Open Access Kent State (OAKS)

An oral presentation on the history of Shellshock Syndrome and Women during the First World War will show how women struggled to cope with the illness they developed during the war, and how society had ignored their cries for help. Most of the resources that were left by these women were novels which are semi-biographical, which allows people to understand how these women were trying to cope with what they witnessed living through battleground Europe. In order to demonstrate that these women did have Shellshock Syndrome, there will be an account referenced from a man who was diagnosed with Shellshock Syndrome and this will show that women who showed or experienced similar issues were either flat-out ignored or they were given some other explanation. Since this topic is still largely unexplored by historians, what work has been done already will be acknowledged, and finally these women will tell their story.

The purpose of this oral presentation is multifaceted. Firstly, this presentation commemorates the 50th anniversary of the tragedy that occurred at Kent State on May 4th. As a memorial to the tragedy, this presentation examines Ohio State Marker 8-67, to understand the history of the event, as told by the marker. South Carolina State Marker 38-27 and Mississippi Freedom Trail Marker 6, which commemorate the Orangeburg Massacre and Jackson State Tragedy respectively, will also be examined. The sources I will examine are images of the three markers, which are geared towards explaining the events to the public, leading to potential viewpoints that differ from the typical academia of these topics. The goal is to further understanding of these three tragedies. Findings indicate that race did have an effect on how these tragedies are addressed.

The ideals of womanhood in 1950s America are reflected in various magazines, books, and educational films. All of these materials detail the socially acceptable roles for women during the 1950s. Notions of acceptable gender roles for women were perpetuated throughout mainstream media and were practiced widely among many American families during the 1950s. The ideal roles for women during the 1950s were largely domestic in nature and centered around a young woman being molded into a “perfect wife”. The social expectations and roles for women during the time included cooking, cleaning, laundry, and child-rearing. In some instances, women, often unmarried, worked as secretaries. The socially acceptable roles for women during the 1950s were not only widespread throughout mainstream America, but it was also heavily present within state correctional institutions. During the 1950s, the Ohio Reformatory for Women embodied these rigid gender roles of society through the reformatory’s structure, programs, and leadership. A majority of the Ohio Reformatory for Women’s programs during the 1950s were focused heavily on conforming women to the acceptable roles for their gender. Vast research has indicated the heavy impact gender roles and expectations for women had on mainstream America during the 1950s. However, research concerning women in state correctional institutions, and the impact that gender roles had on that sector of life are few. Examining social guidance films, magazines, and books from the 1950s will indicate the rigid gender roles of the time period. Interestingly, comparing the rigid gender roles of the 1950s mainstream media and society with the programs at the Ohio Reformatory for Women reveal a striking resemblance between the two. Additionally, a case study from 1954 illustrates the potential outcome for women who rejected their expected roles and therefore, solidifies the connection between gender roles and the penal system of the 1950s. A great deal of the existing literature focuses on the acceptable roles for women in society during the 1950s and the impact these roles had on women living in the domestic sphere. Exploring this sector of society will expand the understanding of gender role impact during the 1950s greatly.

Even as the most easily recognizable playwright of all time, William Shakespeare’s work is still increasingly deemed to be antiquated and therefore irrelevant for modern audiences. Iambic pentameter and archaic rhetoric both lack effortless accessibility. However, by removing Shakespeare’s most iconic tragic figure, Hamlet, from within the realm of the old-fashioned and recreating him in a more easily approachable era and location, the numerous plays of William Shakespeare will reinforce their modern-day significance. Though it is impossible to eliminate the uncertainty regarding Shakespeare’s works’ applicability, it is possible to minimize such skepticism by removing Hamlet from Denmark and instead placing him in 1930’s Oklahoma during the Dust Bowl. Utilizing elements of both theater and film: costuming, setting, language, and music, this presentation is an exploration of madness, murder, and mayhem created to represent a tether between humanity and the past, present, and future, ultimately making Shakespeare available to everyone.

“All the world loves a baby.” The sign outside Dr. Martin Couney’s baby sideshow proclaimed the wonder of his display, but in a way, it also reflected Dr. Couney’s plea for the statement to be true. Years earlier, as the twentieth century began, two differing philosophies swept across the Atlantic Ocean. The eugenics movement came to the United States in the early 1900’s hoping to better humanity’s future through the careful control of the transmission of genes. In the same years, a mysterious Dr. Martin Couney travelled across the ocean bringing with him his own ideas about bettering the future of the human race. Through his displays of premature babies at different world fairs and amusement parks across the country, Dr. Couney was able to sway American opinion about the value of the lives of its tiniest citizens. His efforts stood in sharp contrast with the philosophies espoused by the eugenics movement which feared the spread of genetic defects in those who had any medical complications, including a premature birth. Dr. Couney, and his babies who should not have lived, helped to change the public and medical opinion of the viability and humanity of those born too soon, all in the face of the American eugenics’ movement that purported that such babies should not even be given a chance at life.