The Woman They Could Not Silence: One Woman, Her Incredible Fight for Freedom, and the Men Who Tried to Make Her Disappear

Nonfiction | Biography | Adult | Published in 2021

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Download PDF

Summary

Background

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Part 1, Chapters 1-15

Part 2, Chapters 16-21

Part 3, Chapters 22-30

Part 4, Chapters 31-35

Part 5, Chapters 36-47

Part 6, Chapter 48-Epilogue

Key Figures

Themes

Index of Terms

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Themes

Tenacity, Perseverance, and Integrity as Weapons against Injustice

Elizabeth Packard was triumphant in outsmarting and outlasting her husband, McFarland, and the reach of the Jacksonville psychiatric institution. Bolstered by her unwavering faith and determination to be reunited with her children, she took every circumstance in which she was placed and found a way to convert those experiences into opportunities for serving God and collecting information and reflections that could eventually be utilized to create greater change. Elizabeth was only human in that she, like anyone else, was profoundly affected and discouraged by her time in the “asylum,” especially when she was moved to the nightmarish environment of Eighth Ward. Though her mood might have suffered, she never sacrificed her character, personality, or integrity and never stopped trying to create meaningful human connections with those around her. She wanted to have positive interactions and impacts in the moment and carry the opportunity to create more change in the future.

When people met her at the “asylum,” they, like those in her personal life outside the walls, could not fathom how someone could declare her “insane.” She became a leader and an example among patients and attendants because her true convictions, strength of faith, and character governed each of her actions. She was tireless because she had no choice but to persevere and because she knew that there would be no way for her to support herself outside the “asylum” if she could not find a way to utilize the transformative experience to her advantage.

Her integrity was seriously called into question only once when the letter that she wrote to McFarland was presented during the inquiries made by General Fuller. She might have accepted one of the many excuses for writing it that Fuller had tried to offer her, and she had to fight that letter for the rest of her life, but she admitted the circumstances under which it was written and accepted her flaws in ways that her enemies could not. During her trial and in her political activism, Elizabeth fought against Theophilus and McFarland’s attempts to paint her as irrational, but it was her presence in person that convinced those who eventually joined the fight with her that she was worthy of their support and that her cause was worthy of their involvement. Elizabeth might, at any time, have acquiesced to feelings of hopelessness, loneliness, defeat, and betrayal, but it was her limitless faith and the courage she drew from the inspiration to help others that kept her driving forward until the end of her life.

Hypocrisy, Vengeance, Vindictiveness and Abuse of Power Versus Duty, Moral Obligation, Righteousness, and Advocacy for Others

In The Woman They Could Not Silence, men appear on opposite sides of the Victorian moral divide. Theophilus, his supporters, and McFarland all want to control and subdue Elizabeth and try to convince her that they know her better than she knows herself. In contrast, Elizabeth’s sons, her friends, her political allies, those who testified at her trial, and the members of the jury who saw in her the “sanity” she had never questioned fought for and alongside her against fellow members of their gender who they perceived as abusing their power.

The ideal mid-19th century man of the period saw his role as protector and defender of the “weak,” innocent, and those unable to self-advocate as a calling. For some, it was religious in nature, entwined with messages from the Bible, while for others, it was more about being a proper Victorian gentleman, which carried with it the duty to stand up and use one’s voice for those who could not. There were men among her supporters who may not have agreed with the ferocity and intensity with which Elizabeth pursued her rights, thinking perhaps that she was not as meek and elegant as some ladies, but who nevertheless looked beyond her methods and recognized that she had not been treated with the appropriate kindness and gentility that her husband should have afforded her.

Similarly, one of the most significant elements contributing to how a Victorian woman was perceived was her relationship with her children, and it was obvious to everyone how devastated she was by her separation and alienation from them. It was unnatural for them to be apart, and her anguish and heartbreak were exactly what they expected to see from someone of her standing and stature. At Elizabeth’s trial, it became obvious to experts and laymen alike the extent to which Theophilus and McFarland had tried to confound Elizabeth and those demanding answers for her. The members of the jury and the mob who went after Theophilus outside the courtroom all saw what he was trying to accomplish. It is quite possible that five members of the jury, being themselves Presbyterians, were disappointed and angered, having expected more not just from a middle-class man of standing but from a minister.

When it came to their pursuit of her reputation after Elizabeth was legally adjudicated as “sane” and following her successes in publishing and politics, Theophilus and McFarland were primarily concerned about harming Elizabeth’s reputation. In contrast, Elizabeth simply wanted to look out for others. To do that, she had to explain the extent of McFarland’s power and influence so that the public would realize that this amount of absolute power had the potential to be very damaging to those who could not speak for themselves. When McFarland presented Elizabeth’s letter at General Fuller’s hearing, the politicians investigating alongside Fuller were disappointed and surprised by the content because they thought better of Elizabeth. However, it is also likely that they and those who subsequently read the publications of the letter in the press thought very little of McFarland for exposing such a personal and intimate document that he had promised to destroy. This contrast in leaked publications is demonstrated when General Fuller leaked a document not personally damning or damaging but factually incriminating—the full findings of the investigation.

“Insanity” as a Prejudicial, Weaponized Label Difficult to Refute or Retract

Moore describes Elizabeth’s label of “insane” as the shadow stitched to her. Even before Elizabeth became an activist and an enemy of her husband on a national scale, Theophilus used the fact that she had once been in a psychiatric facility against her. Illustration of this prejudice, particularly during the mid-19th century when less was understood about mental illness, becomes evident when Moore shares that Elizabeth’s father and brothers immediately believed Theophilus when he informed them that Elizabeth had begun to display characteristics of “insanity.” They believed her previous commitment to a psychiatric facility continued to hold weight and predictive power even though it had been 24 years since Elizabeth had been at Worcester State Hospital, and she had only been there for six weeks.

As it has been throughout human history, the suggestion that someone else is “insane” holds myriad motives and intentions when it is lobbed against another person. It is often used to discredit someone’s views or claims, as in Elizabeth’s case, and it has often been an emotionally charged concept, frequently intertwined with fear and mistrust of the person described that way. Another aspect dictating the strength of a claim against another’s mental health is the degree to which that person has authority in another’s life. A close loved one, like a parent or a spouse, is often seen as an authority because of the amount of time spent with the accused and the secrets and revelations that can be provided by those who know them best, whether or not they are being correctly interpreted. As in Elizabeth’s case, a physician or other person with a good reputation or political and social connections that the accused does not have can also carry weight. Part of what made Elizabeth’s accusations of “insanity” so difficult to refute was the difficulty in reaching one’s audience in the 19th century. Elizabeth was published in newspapers, magazines, and in her own self-authored pieces, and yet there were still many who read her words and counted her “insane,” despite the decision of the Kankakee jury, who took only seven minutes to confirm that she was “sane.” Moore does not delve much into Libby’s experience with her battle with mental illness, but one might consider intergenerational assumptions about “insanity,” which can be found throughout human history, with greater intensity and emphasis in certain decades over others. There was no doubt among the Packard family that Libby was indeed very ill, but it is possible that her mother’s high profile as a person once accused of “insanity” and still thought “insane” by others might have affected how her illness was also perceived, particularly in her later years in an “asylum” when her mother was not there to advocate for her.