Three Guineas

Given the nature of the essay, letters are an important motif throughout. The essay itself begins with an acknowledgement of the basic practices of letter writing. “Three years is a long time to leave a letter unanswered” (3), Woolf admits, thereby setting up the premise of Three Guineas. This short statement carries a number of important signifiers. Firstly, Woolf concedes that the problem outlined in the letter (how to prevent war) is still pertinent. Furthermore, she signals that this letter has lodged itself in her mind for so long that she has been driven to reply. Her words are also an apology for breaking the conventions of letter writing, while operating within the format itself. Finally, she seems to address the letter to an individual, but, as a book, it is now available for a wider audience to read. Within eleven words, Woolf has established, accepted, and then broken with important conventions of letter writing.

The central thesis put forward by the correspondent—that war can be prevented and that Woolf can help—is one that Woolf herself finds deplorable, as it displays a misunderstanding of the nature of war and the nature of society. It seems as though she has obsessed over this particular letter, recognizing the same fault throughout society, and has finally felt compelled to do something about it. By addressing her letter to the individual but allowing the society to read it, she is attempting to address every person through the same personal mode. She is seeking to talk to people on an individual level—and they, in turn, will read the letter as though they are glimpsing a private conversation—thus drawing them deeper into the world than if they were simply reading a manifesto or an article.

As well as being a symbol of how to address society, the letter becomes an important motif, especially when Woolf begins to imagine further letters she might write in the future. When Woolf attempts to “draft a letter” (31) to the treasurer of the women’s school, she surrounds this suggestion with very specific words. “Let us risk it” (31), she says, with the focus on “us” and “risk.” The use of the collective pronoun suggests a camaraderie with the correspondent that is lacking in many other areas of the text. There is also a hint of patronization, as though Woolf is teaching letter writing to a child. The word “risk” is an ironic choice considering that the drafting of a hypothetical letter seems to contain no inherent danger. This facetious tone becomes increasingly familiar throughout the essay, hinting at the anger Woolf feels toward the respondent. She channels this anger through the conventions of letter writing, even when writing a letter within a letter.

This notion of a letter within a letter is important, as it takes the framing device of the essay and escalates it even further. While in the main body of the essay, Woolf only occasionally turns to imagery and description to make her point, both appear much more in the hypothetical letters. When she describes burning down buildings, she uses almost lyrical words, dropping the pretense of polite letter writing she upholds throughout most of the essay. Woolf implores the treasurer to take her donation, “not to burn the house down, but to make its windows blaze” (77), and the mode of appeal switches from a simple, descriptive verb (burn) to a much more vivid, dramatic image (make its windows blaze). By switching the style of language when writing a letter within a letter, Woolf draws a distinction between her two audiences; she writes one way for a man and another way for a woman. Each sex needs to hear a different message, so her letter-writing style changes depending on her audience.