Discussion Questions for Mary Wollstonecraft’s Letters Written during a Short Residence in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark

by Megan Feulner

  1. On the genre of epistolary travel writing: A Short Residence is a travel narrative written in the epistolary mode. How does this combination set up a tension between the private and the public in terms of audience (writing letters for her lover and touristic accounts for the reading public)? Consider the way Wollstonecraft balances the conventions of travel writing (exploration, immediacy of description, attention to landscapes, weather, customs) alongside her more intimate passages on daily life (mood, feeling, and sensory experience).
  2. On her decision to exclude biographical particulars from the published letters: Posthumous biographies of Wollstonecraft reveal the context in which she travelled to Scandinavia, which includes business dealings on behalf of her American lover (and father of her child) Gilbert Imlay and their passionate and tumultuous relationship. But in the published letters, Wollstonecraft omits any specific reference to these details (for instance she uses ambiguous descriptions of people and events, such as “my host” in Letter I or “my affairs” in Letter V). Why might Wollstonecraft have chosen to exclude this aspect of her trip? Was her decision based on artistic conventions or concerns for her reputation? How has the revelation of these details influenced the public reception of A Short Residence over time?
  3. On her legacy as a champion of women’s rights: Mary Wollstonecraft is best known today for her feminist polemic A Vindication of the Rights of Women. How does Wollstonecraft use the lens of gender analysis in A Short Residence? Consider this theme by looking at passages on her daughter Fanny, marriage and motherhood, and general social commentary on the status of women in Scandinavian countries.
  4. On her commitment to the ‘progress’ narrative: Wollstonecraft centers her social analysis, at each destination, on a commitment to a universal ideal of progress. For instance, in Letter XIX, she writes of her analytic framework: “Do not forget, that in my general observations, I do not pretend to sketch a national character, but merely to note the present state of morals and manners, as I trace the progress of the world’s improvement.” Yet Wollstonecraft also shows an acute attention to class analysis in her views on such social institutions as work, criminal punishment, law, and local governance.  Does her commitment to the universal conception of progress foreclose more radical conclusions or limit her descriptive capacity? In a more historical sense, how does Wollstonecraft’s writing reflect her own social standing and standards (for instance, in her commentary on etiquette or distaste for drinking)?
  5. On her letters in the context of our broader discussion of life writing: In her introductory statement (the Advertisement), Wollstonecraft laments that she “could not avoid being continually the first person—‘the little hero of each tale.’”  Can we read the first-person narration as a chronicle of the self in an autobiographical sense? What is the greatest value of these letters (historical, aesthetic, etc.)?