Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T22:57:46.065Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“The Lot of Gifted Ladies Is Hard”: A Study of Harriet Taylor Mill Criticism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2020

Jo Ellen Jacobs
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The question, “Why has Harriet Taylor MM appeared in the history of philosophy as she has?” has several answers. The answers intertwine the personality and polities of Harriet, the sexism of those who wrote of her (which was a reflection of the overall status of women during the period the commentator wrote), misunderstandings of the means and meaning of her collaboration with John Stuart Mill, and the disturbing challenge of her questioning.

Type
Research Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , Summer 1994 , pp. 132 - 162
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashworth, M. 1916. The marriage of John Stuart Mill. Englishwoman 30: 159–72.Google Scholar
Atwood, Margaret. 1989. Biographobia: Some personal reflections on the act of biography. In Nineteenth‐century lives: Essays presented to Jerome Hamilton Buckley, ed.Lockridge, Lawrence S., Maynard, John, and Stone, Donald D.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
August, Eugene. 1975. John Stuart Mill: A mind at large. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
Bain, Alexander. 1882. John Stuart Mill: A criticism with personal recollections. London: Longmans, Green & Co.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borchard, Ruth. 1957. John Stuart Miu: The man. London: Watts.Google Scholar
Bourne, HenryFox, Richard. 1873. John Stuart Mill: A sketch of his life. Examiner 17:582–86.Google Scholar
Courtney, William. 1889. The life of John Stuart Mill. London: Walter Scott.Google Scholar
Cranston, Maurice. 1959. Mr. and Mrs. Mill on liberty. The Listener 62: 385–86.Google Scholar
Diffenbaugh, Guy Linton. 1923. Mrs. Taylor seen through other eyes than Mill's. Sewanee Review 31: 198–204.Google Scholar
Ede, Lisa, and Lunsford, Andrea. 1990. Singular texts/plural authors: Perspectives on collaborative uniting. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Ellery, John B. 1964. John Stuart MiU. New York: Twayne.Google Scholar
Elliot, Hugh S. R., ed. 1910. The Letters of John Stuart Mill. Vol. 1. New York: Longmans, Green and CoGoogle Scholar
Faludi, Susan. 1991. Backlash:The undeclared war against American women. New York: Crown.Google Scholar
Garnett, Richard. 1910. The life of W. J. Fox. London: John Lane at Bodley Head.Google Scholar
Hagberg, Knut. 1930. Personalities and powers. Trans.Sprigge, Elizabeth and Napier, Claude. London: John Lane at Bodley Head.Google Scholar
Hamburger, Joseph. 1965. Intellectuals in politics: John Stuart Mill and the philosophic radicals. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Hamilton, Mary Agnes. N. d. [c.1932.] Sidney and Beatrice Webb: A study in contemporary biography. London: Sampson Low, Marston.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. A. 1951. John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor: Their friendship and subsequent marriage. New York: Augustus M. Kelley.Google Scholar
Held, Virginia. 1971. Justice and Harriet Taylor. The Nation (October 25): 405–6.Google Scholar
Henshaw, S. E. 1874. John Stuart Mill and Mrs. Taylor. Overland Monthly 13:516–23.Google Scholar
Himmelfarb, Gertrude. 1965. The two Mills. The New Leader 10(May): 26, 28‐29.Google Scholar
Himmelfarb, Gertrude. 1974. On liberty and liberalism: The case of John Stuart Mill. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Kamm, Josephine. 1977. John Stuart Mill in love. London: Gordon & Cremonesi.Google Scholar
Le Doeuf, Michêle. 1987. Women and Philosophy. In French feminist thought, ed.Moi, Toril, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Le Doeuf, Michêle. 1991. Hipparchia's choice: An essay concerning women, philosophy, etc. Trans.Selous, Trista. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Marston, Mansfield. 1873. The life of John Stuart Mill: politician and philosopher, critic and metaphysician. London: F. Farrah.Google Scholar
Mazlish, Bruce. 1975. James and John Stuart Mill: Father and son in the nineteenth century. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1982. On Liberty. Himmelfarb, Gertrude, ed. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Mill‐Taylor Collection. British Library of Political and Economic Science of the London School of Economics.Google Scholar
Mineka, Francis E. 1944. The dissidence of dissent: “The Monthly Repository,” 1806‐1838. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Mineka, Francis E. 1963. The Autobiography and the lady. University of Toronto Quarterly 32:301–6.Google Scholar
Packe, Michael St. John. 1954. The life of John Stuart Mill. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Pappe, H. O. 1960. John Stuart Mill and the Harriet Taylor myth. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
Priestley, F. E. L. and Robson, J. M., eds. The collected works of John Stuart Mill. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Robbins, L. 1957. Packe on Mill. Economics 24(August): 250–59. Also published in John Stuart Mill: Critical assessments, vol. 4, ed. John Cunningham Wood. London: Routledge, 1988.Google Scholar
Robson, John. 1966. Harriet Taylor and John Stuart Mill: Artist and scientist. Queen's Quarterly 73: 167–86.Google Scholar
Rose, Phyllis. 1984. Parallel lives: Five Victorian marriages. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Rossi, Alice S., ed. 1970. Essays on sex equality, by John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor Mill. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ryan, Alan. 1970. John Stuart Mill. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Ryan, Alan. 1991. Sense and sensibility in Mill's political thought. In A cultivated mind: Essays on]. S. Mill presented to John M. Robson, ed.Laine, Michael. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Stillinger, Jack, ed. 1961. The early draft of John Stuart Mill's “Autobiography.” Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Strachey, Ray. 1928. The cause: A short history of the women's movement in Great Britain. Portway: Cedric Chivers.Google Scholar
Tatalovich, A. 1973. John Stuart Mill: The subjection of women: An analysis. Southern Quarterly 12(1): 87–105. Also published in John Stuart Mill: Critical assessments, vol. 4, ed. John Cunningham Wood. London: Routledge, 1988.Google Scholar
Taylor, Mary. 1912. Mrs. John Stuart Mill: A vindication by her granddaughter. Nineteenth Century and after 71: 357–63.Google Scholar
Trilling, Diana. 1952. Mills intellectual beacon. Partisan Review 19: 115–16, 118‐120.Google Scholar
Tulloch, Gail. 1989. Mill and sexual equality. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar