian society they belonged to were entirely opposite to one other.
But our story doesn’t really even begin with these formidable ladies. Rather, Boase introduces us to Alice Battershall, a young factory worker, who worked like hundreds of others in skilled and unskilled employments in the feather trade—from cleaning and washing to curling, thickening, and dyeing, among many stages before the plumes were ever affixed to a hat--and, mostly, for a pittance. To these hundreds of poor young women, feathers represented not a living thing (in fact, few had ever had any real contact with birds having lived in the city all of their lives), but certainly a living, ready money (feathers stolen at work), and a symbol of respectability and acceptance. And the work had its own problems—for employment was seasonal and the girls had to find other work when feather work closed after each season.
But the other side of the picture was that the millinery trade led to the massacre (a lot of it excessively cruel, like the egrets who were hunted during their mating/hatching seasons when feathers were at their most beautiful, leaving thousands of chicks to literally starve to death) of millions of birds every year. One estimate that the author mentions is by Frank Chapman which was 5 million birds killed annually in America alone. And it wasn’t just feathers but whole wings or even whole birds affixed to hats in what would certainly look grotesque to us today but was the height of fashion in its day. But fashion demanded it, the shops continued to sell (it was a profitable trade) and the ladies to buy. So, the ladies who set out to protect the birds had a formidable task before them.
And ladies they were. The society’s start can be traced to the individual efforts of some of the ladies, like Etta Lemon herself who sent letters to the women she observed at church wearing these offending creations (they made her shudder, too)—and ultimately to tea parties. A ladies’ tea party may not be viewed too seriously but at a time when women lacked places to meet, two sets of ladies Emily Williamson with her Society for the Protection of Birds in Manchester, and Eliza Phillips with her Fur, Fin and Feather Folk in Croydon (of which Etta Lemon was a part) began their campaigns. Eventually, the two were combined and absorbed by the RSPCA but continued to remain for a while a society run by women. And while it may have been scoffed at by more ‘scientifically minded men’, the women managed to increase their membership manifold, and bring in funds too, though ultimately men too were made members, and they had to look at influential ones for support.
But the fact remains, these were women in a world of men—and were not spared slights or derision but still persisted with their campaign. They had impressive organisational skills (Etta Lemon in particular), and their campaigns included both directly targeting wearers (with pamphlets and such) and even manufacturers, to trying to push through a bill for banning this cruel practice through the influential male members of the society. But politics and compromise were very much a part of the process, for the issue of game birds raised by member Julia Andrews was shut down and Miss Andrews even removed, with the society declaring that its focus would remain the millinery trade. Politics reared its head at other times too, in Mrs Lemon’s later days when she was pushed out of the society she cared about so much.
Alongside, we follow Mrs Pankhurst’s story and the suffragette movement which resorted to violent protest and means to put forth the claim for votes for women; they too faced derision, cruelty, like force feeding when they went on hunger strike in prison or even violence/assault during protests. Mrs Pankhurst’s own interest in fashion and shopping was passed on to her fellow campaigners who were encouraged to look their best, and it was sometimes ladies who were members of both movements who achieved some success in preventing them from wearing feathered hats.
Both movements involved decades of struggle and considerations of politics, fashion and of course economics. And it wasn’t their efforts alone, but also changes in circumstances which ultimately bore fruit.
This was a well-written and excellently researched (even Alice Battershall’s life is well traced) book which proved to be an engrossing read for the most part. I enjoyed following the journey of the two campaigns—their successes and failures, the ways in which they intertwined, and the stories of the two formidable ladies—Etta Lemon and Emmeline Pankhust—who played crucial roles in each (there were many others too, like Winifred Duchess of Portland in the bird campaign; Millicent Fawcett leader of the suffragists; and even Mrs Humphry Ward, prominent among the Anti-suffragists, among many more whose contributions we learn about as well).
What I especially liked about the book was the well-rounded and holistic picture it paints for us—we see the perspectives of the young girls who worked with feathers and for whom they were a symbol of respectability, to the suffragettes like Mrs Pankhust to whom too, these were a symbol of their femininity which was the basis on which they sought the vote; we peep into glamourous boutiques, and also into a hunt for egrets—the hunter thrilled with the money he makes from one trip (as indeed did the traders who interests weighed with politicians for a long enough time to see the plumage bill shelved many times for over a decade); and of course those, like Mrs Lemon who felt for the birds and could not bear to see them adorning the hats of the fashionable ladies of the day, to even Winifred Portland who had to tread a middle way for while she was a passionate animal lover, a vegetarian and hated blood sport, her husband hunted with equal passion, and she had to balance her role in the RSPB with her role as society hostess.
The book was an eye opener for me in many ways; I did know about feathers on hats as a fashion but did not have an idea of the extent of this practice and trade—I didn’t know how many species of wild birds were driven to the brink of extinction, or that the creations had full wings, or even entire birds on them. The thought was so repulsive and off putting (mild words compared to what I felt), but then I realised that this was also a time when people did wear furs too, and with heads and tails attached! I honestly was not aware of the extent of cruelty involved in the practice as well, like the egret hunting I mentioned earlier—and it was these images that served strongly—though the lens of a camera and in the powerful words of Virginia Woolf that did sent a shudder through people, much more than pamphlets and other campaigns could achieve. (And speaking of pictures, I must mention that the images in the book are really high quality which I appreciated a lot.)
Of the suffragettes too, I learnt a lot—especially all they had to go through in their campaigns—the violence and cruelty, the slights and sneers—the victory is a hard won one (which we perhaps don’t appreciate enough). (Also, to tell the truth, I didn’t quite know the difference between suffragettes and suffragists before reading this either).
From these and Boase’s writing, we get a good sense of out two heroines, Etta Lemon and Emmeline Pankhurst—where they came from, what drove them, and their lives, thoughts and ideas which moved in very different directions to each other.
This was a very interesting and enjoyable read overall, but I did have one criticism or complaint and this was the title itself—reading the title and description of the book, I had expected a book focused more on Etta lemon and the movement for the protection of birds; the suffragette movement I’d expected to go into, but only to an extent, but when I found so much of the book devoted to that, while I did enjoy reading the details there were times when I wondered why we were going on such a tangent, and was even slightly losing interest. Later I found that another edition (the hardback) of the book is titled Mrs Pankhurst’s Purple Feather. But this too, I feel doesn’t capture the whole essence of the book---If I had known from the beginning that this was about both ladies and both movements—Etta and Emmeline (like one of the chapters), I think I’d have been able to appreciate it much more when reading.
But a really good and engrossing read otherwise.
4.25 stars!
July 1, 2021
Margaretta (Etta) Louisa Lemon MBE (1860-1953) of Reigate was a co-founder of the all-female organisation that later became the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB). Renowned for her public speaking, she lobbied for legislation to protect wild birds against the fashion for wearing feathered hats which she claimed was ‘murderous millinery’. She was a member of the Reigate Board of Guardians and the Board of Managers for Earlswood Asylum but a staunch anti suffragist, heading a branch of the East Surrey Anti-Suffrage League. When Mrs Pankhurst stormed the House of Commons with her crack squad of militant suffragettes in 1908, she wore on her hat a voluptuous purple feather. This is the intriguing story behind that feather.
Twelve years before the suffragette movement began dominating headlines, a very different women’s campaign captured the public imagination. Its aim was radical: to stamp out the fashion for feathers in hats. Leading the fight was a character just as heroic as Emmeline Pankhurst, but with opposite beliefs. Her name was Etta Lemon, and she was anti-fashion, anti-feminist – and anti-suffrage. Mrs Lemon has been forgotten by history, but her mighty society lives on. Few, today, are aware that Britain’s biggest conservation charity, the RSPB, was born through the determined efforts of a handful of women, led by the indomitable Mrs Lemon. While the suffragettes were slashing paintings and smashing shop windows, Etta Lemon and her local secretaries were challenging ‘murderous millinery’ all the way up to Parliament.
This gripping narrative explores two singular heroines – one lionised, the other forgotten – and their rival, overlapping campaigns. Moving from the feather workers’ slums to the highest courtly circles, from the first female political rally to the first forcible feeding, Mrs Pankhurst’s Purple Feather is a unique journey through a society in transformation. This is a highly original story of women stepping into the public sphere, agitating for change – and finally finding a voice. A fascinating piece of history rich in intricacies and colourful, idiosyncratic characters and a tale not given the exposure it deserved over the last century.
Twelve years before the suffragette movement began dominating headlines, a very different women’s campaign captured the public imagination. Its aim was radical: to stamp out the fashion for feathers in hats. Leading the fight was a character just as heroic as Emmeline Pankhurst, but with opposite beliefs. Her name was Etta Lemon, and she was anti-fashion, anti-feminist – and anti-suffrage. Mrs Lemon has been forgotten by history, but her mighty society lives on. Few, today, are aware that Britain’s biggest conservation charity, the RSPB, was born through the determined efforts of a handful of women, led by the indomitable Mrs Lemon. While the suffragettes were slashing paintings and smashing shop windows, Etta Lemon and her local secretaries were challenging ‘murderous millinery’ all the way up to Parliament.
This gripping narrative explores two singular heroines – one lionised, the other forgotten – and their rival, overlapping campaigns. Moving from the feather workers’ slums to the highest courtly circles, from the first female political rally to the first forcible feeding, Mrs Pankhurst’s Purple Feather is a unique journey through a society in transformation. This is a highly original story of women stepping into the public sphere, agitating for change – and finally finding a voice. A fascinating piece of history rich in intricacies and colourful, idiosyncratic characters and a tale not given the exposure it deserved over the last century.
June 12, 2021
What a fascinating book. I’d never heard of Etta Lemon before, and I hazard a guess that not many others have either. She seems to have been written out of the historical record. (An all too familiar fate for women, sadly). And yet Emma Lemon played such a pivotal role in founding and developing the RSPB, and we’ve all heard of that, particularly in the UK. So why don’t we know more about her? Thankfully we now do, and what an excellent biography this is. The author expertly weaves together the stories of Etta Lemon and Emmeline Pankhurst (and we’ve all heard of her) as they were active at the same time, although their aims were different. Etta cared about birds, in particular the ones that had been slaughtered for Mrs Pankhurst's hats. And that is indeed a hard-to-stomach aspect of the book, the description of the appalling destruction of so many birds purely to adorn women's hats. Later Etta Lemon actually became an anti-suffrage campaigner – and that in itself is a compelling tale. All in all, there is so much to enjoy in this meticulously researched, well –written and thoroughly enjoyable and illuminating biography. Highly recommended.
March 2, 2024
Etta Lemon is the true story of a Victorian woman who was horrified by the 'murderous millinery' , ie feathers, which decorated the fashionable hats of the day. Etta's campaign was the ovum from which the RSPB gestated. Her story overlaps that of Emmeline Pankhurst, (they were just two years age difference between them) - who campaigned for votes for women.
The two women were both campaigners but otherwise complete opposites. Etta Lemon put birds before people and was 'anti' suffrage, believing in the core Victorian values of women being subservient to men. Whilst Emmeline Pankhurst put people before animals and despised the Victorian order of things, campaigning for women to be given parity with men.
The booming feather trade of the late 19th century was indeed shocking and the sheer cruelty of birds hunted to decimation was really quite distressing. But then there was the human struggle of the feather workers, the women and girls living in poverty who washed, dyed, and prepared the feathers before they could adorn hats.
I am in awe of the author's research and the way she brings these two (true) stories to life and creates a portrait of a time when social attitudes were on the cusp of change. Etta's campaigns of letter writing and committees were in sharp contrast to Emmeline Pankhurst's charismatic leadership and violent protest; each reflecting two ends of the same spectrum.
Highly readable, not to mention eye-opening, the book is a wonderful insight into different times.
The two women were both campaigners but otherwise complete opposites. Etta Lemon put birds before people and was 'anti' suffrage, believing in the core Victorian values of women being subservient to men. Whilst Emmeline Pankhurst put people before animals and despised the Victorian order of things, campaigning for women to be given parity with men.
The booming feather trade of the late 19th century was indeed shocking and the sheer cruelty of birds hunted to decimation was really quite distressing. But then there was the human struggle of the feather workers, the women and girls living in poverty who washed, dyed, and prepared the feathers before they could adorn hats.
I am in awe of the author's research and the way she brings these two (true) stories to life and creates a portrait of a time when social attitudes were on the cusp of change. Etta's campaigns of letter writing and committees were in sharp contrast to Emmeline Pankhurst's charismatic leadership and violent protest; each reflecting two ends of the same spectrum.
Highly readable, not to mention eye-opening, the book is a wonderful insight into different times.
May 13, 2023
This book covers some fascinating areas: the early conservation of birds and the foundation of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), the women’s suffrage movement, the deplorable conditions of the working class in the Victorian & Edwardian eras and also attitudes towards, and economic significance of, women’s fashion. With all these areas to combine the task is ambitious but the author has presented an engrossing piece of social history in a highly readable text.
The book’s initial focus is upon a singular woman, Alice Battershall - an exploited slum worker engaged in the preparation of feathers for the ‘Murderous Millinery’ trade- whose occupation provided fashionable headwear for the upper classes. Then Emmeline Pankhurst steps up to demand rights and the vote for women, including those like Alice. These suffragettes (unlike the earlier, peace abiding suffragists) were militant but glamorous feminists, who wore the plumage of the ostrich, osprey and various other species that were hunted to the brink of extinction. Such women used their feminine appearance to strengthen their fight by showing that they hailed from the upper echelons of society but also as a surprise tactic. Who expected a ‘lady’ to wreak havoc and break shop windows, even of those milliners who provided their hats!
Emmeline Pankhurst’s nemesis and the namesake of this book is the conservative, anti-Suffrage advocate Etta Lemon - a tireless and fervent campaigner for the protection of birds. Her crusade lasted for her entire life, beginning as part of the Society for the a protection of Birds (SPB). While Etta did not falter in her aim she did not physically suffer for her cause in the way the Pankhurst women did, via imprisonment and hunger strikes, through to forced feeding which impacted upon their health. Etta seems to be sustained through evangelical zeal and righteousness both in her life and throughout the lifelong fight on behalf of her beautiful birds.
Sadly and ironically, the patriarchy conspired to eject Etta Lemon from both her position and the annals of the RSPB until Tessa Boase revealed her full story here. We even discover many other women’s views about ‘Murderous Millinery’ and the Suffrage movement. For instance, Virginia Woolfe both RSPB supporter and Suffragist, refused to wear feathers but baulked at blaming women for the fashion trend when she vehemently exclaimed: ‘the birds are killed by men, starved by men, and tortured by men - not vicariously, but with their own hands.’
This is an area of social history which would benefit from further study and research. Boase’s narrative occasionally lapses into the first person when she explains some instances of her own research. At times she does not completely succeed in meshing the histories of the radical suffragettes and the conservative conservationists. Nevertheless, this was an enlightening read complete with fashion photographs that some readers may find quite horrifying to modern sensibilities. When we cringe in horror we should chasten ourselves with the memory of fur coats, worn not so long ago.
4.5 stars rounded up.
The book’s initial focus is upon a singular woman, Alice Battershall - an exploited slum worker engaged in the preparation of feathers for the ‘Murderous Millinery’ trade- whose occupation provided fashionable headwear for the upper classes. Then Emmeline Pankhurst steps up to demand rights and the vote for women, including those like Alice. These suffragettes (unlike the earlier, peace abiding suffragists) were militant but glamorous feminists, who wore the plumage of the ostrich, osprey and various other species that were hunted to the brink of extinction. Such women used their feminine appearance to strengthen their fight by showing that they hailed from the upper echelons of society but also as a surprise tactic. Who expected a ‘lady’ to wreak havoc and break shop windows, even of those milliners who provided their hats!
Emmeline Pankhurst’s nemesis and the namesake of this book is the conservative, anti-Suffrage advocate Etta Lemon - a tireless and fervent campaigner for the protection of birds. Her crusade lasted for her entire life, beginning as part of the Society for the a protection of Birds (SPB). While Etta did not falter in her aim she did not physically suffer for her cause in the way the Pankhurst women did, via imprisonment and hunger strikes, through to forced feeding which impacted upon their health. Etta seems to be sustained through evangelical zeal and righteousness both in her life and throughout the lifelong fight on behalf of her beautiful birds.
Sadly and ironically, the patriarchy conspired to eject Etta Lemon from both her position and the annals of the RSPB until Tessa Boase revealed her full story here. We even discover many other women’s views about ‘Murderous Millinery’ and the Suffrage movement. For instance, Virginia Woolfe both RSPB supporter and Suffragist, refused to wear feathers but baulked at blaming women for the fashion trend when she vehemently exclaimed: ‘the birds are killed by men, starved by men, and tortured by men - not vicariously, but with their own hands.’
This is an area of social history which would benefit from further study and research. Boase’s narrative occasionally lapses into the first person when she explains some instances of her own research. At times she does not completely succeed in meshing the histories of the radical suffragettes and the conservative conservationists. Nevertheless, this was an enlightening read complete with fashion photographs that some readers may find quite horrifying to modern sensibilities. When we cringe in horror we should chasten ourselves with the memory of fur coats, worn not so long ago.
4.5 stars rounded up.
February 8, 2022
Excellent! A fantastic example of social history at its best. This relates how campaigners, Etta Lemon prominent among them, took on the issue of Murderous Millinery. This became linked to the founding of the RSPB too.
Read
July 21, 2019DNF at 50%
November 30, 2025
Read Harder Challenge: A microhistory.
“Why would Mrs Lemon’s boundless compassion not include sympathy for women’s rights? And why would campaigning for the vote make Mrs Pankhurst dismiss animal rights as a side distraction?”
This book really surprised me. The premise hits so many of my favourite topics, but books like this can easily fall flat. However, Boase offers a fascinating social history with women firmly at the centre of the story (really!). I already knew most of the women’s names from other nonfiction books on feminism or birds, yet this felt fresh and genuinely engaging, bringing their stories to life.
“Each story sheds a troubling light on the other, while each campaign illuminates the other, in unexpected ways.”
What I loved most is how her account is purposeful and respectful, again, keeping women at the centre of the narrative. That’s so rare in nonfiction as women have been so often left out of the history books. Her arguments feel well balanced, and she explores the alliances women built throughout history to reclaim their voices with a thoughtfulness that invites you to reflect rather than just absorb information.
It’s certainly a ”…lesson in compassion.”
There were parts that dragged for me, but Boase grabbed my attention back swiftly. I found the storytelling enjoyable, and I often had a chuckle at Boase’s playful tone and use of language, especially in her detailed descriptions throughout. I’ve learned so much about these women who deserve far more space in the story of history than they ever got.
I get why this has fewer ratings and why it might not appeal to everyone, but I’m grateful for the stories it brought to light — and I’d definitely read more from this author. It was so thoroughly researched and thoughtfully told.
Ultimately, this book is exactly what it says it is — can’t fault it for that. The epilogue was wonderful. I liked the honesty. And bless Boase for her chapter on ‘tea parties’, where much of the conversation first sparked. 🫖
‘On really cold nights, can I let the robins come into my kitchen? Is that OK?’
“Why would Mrs Lemon’s boundless compassion not include sympathy for women’s rights? And why would campaigning for the vote make Mrs Pankhurst dismiss animal rights as a side distraction?”
This book really surprised me. The premise hits so many of my favourite topics, but books like this can easily fall flat. However, Boase offers a fascinating social history with women firmly at the centre of the story (really!). I already knew most of the women’s names from other nonfiction books on feminism or birds, yet this felt fresh and genuinely engaging, bringing their stories to life.
“Each story sheds a troubling light on the other, while each campaign illuminates the other, in unexpected ways.”
What I loved most is how her account is purposeful and respectful, again, keeping women at the centre of the narrative. That’s so rare in nonfiction as women have been so often left out of the history books. Her arguments feel well balanced, and she explores the alliances women built throughout history to reclaim their voices with a thoughtfulness that invites you to reflect rather than just absorb information.
It’s certainly a ”…lesson in compassion.”
There were parts that dragged for me, but Boase grabbed my attention back swiftly. I found the storytelling enjoyable, and I often had a chuckle at Boase’s playful tone and use of language, especially in her detailed descriptions throughout. I’ve learned so much about these women who deserve far more space in the story of history than they ever got.
I get why this has fewer ratings and why it might not appeal to everyone, but I’m grateful for the stories it brought to light — and I’d definitely read more from this author. It was so thoroughly researched and thoughtfully told.
Ultimately, this book is exactly what it says it is — can’t fault it for that. The epilogue was wonderful. I liked the honesty. And bless Boase for her chapter on ‘tea parties’, where much of the conversation first sparked. 🫖
‘On really cold nights, can I let the robins come into my kitchen? Is that OK?’
January 14, 2024
Wow…I started this a year ago and put it down, then recently picked it up again. A really different style of writing for me but so fascinating to unpick the history behind the RSPB, the local links, the links to the Suffragette movement and the way navigated Victorian society and expectations. The modern RSPB is fantastic and long may their work continue!
September 24, 2018
I acquired this book after it was a reader recommendation in the Christian Science Monitor. It's the second book about feathers I've read this season. (See: The Feather Thief.)
Boase tells the story of two women activists in Britain at the turn of the 20th century. One is remembered today -- suffragist Emmeline Pankhurst. The other is nearly unknown -- conservationist Margaretta (Etta) Lemon. Not only does Boase provide the history of their movements but she also compares and contrasts the public relations effect of both, and why the these two contemporaries did not work together. (The suffragists were fashionable. Their hats were bird-and-feather trimmed and they wore furs. They avoided dowdiness. Many of the conservationists opposed woman's suffrage, partly because they did not want to dilute their area of advocacy.)
I was more aware of the suffrage story. I knew who Emmeline and her daughters were and I knew something about what they went through (imprisonment). I wasn't aware that there were numerous suffrage groups and an active and influential anti-suffrage movement.
I didn't anything about Etta's pioneering conservation movement. In the last quarter of the 19th century women's hats in the U.K., the U.S., and Canada (and most of western Europe) were bedecked with feathers. Frequently the feathers were still attached to taxidermied birds who were then attached, in their entirety, to the hats. The fashion and fad meant the wholesale slaughter of millions and millions of egrets, birds-of-paradise, osprey, and many other species. Not only were birds hunted nearly to extinction, but many were tortured in the process. In 1889 Etta Lemon began Fur, Fin & Feather Folk -- one of the first conservation societies in Britain -- to protest the fashion and the means by which the feathers were procured. Renamed the Society for the Protection of Birds (and later given a Royal charter), RSPB still exists. It's the British equivalent of the Audubon Society, which was founded about the same time and for the same reasons.
Boase provides a rich field for discussion: how both the suffrage and conservation movements, though begun by women, succeeded after men became active and influential. How do the millinery fashions of 1900 [which women in all ranks of society adopted] compare to fashions today, especially for "fast fashions" sourced in developing nations. Think about the working conditions for the "feather hands" who dyed and curled the plumes.
Boase tells the story of two women activists in Britain at the turn of the 20th century. One is remembered today -- suffragist Emmeline Pankhurst. The other is nearly unknown -- conservationist Margaretta (Etta) Lemon. Not only does Boase provide the history of their movements but she also compares and contrasts the public relations effect of both, and why the these two contemporaries did not work together. (The suffragists were fashionable. Their hats were bird-and-feather trimmed and they wore furs. They avoided dowdiness. Many of the conservationists opposed woman's suffrage, partly because they did not want to dilute their area of advocacy.)
I was more aware of the suffrage story. I knew who Emmeline and her daughters were and I knew something about what they went through (imprisonment). I wasn't aware that there were numerous suffrage groups and an active and influential anti-suffrage movement.
I didn't anything about Etta's pioneering conservation movement. In the last quarter of the 19th century women's hats in the U.K., the U.S., and Canada (and most of western Europe) were bedecked with feathers. Frequently the feathers were still attached to taxidermied birds who were then attached, in their entirety, to the hats. The fashion and fad meant the wholesale slaughter of millions and millions of egrets, birds-of-paradise, osprey, and many other species. Not only were birds hunted nearly to extinction, but many were tortured in the process. In 1889 Etta Lemon began Fur, Fin & Feather Folk -- one of the first conservation societies in Britain -- to protest the fashion and the means by which the feathers were procured. Renamed the Society for the Protection of Birds (and later given a Royal charter), RSPB still exists. It's the British equivalent of the Audubon Society, which was founded about the same time and for the same reasons.
Boase provides a rich field for discussion: how both the suffrage and conservation movements, though begun by women, succeeded after men became active and influential. How do the millinery fashions of 1900 [which women in all ranks of society adopted] compare to fashions today, especially for "fast fashions" sourced in developing nations. Think about the working conditions for the "feather hands" who dyed and curled the plumes.
February 25, 2021
I wish this had lived up to its absolutely gorgeous cover, but it didn't quite. The focus is the women-founded Royal Society for the Protection of Birds for the purpose of ending the brutal plumage trade (the main reason I was interested in it), and the tensions between the Society and the contemporary suffragist movement. The Society is represented by Etta Lemon, the suffragist movement by Emmeline Pankhurst. I appreciated how Boase set up these two women and brought out their similarities in the midst of their glaring differences: Lemon, a strong-willed and outspoken woman, opposed extending the vote to women. I also appreciated how Boase made an effort to understand both sides, although I don't think she spent as much time exploring the reasons why some women opposed the suffragist movement as she should have: she ultimately concluded (as far as I could tell) that these women had just internalized misogyny and couldn't get beyond seeing themselves as standing in the shadow of the men. In the end it felt like Boase was still struggling to wrap her mind around the concept of women opposing women's suffrage...and not quite succeeding. [She also kept mentioning and describing the moustaches on the guys, and I got the feeling she was treating it as a sign of the patriarchy or something and it was just weird.]
The writing style also rather let the book down for me. It's a bit too...newspaper-reporter-y. I don't like the self-referential style (I found this source, I went here, I thought this when I saw the painting...); it comes across to me as in-your-face. The short paragraphs became irritating: some felt like they could have been combined, while in other cases they seemed to skip about without good transitions, leaving me (usually only briefly) confused. The chapters, too, are very short, and while to an extent this can't be helped because of the sort of book it is, I thought it lacked sufficient content on any one of the topics it covers: the suffragist movement, the RSPB, the Pankhursts, the millinery trade. For instance, we seemed to jump from the RSPB being a failure to it buying lots of land and being very influential without showing how we got from one thing to the other. It just was all a bit too cursory.
It does have some good information, though, about the RSPB and the exploitation of nature, and I am glad I read it.
The writing style also rather let the book down for me. It's a bit too...newspaper-reporter-y. I don't like the self-referential style (I found this source, I went here, I thought this when I saw the painting...); it comes across to me as in-your-face. The short paragraphs became irritating: some felt like they could have been combined, while in other cases they seemed to skip about without good transitions, leaving me (usually only briefly) confused. The chapters, too, are very short, and while to an extent this can't be helped because of the sort of book it is, I thought it lacked sufficient content on any one of the topics it covers: the suffragist movement, the RSPB, the Pankhursts, the millinery trade. For instance, we seemed to jump from the RSPB being a failure to it buying lots of land and being very influential without showing how we got from one thing to the other. It just was all a bit too cursory.
It does have some good information, though, about the RSPB and the exploitation of nature, and I am glad I read it.
October 5, 2020
Mrs Pankhurst’s Purple Feather was a wonderful book for me to read combining two topics which have played a significant role in my life - women’s history, particularly their efforts to gain direct representation in parliament both through the vote and through women candidates (I have a PhD in the area) and bird conservation (besides reading birding is my other main interest).
This book looks at two intertwined topics. One is the origins of Britain’s Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, started by a group of women wanting to protect bird life and especially to stop the trade in feathers and the use of birds as hat decorations. This was something I knew very little about. It also looks at the campaign in Britain for voting rights for women, something I was already quite familiar with. But seeing the similarities and differences between the two campaigns, the interconnections and the antagonisms was illuminating and provided new insights. Many suffragettes were ardent feather wearers, while most women leading RSPB’s campaign against the feather trade were anti-voting rights for women, despite (or because of) their own involvement in political matters.
Such an interesting story, filled with many fascinating details. I especially enjoyed the opening sections outlining the working conditions of women and children in the feather trade. A woman and two children could spend more than a day preparing a single ostrich feather, a task requiring over 8,600 knots. I also enjoyed reading the stories of many women who have previously flown under history’s radar. Not to mention the gender based disputes over RSPB leadership - men thought they were scientific and dismissed women as sentimental. Snippets about the historian’s work, how she discovered some things but was unable to find others, also added interest for me.
All in all an engaging, engrossing, well-written narrative about topics I found really interesting. A non-fiction win for sure, one I think would have wide appeal, even to those who have less pre-existing interest than I do.
This book looks at two intertwined topics. One is the origins of Britain’s Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, started by a group of women wanting to protect bird life and especially to stop the trade in feathers and the use of birds as hat decorations. This was something I knew very little about. It also looks at the campaign in Britain for voting rights for women, something I was already quite familiar with. But seeing the similarities and differences between the two campaigns, the interconnections and the antagonisms was illuminating and provided new insights. Many suffragettes were ardent feather wearers, while most women leading RSPB’s campaign against the feather trade were anti-voting rights for women, despite (or because of) their own involvement in political matters.
Such an interesting story, filled with many fascinating details. I especially enjoyed the opening sections outlining the working conditions of women and children in the feather trade. A woman and two children could spend more than a day preparing a single ostrich feather, a task requiring over 8,600 knots. I also enjoyed reading the stories of many women who have previously flown under history’s radar. Not to mention the gender based disputes over RSPB leadership - men thought they were scientific and dismissed women as sentimental. Snippets about the historian’s work, how she discovered some things but was unable to find others, also added interest for me.
All in all an engaging, engrossing, well-written narrative about topics I found really interesting. A non-fiction win for sure, one I think would have wide appeal, even to those who have less pre-existing interest than I do.
June 21, 2020
The best thing I've read so far this year. Considered, balanced, immaculately researched and enlightening and thought provoking.
February 4, 2023
This was an unexpected joy. I wouldn’t have come across it if it hadn’t been in the Audible sale but I found it fascinating.
Who knew that the RSPB was founded by a group of women sickened by the fashion for wearing dead birds on your hat? Who knew that the animal rights movement grew up at the same time as the women’s rights movement and were surprisingly often at odds?
The comparisons between Mrs Lemmon and Mrs Pankhurst and their respective campaigns was very interesting.
Recommended to anyone interested in social history or intrigued by tough women who made a difference.
Who knew that the RSPB was founded by a group of women sickened by the fashion for wearing dead birds on your hat? Who knew that the animal rights movement grew up at the same time as the women’s rights movement and were surprisingly often at odds?
The comparisons between Mrs Lemmon and Mrs Pankhurst and their respective campaigns was very interesting.
Recommended to anyone interested in social history or intrigued by tough women who made a difference.
August 15, 2025
Interesting, insightful, incredibly niche, well-researched, and detailed (at times overwhelmingly/unnecessarily so).
Unexpectedly, I enjoyed it.
As a novice to both the RSPB and the suffragist movement (as well as the history of fashion!), I got a lot out of this. Not without its problems, but I am really glad my book club exposed me to this hidden gem of a book and I think more people should know about the discourse in here.
3.75
Unexpectedly, I enjoyed it.
As a novice to both the RSPB and the suffragist movement (as well as the history of fashion!), I got a lot out of this. Not without its problems, but I am really glad my book club exposed me to this hidden gem of a book and I think more people should know about the discourse in here.
3.75
February 10, 2025
"For the first time, this is not just Emmeline Pankhurst's story" Phew! Because I'm ready for a new context. This book provided me with a different perspective as two of my passions collide: women's and animals rights, shedding a light on two very important movements within their history. Holding a magnifying glass on Emmeline Pankhurst of the WSPU and Etta Lemon of the RSPB. I'd have never thought these two were so interlinked historically but it seems their passions for humans and animals become quite a competitive and delicate battle to have their causes heard.
Back in the day, - I'd like to think I'd have put my money into both charitable pots if I were lucky enough to have any to spare. In reality, I would more likely have been one of the women working with the feathers. This book has really made me explore what my relationship is with these causes, historically and now, and I'm thankful that Tessa Boase has brought to me some of the history I had not yet reached.
One of the key elements I appreciated about this book, is that it allowed us to look at two activist organisations that were active around the same time - highlighting similarities and differences that enable us to scrutinize the successes and failings of organisations the and now that are fighting for positive change. Although Boase doesn't always overtly make these comparisons, her writing allows us to connect the dots for ourselves. The discussions of activist families, dedication to the cause, the power fashion has towards oppression and protest, hypocrisy (yey to Miss Julia Andrews for calling the RSPB out at the time), the discrimination within seemingly positive campaigns (eg. Blaming women for the murder of birds rather than the hunters and millinery owners), all feed into a higher analysis of campaigning and protest.
Most prominent for me are four core elements I picked from the book that resonated and appears to hold back or push forward a campaign, if we use Boase's representation of these two campaigns as our case studies. Sentimentality, Ageism, Sexism, Single-Issue Campaigns, and Classism:
Sentimentality appears to be a core driver for dismissing campaigns yesterday and today. Their emotional displays of passion were brandished with women nicknamed militant, and as suffragettes, while others reduced to mere bird-lovers without being supported by science. Today we're 'woke' and 'snowflakes', lived experiences and empathy invalidated by 'facts'. Boase's epilogue claims: "Today, you are not dismissed as 'sentimental' for having scruples on animals." I appreciate it may not appear as prevalent with more people engaging in animal rights than ever before - but having been met with this argument firsthand, I promise Boase this rhetoric is still alive and well and animals continue to die for it.
Ageism, seemed to go both ways in these discussions. Christabel's acceptance as WSPU leader pushed the cause forward in new and daring ways - much to the support of her aging mother, while Etta and the RSPB's reluctance to step down for the younger campaigners stamped them as an aging and conservative charity which failed to reach the headlines with such boldness. On the other hand, it appeared that there is often a perceived lack of appreciation from younger activists for those who fought before them. Having only just read a book about this exact issue - I see that this has greatly reduced the historical narrative which educates new activists and forgets women's history.
Sexism. I was astonished that in a book about two leading women to find in the RSPB, as soon as the fights encroached on their husbands hunts, it was no longer a discussion of moral good. Or how men used their power to push women off the higher posts in the name of science (noticing a pattern?). It saddened me to see the disregard for Etta from the RSPB and how her legacy meant that a woman did not take a higher positions until 1991. I cried at this. Etta's name, decades after being ousted, used as a negative comparison to Barbara Young, their bright new leader.
Single-Issue campaigns were an interesting one for me. I've heard many times that it was the women's dedication purely to the cause of women's suffrage that brought them to the fore of politics. Meanwhile, even if Lemon didn't herself - the RSPB group forayed into many aisles of discussion during their fight, possibly diminishing their message and contributing to their limited success for the cause for so long. It made me wonder if a single-issue campaign would support changing the world more completely today, and I feel like the next suggestion is the one that would do it...
Classism. Ahh, the many times that Boase notes the power of class and highlights how it divides the UK holding both causes back. Firstly, Boase clearly showcases that politics didn't even enter the working class sphere, particularly for women, through the story of Alice Battershall (fantastic start and end to the book by the way), and challenges how animals rights would actually negatively impact working people inadvertantly. This thought absolutely sent me on a spiral as I re-evaluated my own stance. Boase also raised issue with how the perceived intelligence, status and flawed moral righteousness of women seemingly made them worthy of rights, and their hypocrisy as they either protest murderous millenery while accepted their husbands hunting or sent working class women to do messy work yet reduced the efforts before getting many of them their right to vote. To me, class is the oppressive system that sits over all other forms of discrimination, and this book demonstrates this wonderfully.
While I don't have a sense of Boase's position with animal rights from this book - there were some elements that highlighted her passions for the fight. Even though the title features only Emmeline Pankhurst by name, Boase rightfully addresses the reason for the bias towards telling Etta's story. It is lesser known in the same vein that I believe the animals rights movement is lesser known in comparison to the women's rights movement. I appreciate the time she takes to discuss the issues, fight and contribution to Etta for the birds. She did incredibly well that demonstrating the sheer numbers of birds being murdered by the millinery trade, and building a world where millinery, taxidermy and exploitation of animals of the Victorian period is misunderstood for appreciating their beauty and connecting to nature.
Although, in my bias mind, she misses some great opportunitied to connect to other forms of exploitation of animals - such as when Lemon celebrates working horses, gifting them a carrot at an event, rather than arguing for their freedom or comparing the force feeding of women with Fois Grais (a torturous force feeding of ducks) rather than the caring feeding of chicks from their mother - though the connection with the egret is not lost on me.
Boase challenges some areas of the animal rights discussion too, like the fact that a key challenge of the movement that the women's one did not share was that "the RSPB was handicapped because it was founded on a negative", by asking people to remove something from their life rather than add to do. It is a challenge still faced today.
Boase's writing bases each chapter on a theme but also aims to tie it to a chronology. I think this works in most cases, with a bit of jumping around time, however I do think the final chapters were slightly hindered by this choice. Personally, the use of the portraits to analyse these two characters was, quite frankly, a stroke of genius - it felt like the perfect way to tie off the book and focus on these women's legacy. Yet she didn't. The following chapter, when it unexpectedly comes returns back to the chronology and removes you from the conclusionary mindset. Then, the epilogue returns to the sense of legacy. I'd have swapped chapters 40 and 41, allowing for a smoother transition and a stronger final two chapters.
To finish my review of Mrs Pankhursts Purple Feather, I come to the epilogue which had me in tears. It was the perfect sign off to a book which clearly meant a lot to Boase and saved a woman's story from disappearing forever. Highlighting how Emmeline and Etta has influenced ours and animals lives today brought their stories home. I had been told that this book did not look at Emmeline favourably, but I think Boase did a magnificent job of putting neither Pankhurst or Lemon on a pedestal and demonstrating that not even our heroines are solely good, nor were they completely bad. My only wish was that the meeting of these minds was better recorded so Boase could have discussed their meeting at the Women's Exhibition is more detail. I was waiting for this moment and it never came!
Finally, as much as Etta's views on feminism do not align with mine (neither did Emmalines to be honest), I'm so thankful to Boase for saving Etta's story. She deserves to be remembered, and now I know of her - I will forever appreciate what she has done for women and animals by showing us how politics should be compassionate, women should be involved, and should fight for the voiceless. Thank you Tessa Boase for sharing her with us.
Back in the day, - I'd like to think I'd have put my money into both charitable pots if I were lucky enough to have any to spare. In reality, I would more likely have been one of the women working with the feathers. This book has really made me explore what my relationship is with these causes, historically and now, and I'm thankful that Tessa Boase has brought to me some of the history I had not yet reached.
One of the key elements I appreciated about this book, is that it allowed us to look at two activist organisations that were active around the same time - highlighting similarities and differences that enable us to scrutinize the successes and failings of organisations the and now that are fighting for positive change. Although Boase doesn't always overtly make these comparisons, her writing allows us to connect the dots for ourselves. The discussions of activist families, dedication to the cause, the power fashion has towards oppression and protest, hypocrisy (yey to Miss Julia Andrews for calling the RSPB out at the time), the discrimination within seemingly positive campaigns (eg. Blaming women for the murder of birds rather than the hunters and millinery owners), all feed into a higher analysis of campaigning and protest.
Most prominent for me are four core elements I picked from the book that resonated and appears to hold back or push forward a campaign, if we use Boase's representation of these two campaigns as our case studies. Sentimentality, Ageism, Sexism, Single-Issue Campaigns, and Classism:
Sentimentality appears to be a core driver for dismissing campaigns yesterday and today. Their emotional displays of passion were brandished with women nicknamed militant, and as suffragettes, while others reduced to mere bird-lovers without being supported by science. Today we're 'woke' and 'snowflakes', lived experiences and empathy invalidated by 'facts'. Boase's epilogue claims: "Today, you are not dismissed as 'sentimental' for having scruples on animals." I appreciate it may not appear as prevalent with more people engaging in animal rights than ever before - but having been met with this argument firsthand, I promise Boase this rhetoric is still alive and well and animals continue to die for it.
Ageism, seemed to go both ways in these discussions. Christabel's acceptance as WSPU leader pushed the cause forward in new and daring ways - much to the support of her aging mother, while Etta and the RSPB's reluctance to step down for the younger campaigners stamped them as an aging and conservative charity which failed to reach the headlines with such boldness. On the other hand, it appeared that there is often a perceived lack of appreciation from younger activists for those who fought before them. Having only just read a book about this exact issue - I see that this has greatly reduced the historical narrative which educates new activists and forgets women's history.
Sexism. I was astonished that in a book about two leading women to find in the RSPB, as soon as the fights encroached on their husbands hunts, it was no longer a discussion of moral good. Or how men used their power to push women off the higher posts in the name of science (noticing a pattern?). It saddened me to see the disregard for Etta from the RSPB and how her legacy meant that a woman did not take a higher positions until 1991. I cried at this. Etta's name, decades after being ousted, used as a negative comparison to Barbara Young, their bright new leader.
Single-Issue campaigns were an interesting one for me. I've heard many times that it was the women's dedication purely to the cause of women's suffrage that brought them to the fore of politics. Meanwhile, even if Lemon didn't herself - the RSPB group forayed into many aisles of discussion during their fight, possibly diminishing their message and contributing to their limited success for the cause for so long. It made me wonder if a single-issue campaign would support changing the world more completely today, and I feel like the next suggestion is the one that would do it...
Classism. Ahh, the many times that Boase notes the power of class and highlights how it divides the UK holding both causes back. Firstly, Boase clearly showcases that politics didn't even enter the working class sphere, particularly for women, through the story of Alice Battershall (fantastic start and end to the book by the way), and challenges how animals rights would actually negatively impact working people inadvertantly. This thought absolutely sent me on a spiral as I re-evaluated my own stance. Boase also raised issue with how the perceived intelligence, status and flawed moral righteousness of women seemingly made them worthy of rights, and their hypocrisy as they either protest murderous millenery while accepted their husbands hunting or sent working class women to do messy work yet reduced the efforts before getting many of them their right to vote. To me, class is the oppressive system that sits over all other forms of discrimination, and this book demonstrates this wonderfully.
While I don't have a sense of Boase's position with animal rights from this book - there were some elements that highlighted her passions for the fight. Even though the title features only Emmeline Pankhurst by name, Boase rightfully addresses the reason for the bias towards telling Etta's story. It is lesser known in the same vein that I believe the animals rights movement is lesser known in comparison to the women's rights movement. I appreciate the time she takes to discuss the issues, fight and contribution to Etta for the birds. She did incredibly well that demonstrating the sheer numbers of birds being murdered by the millinery trade, and building a world where millinery, taxidermy and exploitation of animals of the Victorian period is misunderstood for appreciating their beauty and connecting to nature.
Although, in my bias mind, she misses some great opportunitied to connect to other forms of exploitation of animals - such as when Lemon celebrates working horses, gifting them a carrot at an event, rather than arguing for their freedom or comparing the force feeding of women with Fois Grais (a torturous force feeding of ducks) rather than the caring feeding of chicks from their mother - though the connection with the egret is not lost on me.
Boase challenges some areas of the animal rights discussion too, like the fact that a key challenge of the movement that the women's one did not share was that "the RSPB was handicapped because it was founded on a negative", by asking people to remove something from their life rather than add to do. It is a challenge still faced today.
Boase's writing bases each chapter on a theme but also aims to tie it to a chronology. I think this works in most cases, with a bit of jumping around time, however I do think the final chapters were slightly hindered by this choice. Personally, the use of the portraits to analyse these two characters was, quite frankly, a stroke of genius - it felt like the perfect way to tie off the book and focus on these women's legacy. Yet she didn't. The following chapter, when it unexpectedly comes returns back to the chronology and removes you from the conclusionary mindset. Then, the epilogue returns to the sense of legacy. I'd have swapped chapters 40 and 41, allowing for a smoother transition and a stronger final two chapters.
To finish my review of Mrs Pankhursts Purple Feather, I come to the epilogue which had me in tears. It was the perfect sign off to a book which clearly meant a lot to Boase and saved a woman's story from disappearing forever. Highlighting how Emmeline and Etta has influenced ours and animals lives today brought their stories home. I had been told that this book did not look at Emmeline favourably, but I think Boase did a magnificent job of putting neither Pankhurst or Lemon on a pedestal and demonstrating that not even our heroines are solely good, nor were they completely bad. My only wish was that the meeting of these minds was better recorded so Boase could have discussed their meeting at the Women's Exhibition is more detail. I was waiting for this moment and it never came!
Finally, as much as Etta's views on feminism do not align with mine (neither did Emmalines to be honest), I'm so thankful to Boase for saving Etta's story. She deserves to be remembered, and now I know of her - I will forever appreciate what she has done for women and animals by showing us how politics should be compassionate, women should be involved, and should fight for the voiceless. Thank you Tessa Boase for sharing her with us.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Read
August 17, 2021This is a was a true delight. Meticulously researched with extraordinary revelations shining from every stone turned over. Historic time travel at its most compelling that transports us to a zeitgeist so utterly alien to our own and so completely that we understand and feel what it must have been to have lived in such through such a pivotal time in our social history.
At the heart of the story are two adversaries, arraigned principally not against each other, but for the causes they champion: Etta Lemon for the preservation of birds, murdered by the million to keep every society hat feathered to its fullest glory; and Emmeline Pankhurst, feisty wearer of the hats Lemon abhorred, and suffrage champion who, along with so many others, tore up the rulebook and went to prison in the fight for women’s votes.
Boase plants herself firmly in the middle ground between the two women, sympathetic to both, almost becoming the go between between their causes.
But perhaps the real heroines of the story are the ordinary working women who toiled so tirelessly for little gain in countless East End sweatshops, combing, dying and curling the feathers that adorned the hats of the upper-crust ladies. The book is as much a tribute to them, and through meticulous research and with a gentle and sympathetic touch Boase takes us to the very heart of a London that cast them so harsh a lot.
At the heart of the story are two adversaries, arraigned principally not against each other, but for the causes they champion: Etta Lemon for the preservation of birds, murdered by the million to keep every society hat feathered to its fullest glory; and Emmeline Pankhurst, feisty wearer of the hats Lemon abhorred, and suffrage champion who, along with so many others, tore up the rulebook and went to prison in the fight for women’s votes.
Boase plants herself firmly in the middle ground between the two women, sympathetic to both, almost becoming the go between between their causes.
But perhaps the real heroines of the story are the ordinary working women who toiled so tirelessly for little gain in countless East End sweatshops, combing, dying and curling the feathers that adorned the hats of the upper-crust ladies. The book is as much a tribute to them, and through meticulous research and with a gentle and sympathetic touch Boase takes us to the very heart of a London that cast them so harsh a lot.
July 24, 2022
Anti-Semetic. I returned this audiobook after one chapter. The first chapter focuses on a businessman, who mistreated his employees and had them jailed. He is frequently and needlessly described as Jewish. This would almost certainly not have been done had the man in question been Christian, so serves no purpose other than to perpetuate a negative stereotype. The vast majority of employers mistreated their staff in the 1800s, religion has nothing to do with it. Perhaps this was unconsciously done, but I was so uncomfortable I couldn't continue to read the book. I don't want royalties going to this woman from me.
Having also read other reviews that weren't brilliant, I read the Wikipedia article instead.
Having also read other reviews that weren't brilliant, I read the Wikipedia article instead.
December 10, 2022
The December book for one of my online book clubs is "Etta Lemon: The Woman Who Saved the Birds" by Tessa Boase.
In some editions/markets, the book has a different title: "Mrs Pankhurst's Purple Feather: A Scandalous History of Birds, Hats and Votes." The edition I was able to get for my Kobo e-reader, however, was "Etta Lemon," so that's how I'll refer to it here.
Many/most of us, even outside of the UK, will have at least heard of Mrs. (Emmeline) Pankhurst, who fought for -- and won -- the right for women to vote in Britain, 100+ years ago. But who was Etta Lemon? And which book title is more correct? Is the book about Etta Lemon, or Emmeline Pankhurst?
Both, actually. They were contemporaries, leading movements that flourished (and ultimately achieved their goals and changed Britain in dramatic ways) at around the same time in history -- but they were different women, with very different views and interests, and different stories -- and they can be linked in some interesting ways that the book explores.
Emmeline Pankhurst, her daughters (Christabel and Sylvia), and the suffragette movement they led (under the banner of the Women's Social and Political Union, or WSPU) are very well known. But the childless Etta Lemon and her crusade to save the birds has been mostly forgotten by history -- until now, thanks to Tessa Boase and this book.
Elaborately plumed hats were a central part of the suffragettes' image, as they crusaded for the vote. "The ever-elegant Emmeline Pankhurst insisted that if they were to win the nation over, suffragettes must ensure that they were the best dressed, most alluring women at every social gathering," Boase writes in Chapter 31 ("The Feminine Arts"). In the Prologue, she reveals that the "purple feather" of the book's other title refers to the voluptuous purple feather Mrs. Pankhurst wore on her hat when she and her suffragettes stormed the British House of Commons in 1908. After her death in 1928, it was preserved by the Suffragette Fellowship and, since 1950, has been on display at the Museum of London.
Etta Lemon, on the other hand, was vehemently ANTI-suffrage -- but she too was a divisive, crusading figure, who helped found what eventually became known as the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), which still exists today and is Britain's best-known nature conservation society. There was a great deal of rivalry and tension between the two organizations. (Some women, of course, belonged to both and supported both causes.)
Both crusades were eventually eclipsed -- and yet at the same time bolstered -- by the First World War. During the war years, women stepped into men's roles and proved themselves entirely capable, while importing feathers was banned and domestic bird populations flourished in the absence of hunters. In 1921, after the war ended, the feather ban finally became permanent law. Some women gained the right to vote in 1918, and the vote was extended to all women age 21 and older in 1928.
Etta remained devoted to the RSPB until 1939, when she was unceremoniously forced out of her position at the age of 79, her portrait relegated to a cupboard in the attic -- until Boase's book was published. Since then, the portrait has been restored, reframed and now hangs in a prominent place at the RSPB headquarters, and is also displayed on its website. (Etta died in 1953, age 92.)
The acknowledgements at the end of the book (the edition I read) help to clarify the mystery around the two different titles: apparently it was the first/hardcover edition of the book that was titled "Mrs. Pankhurst's Purple Feather" -- presumably because Mrs. Pankhurst was better known and her name would sell more books. (It was first published in 2018, anniversary of the suffragettes' initial victory in obtaining the vote.) The title was changed for the paperback edition to focus on Etta Lemon, and in the acknowledgements at the end of the book, Boase thanked her paperback editor "for instantly grasping that Etta Lemon was the revelation, and for encouraging a rethink on the cover." She also saluted her late researcher: "Beryl [Holt] always thought that Etta Lemon was the real heroine of these pages -- and she was right." :)
I had absolutely no idea about what a "thing" feathers were for Victorian-era women, or what a huge business they were -- or what a toll they took on bird populations around the world, with some species hunted to the point of extinction. Boase lays out the facts here in horrifying detail. I was reminded of how both the beaver and the buffalo here in North America were hunted and slaughtered in massive numbers -- primarily for their pelts -- between the early 1600s & late 1800s, almost to the point of extinction.
This was an interesting read overall -- a little dry/academic in tone, and perhaps a little more detail than most of us ever wanted or needed to know on these subjects...! It did take me a little while to get into it. But once I did, it was a pretty fascinating piece of social history. The author has certainly done her homework and knows her subject...! Etta Lemon is yet another unsung woman who did great things and whose story has been overlooked until now. Thank you, Tessa Boase, for (re)introducing her to us!
3.5 stars, rounded up to 4.
In some editions/markets, the book has a different title: "Mrs Pankhurst's Purple Feather: A Scandalous History of Birds, Hats and Votes." The edition I was able to get for my Kobo e-reader, however, was "Etta Lemon," so that's how I'll refer to it here.
Many/most of us, even outside of the UK, will have at least heard of Mrs. (Emmeline) Pankhurst, who fought for -- and won -- the right for women to vote in Britain, 100+ years ago. But who was Etta Lemon? And which book title is more correct? Is the book about Etta Lemon, or Emmeline Pankhurst?
Both, actually. They were contemporaries, leading movements that flourished (and ultimately achieved their goals and changed Britain in dramatic ways) at around the same time in history -- but they were different women, with very different views and interests, and different stories -- and they can be linked in some interesting ways that the book explores.
Emmeline Pankhurst, her daughters (Christabel and Sylvia), and the suffragette movement they led (under the banner of the Women's Social and Political Union, or WSPU) are very well known. But the childless Etta Lemon and her crusade to save the birds has been mostly forgotten by history -- until now, thanks to Tessa Boase and this book.
Elaborately plumed hats were a central part of the suffragettes' image, as they crusaded for the vote. "The ever-elegant Emmeline Pankhurst insisted that if they were to win the nation over, suffragettes must ensure that they were the best dressed, most alluring women at every social gathering," Boase writes in Chapter 31 ("The Feminine Arts"). In the Prologue, she reveals that the "purple feather" of the book's other title refers to the voluptuous purple feather Mrs. Pankhurst wore on her hat when she and her suffragettes stormed the British House of Commons in 1908. After her death in 1928, it was preserved by the Suffragette Fellowship and, since 1950, has been on display at the Museum of London.
The elaborately feathered hat was an indispensable part of her brand: a way of showing the world that she was no unnatural, mannish harridan intent on a 'petticoat government.' Yet she was also steely, autocratic and dictatorial. She liked a good fight. Like a strutting cock's extravagant tail, Emmeline Pankhurst's plumage signified power.
Etta Lemon, on the other hand, was vehemently ANTI-suffrage -- but she too was a divisive, crusading figure, who helped found what eventually became known as the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), which still exists today and is Britain's best-known nature conservation society. There was a great deal of rivalry and tension between the two organizations. (Some women, of course, belonged to both and supported both causes.)
Both crusades were eventually eclipsed -- and yet at the same time bolstered -- by the First World War. During the war years, women stepped into men's roles and proved themselves entirely capable, while importing feathers was banned and domestic bird populations flourished in the absence of hunters. In 1921, after the war ended, the feather ban finally became permanent law. Some women gained the right to vote in 1918, and the vote was extended to all women age 21 and older in 1928.
Etta remained devoted to the RSPB until 1939, when she was unceremoniously forced out of her position at the age of 79, her portrait relegated to a cupboard in the attic -- until Boase's book was published. Since then, the portrait has been restored, reframed and now hangs in a prominent place at the RSPB headquarters, and is also displayed on its website. (Etta died in 1953, age 92.)
The acknowledgements at the end of the book (the edition I read) help to clarify the mystery around the two different titles: apparently it was the first/hardcover edition of the book that was titled "Mrs. Pankhurst's Purple Feather" -- presumably because Mrs. Pankhurst was better known and her name would sell more books. (It was first published in 2018, anniversary of the suffragettes' initial victory in obtaining the vote.) The title was changed for the paperback edition to focus on Etta Lemon, and in the acknowledgements at the end of the book, Boase thanked her paperback editor "for instantly grasping that Etta Lemon was the revelation, and for encouraging a rethink on the cover." She also saluted her late researcher: "Beryl [Holt] always thought that Etta Lemon was the real heroine of these pages -- and she was right." :)
I had absolutely no idea about what a "thing" feathers were for Victorian-era women, or what a huge business they were -- or what a toll they took on bird populations around the world, with some species hunted to the point of extinction. Boase lays out the facts here in horrifying detail. I was reminded of how both the beaver and the buffalo here in North America were hunted and slaughtered in massive numbers -- primarily for their pelts -- between the early 1600s & late 1800s, almost to the point of extinction.
This was an interesting read overall -- a little dry/academic in tone, and perhaps a little more detail than most of us ever wanted or needed to know on these subjects...! It did take me a little while to get into it. But once I did, it was a pretty fascinating piece of social history. The author has certainly done her homework and knows her subject...! Etta Lemon is yet another unsung woman who did great things and whose story has been overlooked until now. Thank you, Tessa Boase, for (re)introducing her to us!
3.5 stars, rounded up to 4.
September 13, 2018
Rather interesting coverage of the origins of the RSPB and the (now mostly forgotten) women who spearheaded a movement, founded a royal society, and helped preserve thousands of species of birds from slaughter. The author cleverly ties it in to the suffragist movement, which grew at about the same time and in parallel to the RSPB. It's a different perspective on a part of history that we should all probably know more about. I found it fascinating, if a little heavy-going at times.
February 19, 2021
I am really interested in the subject material as both a feminist and an advocate for animal welfare, fairtrade and workers rights. However this was just a bit hard going for me. I started it last year and have ended up just skimming through the majority in a few hours. I think I would have enjoyed this topic as a longer magazine article but this felt like reading someone's dissertation and it was just too much for me!
July 19, 2018
A fascinating comparison between the deservedly famous suffragette, and the undeservedly unknown ladies who founded the RSPB and arguably changed the face of conservation.
June 6, 2021
I actually clicked on this as a free review copy in error, to be truthful, yet seldom did I regret it at all. I thought it was a children's book, along the lines of those others I have seen recently ("She Heard the Birds" – https://www.goodreads.com/review/show... and "Counting Birds" – https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...), telling of pioneering bird enthusiasts killing off the trade in feathers for fashion. Instead it's an adult non-fiction book, and one that's much more about society and hats than it is about birds. While those other books concentrated on American subjects, this British volume looks at the woman who helped inspire the RSPB bird and conservation charity, who was railing against the idea of killing birds and sticking their plumage in bonnets and headdresses. Oh, and she was campaigning for birds on similar platforms to the chief suffragettes, who were all too happy to flounce around under a forest of feathers, as they needed to look dainty and feminine to get anywhere – the brash, couture-less harridan look would not do.
So this almost acts as a joint biography of Emmeline Pankhurst (wants everything for women, as long as she can be be-feathered, thus managing to keep the girls involved in the feather trade stuck in the poverty that is all they've known), and the most unfortunately-named Etta Lemon (wants everything for birds, and hang those women demanding the vote and a living wage and everything else for nicking her column inches). It's also a social history, looking at the background of the workers in the feather trade, the evangelical ideas that helped Lemon become such a pioneer in her field, and more. This was, perhaps surprisingly, the first era of the campaigning style we know of today, although they were making beginner's mistakes – a lead anti-vivisectionist sporting a whole bird of paradise and an ivory-handled umbrella as her decoration of choice.
I'm forced to consider this book as a complete layman here – I've hardly ever worn a formal hat, and certainly not one with a gutted songbird stuck on it. I would never have thought to find myself reading about the social history of millinery decoration, and as I say those prior reads of mine never encouraged me to think the RSPB had been born from similar reasons – and certainly not that the chief worker of the SPB before its Royal endowment was a virulent anti-suffragist. So what this layman can report is that this is surprisingly engaging, and would appear to be so for many an audience member. You don't have to have an academic hat on (feather-free, of course) to be coming here for study of early environmentalism, social protests' impact on couture or any other reason an expert would need to peruse this. It is, ultimately, a bit clumsily-named, much like its title subject, for this is about a lot more than someone who consumed a citrus fruit, and perhaps too forensic, "must-make-the-definitive-book-and-therefore-use-every-minute-detail" for its own good, but it still can go down as a surprising success.
To quote, "ETTA LEMON was originally published in hardback in 2018 under the title of MRS PANKHURST'S PURPLE FEATHER." That was a slightly better title, but only just.
So this almost acts as a joint biography of Emmeline Pankhurst (wants everything for women, as long as she can be be-feathered, thus managing to keep the girls involved in the feather trade stuck in the poverty that is all they've known), and the most unfortunately-named Etta Lemon (wants everything for birds, and hang those women demanding the vote and a living wage and everything else for nicking her column inches). It's also a social history, looking at the background of the workers in the feather trade, the evangelical ideas that helped Lemon become such a pioneer in her field, and more. This was, perhaps surprisingly, the first era of the campaigning style we know of today, although they were making beginner's mistakes – a lead anti-vivisectionist sporting a whole bird of paradise and an ivory-handled umbrella as her decoration of choice.
I'm forced to consider this book as a complete layman here – I've hardly ever worn a formal hat, and certainly not one with a gutted songbird stuck on it. I would never have thought to find myself reading about the social history of millinery decoration, and as I say those prior reads of mine never encouraged me to think the RSPB had been born from similar reasons – and certainly not that the chief worker of the SPB before its Royal endowment was a virulent anti-suffragist. So what this layman can report is that this is surprisingly engaging, and would appear to be so for many an audience member. You don't have to have an academic hat on (feather-free, of course) to be coming here for study of early environmentalism, social protests' impact on couture or any other reason an expert would need to peruse this. It is, ultimately, a bit clumsily-named, much like its title subject, for this is about a lot more than someone who consumed a citrus fruit, and perhaps too forensic, "must-make-the-definitive-book-and-therefore-use-every-minute-detail" for its own good, but it still can go down as a surprising success.
To quote, "ETTA LEMON was originally published in hardback in 2018 under the title of MRS PANKHURST'S PURPLE FEATHER." That was a slightly better title, but only just.
July 9, 2023
I'll admit that I came to this book for perhaps strange reasons - I'd heard that it was originally published as 'Mrs Pankhurst's Purple Feather: Fashion, Fury and Feminism' and that sounded right up my street. I didn't know who Etta Lemon was, but I settled in for a good read about suffragettes and their fancy outfits.
It was kind of half what I expected, but all fascinating!
The book is actually only half about Etta Lemon, a woman who felt passionately that feathers/whole birds shouldn't be used to decorate hats and who was central to the founding of the RSPB. She took on the trend for 'murderous millinery' and made it her life's work - and good on her!
The other half of the story follows the suffrage movement, especially Mrs Pankhurst's militant suffragettes who used fashion to further their cause - whether through their symbolic colour code, their expensive dresses used to denote respectability, or their penchant for a nice feathered hat...
What was really interesting was the idea of women's legacies - the Pankhurst name has become legendary, while Etta Lemon is pretty much forgotten. I liked that this book shed some light on some powerful women of the past (as both the RSPB and suffragette contingents were mainly female). Even if they often totally disagreed...
Another interesting idea raised by the book is about the writing of history. In many ways, Etta Lemon was a heroine who fought what now feels like a very modern battle against animal cruelty. There is a lot of shocking detail uncovered about the trade in birds as decorative elements for Edwardian hats, so in that regard, Etta was absolutely on point. However, she was also anti-suffrage and anti-feminism. Oooooof! She suddenly didn't seem so modern, or quite so relatable to a 21st century reader (especially this one!)
Despite this, it's a really interesting look at opposing perspectives in Edwardian society. I loved that it didn't take the well-trodden path of a history of suffragism (even though this is kind of why I picked the book up!) Instead, we got a look at those in the plumage industry (factory workers - and those who made money by stealing the feathers), those early eco-warriors who took on the millinery industry, and - contrastingly - the middle- and upper-class suffragettes whose eco-credentials perhaps now look a bit shaky.
For me, one of the most interesting bits was about Ada Nield, a Crewe factory girl who took on the battle for better working conditions and wrote to the local paper in support of rights for female workers. Ada Nield is a kind-of local celebrity where I live and I'm working on a campaign to commemorate her in statue form, so this bit felt very relevant to me.
I also listened to the audiobook of 'Etta Lemon' (still makes me smile, every time it's said!) which is read by the author, Tessa Boase. I found this to be really well narrated and engaging to listen to so would recommend this also.
I'd recommend this to anyone interested in women's lived experiences of the past - there's plenty of diversity here instead of the usual (white, affluent, revolutionary) narrative about suffragettes. I thought that this gave me a much broader understanding about Edwardian society and the anti-suffrage perspective - something I'd not considered deeply. I'm not sure Etta Lemon would be entirely in tune with my own beliefs - but I sure am glad someone was there to do the right thing by the birds!
It was kind of half what I expected, but all fascinating!
The book is actually only half about Etta Lemon, a woman who felt passionately that feathers/whole birds shouldn't be used to decorate hats and who was central to the founding of the RSPB. She took on the trend for 'murderous millinery' and made it her life's work - and good on her!
The other half of the story follows the suffrage movement, especially Mrs Pankhurst's militant suffragettes who used fashion to further their cause - whether through their symbolic colour code, their expensive dresses used to denote respectability, or their penchant for a nice feathered hat...
What was really interesting was the idea of women's legacies - the Pankhurst name has become legendary, while Etta Lemon is pretty much forgotten. I liked that this book shed some light on some powerful women of the past (as both the RSPB and suffragette contingents were mainly female). Even if they often totally disagreed...
Another interesting idea raised by the book is about the writing of history. In many ways, Etta Lemon was a heroine who fought what now feels like a very modern battle against animal cruelty. There is a lot of shocking detail uncovered about the trade in birds as decorative elements for Edwardian hats, so in that regard, Etta was absolutely on point. However, she was also anti-suffrage and anti-feminism. Oooooof! She suddenly didn't seem so modern, or quite so relatable to a 21st century reader (especially this one!)
Despite this, it's a really interesting look at opposing perspectives in Edwardian society. I loved that it didn't take the well-trodden path of a history of suffragism (even though this is kind of why I picked the book up!) Instead, we got a look at those in the plumage industry (factory workers - and those who made money by stealing the feathers), those early eco-warriors who took on the millinery industry, and - contrastingly - the middle- and upper-class suffragettes whose eco-credentials perhaps now look a bit shaky.
For me, one of the most interesting bits was about Ada Nield, a Crewe factory girl who took on the battle for better working conditions and wrote to the local paper in support of rights for female workers. Ada Nield is a kind-of local celebrity where I live and I'm working on a campaign to commemorate her in statue form, so this bit felt very relevant to me.
I also listened to the audiobook of 'Etta Lemon' (still makes me smile, every time it's said!) which is read by the author, Tessa Boase. I found this to be really well narrated and engaging to listen to so would recommend this also.
I'd recommend this to anyone interested in women's lived experiences of the past - there's plenty of diversity here instead of the usual (white, affluent, revolutionary) narrative about suffragettes. I thought that this gave me a much broader understanding about Edwardian society and the anti-suffrage perspective - something I'd not considered deeply. I'm not sure Etta Lemon would be entirely in tune with my own beliefs - but I sure am glad someone was there to do the right thing by the birds!
June 11, 2022
An absorbing intertwining of several threads of social history: bird conservation, Victorian philanthropy and politics, the suffrage movement, and the plumage trade and working class life. Although it's titled after RSPB founder Etta Lemon and she does more or less frame the narrative, it's just as much about Emmeline Pankhurst (I wonder why it wasn't called Etta and Emmeline or something like that--the original title Mrs Pankhurst's Purple Feather might have suited it better), with plenty of other characters, including somewhat hypothetical ones (such as a stand-in female laborer in the millinery industry) given a lot of air time. I didn't mind, since the story was well-told throughout. It was interesting to get glimpses of the historian-journalist's process, the discovery of documents and tracing down of records of people like the above millinery worker, and the threading them together in a narrative supported by the author's personal interest in bringing these overlooked characters to light, as well as her reactions to them--e.g. her initial surprise that Etta Lemon, strong, political, semi-masculine personality that she was, was also a stuanch anti-suffrage activist, leading this rivalry with Emmeline Pankhurst to become the central scaffolding of the book. She does a good job of examining and holding in tension the nuances of these complex people. Also very interesting to read about the militant suffragists and the personalities necessary to instigate that movement as well as the extreme anxiety and vitriol they provoked, reminiscent of today's more militant tendencies in activism. I definitely recommend this to anyone interested in this time period in England, new angles on familiar and unfamiliar names, and/or the history of the suffrage movement (RSPB as well, but I would say it's more about social politics than conservation per se).
June 7, 2022
This is an extremely hard review to leave. And I was so torn about what to rate it. Prepare for me to repeatedly contradict myself.
I hated Etta Lemon the more I read. Anti suffrage and extremely conservative when I saw the Telegraph call it dazzling I should’ve been tipped off. However, she is someone we should all know the name of. The founder and all round sole creator frankly of the RSPB she has never had the credit owed to her for all the work she did to prevent countless species of birds being only in history books.
The book is extremely clever in that it places Etta against Emmeline Pankhurst who is someone we all know and love. What they were campaigning for at the same time and the disdain they no doubt held for each other.
I want to say here I’m a historian and I’m a feminist. This book should’ve been made for me. But honestly, whilst the information was ultimately very interesting it took a lot of work to get to it. It was just so very long and far too detailed on things which bore no relevance at all. It’s clearly written by an extremely smart and well researched passionate historian in Tessa Boase, but despite this being a book perfect for me *on paper* I found it a proper slog. I have put it down and picked it up over the last 2 years.
Pros included some insight to redress the love openly given to Panky and how maybe we should choose our heroes carefully and indeed a woman who’s contribution to our animal world which has been vastly overlooked being brought to our attention.
Cons - I hated so much of Etta Lemon the person which made it all the harder. She was a Turkey voting for Christmas and I believe that irony would’ve been lost on her. Too much detail which didn’t help us better understand Etta or the tale of her life.
I hated Etta Lemon the more I read. Anti suffrage and extremely conservative when I saw the Telegraph call it dazzling I should’ve been tipped off. However, she is someone we should all know the name of. The founder and all round sole creator frankly of the RSPB she has never had the credit owed to her for all the work she did to prevent countless species of birds being only in history books.
The book is extremely clever in that it places Etta against Emmeline Pankhurst who is someone we all know and love. What they were campaigning for at the same time and the disdain they no doubt held for each other.
I want to say here I’m a historian and I’m a feminist. This book should’ve been made for me. But honestly, whilst the information was ultimately very interesting it took a lot of work to get to it. It was just so very long and far too detailed on things which bore no relevance at all. It’s clearly written by an extremely smart and well researched passionate historian in Tessa Boase, but despite this being a book perfect for me *on paper* I found it a proper slog. I have put it down and picked it up over the last 2 years.
Pros included some insight to redress the love openly given to Panky and how maybe we should choose our heroes carefully and indeed a woman who’s contribution to our animal world which has been vastly overlooked being brought to our attention.
Cons - I hated so much of Etta Lemon the person which made it all the harder. She was a Turkey voting for Christmas and I believe that irony would’ve been lost on her. Too much detail which didn’t help us better understand Etta or the tale of her life.
November 20, 2024
Excellent book about Emma Lemon, an Englishwoman who helmed an 1889- all-female activist group with the goal of getting women to not wear feathers. Their efforts would eventually lead to the Plumage Act of 1921, which brought about legal support for the exotic birds that were being extirpated by the feathered millinery industry and to the cultural change that crushed this fashion.
In and around the story of Emma Lemon is woven the story of Emmeline Pankhurst, who lobbied for women’s suffrage. While the two movements might seem to have been compatible, they were anything but: Lemon was an avowed antisuffragist and Pankhurst, anxious to show men that her followers were “feminine,” all but demanded the wearing of extravagant, feathered hats.
Ultimately, women’s suffrage, too, would triumph. But the struggles along the way – for both movements – reveal a great deal about the society of late 19th-early 20th century Britain.
Chiefly at issue: the lives and livelihood of poor women, many of whom labored in the feather industry and desperately needed the work it gave them. How do you inspire them to support endangered bird species? How do you get the wealthy women who wore feathered hats to care about suffrage, when they felt they already had sufficient power, and were disdainful of the demands of working women?
Despite their inevitable triumphs, both Lemon and Pankhurst eventually had to deal with the pain of seeing “their” movements leave them behind.
What they bravely did and how they did it, makes for wonderful reading.
In and around the story of Emma Lemon is woven the story of Emmeline Pankhurst, who lobbied for women’s suffrage. While the two movements might seem to have been compatible, they were anything but: Lemon was an avowed antisuffragist and Pankhurst, anxious to show men that her followers were “feminine,” all but demanded the wearing of extravagant, feathered hats.
Ultimately, women’s suffrage, too, would triumph. But the struggles along the way – for both movements – reveal a great deal about the society of late 19th-early 20th century Britain.
Chiefly at issue: the lives and livelihood of poor women, many of whom labored in the feather industry and desperately needed the work it gave them. How do you inspire them to support endangered bird species? How do you get the wealthy women who wore feathered hats to care about suffrage, when they felt they already had sufficient power, and were disdainful of the demands of working women?
Despite their inevitable triumphs, both Lemon and Pankhurst eventually had to deal with the pain of seeing “their” movements leave them behind.
What they bravely did and how they did it, makes for wonderful reading.
April 28, 2024
Etta Lemon was a Victorian woman who (with others) founded the charity which became the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) and campaigned forcefully against the fashion for using bird plumage in hats, so-called ‘murderous millinery’. Boase’s interesting biography links Mrs Lemon’s story with that of women’s suffrage leader Emmeline Pankhurst, comparing and contrasting the two women’s lives, beliefs and campaigning.
I really enjoyed the story of Etta Lemon’s life, the role of women in public service at the time, and the work done to turn women against the fashion for bird plumage, a craze which resulted in near extinction for many species. I feel it was a clever concept to contrast Mrs Lemon with Mrs Pankhurst, illustrating the different social attitudes and approaches operating in the early 20th century, a time of change across Europe and the US. I was less interested in the chapters dealing with women’s suffrage, partly because this content was already familiar to me, and partly because their generic nature was less interesting than the focus on two fascinating individuals.
There is an increasing focus on the women who founded many great British institutions - like Octavia Hill, Eglantine Jebb, Elizabeth Garrett Anderson- but I had never even heard of Etta Lemon and thoroughly enjoyed finding out about her and her achievements.
I really enjoyed the story of Etta Lemon’s life, the role of women in public service at the time, and the work done to turn women against the fashion for bird plumage, a craze which resulted in near extinction for many species. I feel it was a clever concept to contrast Mrs Lemon with Mrs Pankhurst, illustrating the different social attitudes and approaches operating in the early 20th century, a time of change across Europe and the US. I was less interested in the chapters dealing with women’s suffrage, partly because this content was already familiar to me, and partly because their generic nature was less interesting than the focus on two fascinating individuals.
There is an increasing focus on the women who founded many great British institutions - like Octavia Hill, Eglantine Jebb, Elizabeth Garrett Anderson- but I had never even heard of Etta Lemon and thoroughly enjoyed finding out about her and her achievements.
July 15, 2021
This book takes the reader right into the world of the high life of aristocratic women and the tough enslavement of the girls working for milliners. Etta Lemon, privately educated and intelligent, grew a society to save the birds, cruelly slain for beautiful women's hats, and was an excellent public speaker. She worked tirelessly to make women aware of this terrible trade - some women even wore dead birds on their hats. Many of the bird species were in danger of extinction. Yet she was against women having the vote.
Some of the suffragettes were also against this 'murderous millinery', but many felt that they had to use fashion, including feathers, to enhance their power. Tessa Boase compares Etta with Emmeline Pankhurst in an interesting way.
This book is very enjoyable, and made me want to find out more about such eccentric characters as the Duchess of Portland, and learn more about Arthur Mattingley, who photographed Australian egrets for the Society.
I received this free ebook from NetGalley in return for an honest review.
EDITION Other Format
ISBN 9780711263383
PRICE $16.00 (USD)
Some of the suffragettes were also against this 'murderous millinery', but many felt that they had to use fashion, including feathers, to enhance their power. Tessa Boase compares Etta with Emmeline Pankhurst in an interesting way.
This book is very enjoyable, and made me want to find out more about such eccentric characters as the Duchess of Portland, and learn more about Arthur Mattingley, who photographed Australian egrets for the Society.
I received this free ebook from NetGalley in return for an honest review.
EDITION Other Format
ISBN 9780711263383
PRICE $16.00 (USD)
August 10, 2021
It is good to mix a good history book into my To Be Read list; and I'm glad that I selected this book.
The time line of the campaign to save birds from being gruesomely adorned on women's headwear and the women's suffrage movement in Britain take similar timelines.
Some of the hats were 2 foot x 3 foot in dimension; I can't imagine. But you don't have to imagine, as there are pictures. Species of birds were decimated by hunters gathering all they could slaughter for women's fashion. In order to obtain the highly desired mating plumes, adult birds were killed and the baby birds starved. I'm not sure that those images will ever be forgotten.
History was pretty cruel in so many ways. Definitely worth reading. I'm glad that this bit of history was captured with Etta Lemon: The Woman Who Saved the Birds.
Thank you to NetGalley, the author Tessa Boase and the publisher Quarto Publishing Group - White Lion, Aurum for the opportunity to review Etta Lemon in exchange for an honest review. Previously released in 2018 as Mrs. Pankhurst's Purple Feather.
The time line of the campaign to save birds from being gruesomely adorned on women's headwear and the women's suffrage movement in Britain take similar timelines.
Some of the hats were 2 foot x 3 foot in dimension; I can't imagine. But you don't have to imagine, as there are pictures. Species of birds were decimated by hunters gathering all they could slaughter for women's fashion. In order to obtain the highly desired mating plumes, adult birds were killed and the baby birds starved. I'm not sure that those images will ever be forgotten.
History was pretty cruel in so many ways. Definitely worth reading. I'm glad that this bit of history was captured with Etta Lemon: The Woman Who Saved the Birds.
Thank you to NetGalley, the author Tessa Boase and the publisher Quarto Publishing Group - White Lion, Aurum for the opportunity to review Etta Lemon in exchange for an honest review. Previously released in 2018 as Mrs. Pankhurst's Purple Feather.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 79 reviews