Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:08:09.372Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feminist Criticism: A Tale of Two Bodies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

Sharon Marcus
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

For feminist criticism today it is, as perhaps it has always been, the best of times and the worst of times. When a critical school becomes the topic of a PMLA roundtable, it is safe to say that scholars currently consider it both solidly entrenched and dangerously diminished. Indeed, many would say that feminist criticism's success is the very sign of its failure, an indication that it has lost the renegade dynamism of its early days as an upstart outsider in the academy and declined into yet another stale paradigm on the verge of obsolescence, fit only to be recycled in anthologies or assessed in essays such as this one.

Type
Theories and Methodologies
Information
PMLA , Volume 121 , Issue 5 , October 2006 , pp. 1722 - 1728
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 2006

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

Works Cited

Rita, Felski. Literature after Feminism. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2003.Google Scholar
Ferriss, Suzanne, and Young, Mallory, eds. Chick Lit: The New Woman's Fiction. New York: Routledge, 2005.Google Scholar
Catherine, Gallagher. “A History of the Precedent: Rhetorics of Legitimation in Women's Writing.” Critical Inquiry 26 (2000): 309–27.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Sandra, and Gubar, Susan. The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination. New Haven: Yale UP, 1979.Google Scholar
John, Guillory. Cultural Capital: The Problem of Literary Canon Formation. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1993.Google Scholar
Lynn, Hunt. The Family Romance of the French Revolution. Berkeley: U of California P, 1992.Google Scholar
Hunter College Women's Studies Collective. Women's Realities, Women's Choices. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2005.Google Scholar
“Inequities Persist for Women and Non-Tenure-Track Faculty.” Academe Mar.-Apr. 2005:20–30. American Association of University Professors. Apr. 2005. 17 July 2006 <http://www.aaup.org/surveys/05z/zrep.htm>..>Google Scholar
Jakobsen, Janet R. “Introduction: Feminism Is Dead (Long Live Feminism).” S&F Online 3.3–4.1 (2005). 17 July 2006 <http://www.barnard.columbia.edu/sfonline/sfxxx/intro_01.htm>.Google Scholar
Claudia, Johnson. Equivocal Beings: Politics, Gender, and Sentimentality in the 1790s: Wollstonecraft, Radcliffe, Burney, Austen. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1995.Google Scholar
Claudia, Johnson. Jane Austen: Women, Politics, and the Novel. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1988.Google Scholar
Kantorowicz, Ernst H. The King's Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1957.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Elizabeth Lapovsky, and Beins, Agatha, eds. Women's Studies for the Future. New Brunswick: Rutgers UP, 2005.Google Scholar
Kolmar, Wendy K., and Bartkowski, Frances. Feminist Theory: A Reader. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw, 2005.Google Scholar
McKeon, Michael. The Secret History of Domesticity: Public, Private, and the Division of Knowledge. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 2005.Google Scholar
Elizabeth, Merrick. Miss Grace's Salon. 17 July 2006 <http://www.gracereadingseries.com/blog/>..' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Elizabeth,+Merrick.+Miss+Grace's+Salon.+17+July+2006+.>Google Scholar
D., Miller A. Jane Austen, or The Secret of Style. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2003.Google Scholar
Office of the Vice Provost for Diversity Initiatives. “Reports and Data.” 9 May 2006. Columbia U. 17 July 2006 <http://www.columbia.edu/cu/vpdi/reports_data.html>..>Google Scholar
Mary, Poovey. The Proper Lady and the Woman Writer: Ideology as Style in the Works of Mary Wollstonecraft, Mary Shelley, and Jane Austen. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1984.Google Scholar
Zinn, Maxine Baca, Hondagneu-Sotelo, Pierrette, and Michael, A. Messner, eds. Gender through the Prism of Difference. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2005.Google Scholar