Lee Ann
American Women’s Literature 4360.001
Dr. Sharon Talley
29 Sept. 2011
Surnames in Herland Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s Herland, written in 1915, illustrates women’s growing issues of inequality, forced submissiveness, which reduces individuality, and the concern to break with those traditions, which are abundant in the United States. They do not exist in the country of Herland, nor do surnames. The qualities of individualism and equality through rationality do exist. Among the many beliefs the women of Herland employ to enhance these qualities is the lack of surnames. Surnames are a “label” usually acquired from the male species, not the female species. In addition, surnames descend from generations past based on the occupation of a deceased ancestor, merely a tradition with no rationality. The use of surnames does not comply with the logical women of Herland and reduces their emphasis on individualism and equality.
In the passage that addresses this issue, the “male” question arises as to why all the women have only one name. Why is there not an identifiable family surname for the children? The sensible answer from Moadine is, “Why should we? We are all descended from a common source-all one ‘family’ in reality.” (64). The men then begin to question the concepts of personal pride and the “claiming” of one’s child. Moadine replies, “No-why should she? The child has her own” (64). Moadine is speaking to the issue of individuality and equality. The women of Herland believe that names develop as an individual earns them. When the individual’s characteristics and attributes become apparent, then their names evolve to designate who they are. A surname robs the children of their individuality and establishes, thus burdens them with preconceived notions as to who they are.
When the repeated astonished look appears on the male characters about this revelation due to their egos, Moadine explains in her usual patient and deferential manner that there is not a need to establish family lineage. First, in a society as well organized as Herland’s, naturally their birth records are immaculate. Second, she insists, “But as to everyone knowing which child belongs to which mother-why should she?” (64); her rationality behind this concept is that since all the women are descendants of the First Mother, surnames are obsolete and pointless. In addition, they are all mothers to all of the children.
The argument from the male point of view compares to other accomplishments or productions in Herland, such as homes, books, statues, and even dishes. They are “signed,” why not the children? The explanation is the women of Herland are proud of their heritage, “…without dragging in its ancestors” (65). The women of Herland do not waste their time with such foolish enterprises as pride. In their opinion, the use of surnames only contributes to this erroneous belief. In a society such as Herland, where most women assume motherhood of all the children, Gilman is suggesting that society, as a whole should accept responsibility for child- rearing. Each member contributes the attributes that suit him or her. Therefore, labeling to a particular member of society is ridiculous, if not impossible. The advantages to this approach are that the child learns from the best qualified to teach a particular trait and individuality in performance is recognized. Gilman believed allowing each member to participate made society better as a whole. In Herland, the use of surnames only serves to breakdown a society’s united community.

Work Cited
Gilman, Charlotte Perkins. Herland. New York: Dover, 1998. Print.