Bookman is feeling poorly today so I am taking care of him. But I thought I’d take a moment to share a couple of quotes from Rereading Women by Sandra Gilbert.
This is from the essay “What Do Feminist Critics Want? Or, A Postcard from the Volcano,” written in 1980. Gilbert is trying to explain just what feminist critics are about:
Indeed, if I were to try to tell you very seriously what feminist criticism, as a way of thinking about literary texts, wants philosophically [...], I would tell you that at its most ambitious it wants to decode and demystify all the disguised questions and answers that have always shadowed the connections between textuality and sexuality, genre and gender, psychosexual identity and cultural authority.
I love ambitious thinking! Are feminist literary critics still pursuing this goal or has it expanded or changed? I haven’t read much current criticism in a while so I feel a bit out of the loop. Does anyone have thoughts on its current state?
The other quote I offer up is actually an epigraph to the essay “A Tarantella of Theory: Hélène Cixous’ and Catherine Clément’s Newly Born Woman.” The quote is by Hélène Cixous:
Everyone knows that a place exists which is not economically or politically indebted to all the vileness and compromise. That is not obliged to reproduce the system. That is writing. If there is a somewhere else that can escape the infernal repetition, it lies in that direction, where it writes itself, where it dreams, where it invents new worlds.
I find this to be rather inspiring. If there is anywhere we can create something outside of a patriarchal society, outside of a world filled with war and hate and greed and “vileness,” then writing just might be it. The only thing that limits us is our ability to imagine.
I suspect the quote came from Cixous’ essay “The Laugh of the Medusa” where she coins the term “écriture féminine”. I’ve not read the essay. I’ve always meant to, but I’ve read about it and Gilbert discusses it too. Anyone out there read the essay? Is it one I really should make the effort to get to?
Okay, off to check on Bookman.
Totally inspiring!
wherethereisjoy,
Read the essay? Oh boy, I lived the Cixous years as a graduate student with feminist leanings. I really like Cixous but you do have to read quite a lot of her to get to the good bits. She’s a crazy writer who does have huge ambitions and that’s sort of fun to watch. If you have a copy of The Book of Promethea in your library, borrow it to see what she’s about. It’s hard to get through all of it, but even dipping in here and there will give you a good idea. Or indeed read The Laugh of the Medusa, which is interesting, too. I confess I feel guilty that I haven’t read any feminist writing in years. I should – it’s a perspective that never fails to intrigue me. And do send my sympathies to Book man. Hope he feels much much better very soon.
Litlove, thanks for the tip on Cixous. I suspected you had read her
I do believe I have The Book of Promethea on my own bookshelves somewhere that I picked up secondhand who knows when. I’ll have to find it and take a dip. Gilbert got me all charged up and reminded me how much I love this stuff. I am eagerly looking forward to when you get to reading it! And thank you, Bookman has recovered and is almost completely well again.
Sorry to hear Bookman has been under the weather–hope he’s on the mend. I admire your reading choices (as always). Criticism is really interesting, but I don’t read as much as I’d like–though some of this may be a little over my head. Anything that makes me look at books differently or enhances my reading is a good thing.
Danielle, Bookman is back to 100% thanks! Thank goodness for quick bugs. I don’t think this would be over your head at all. Gilbert, though an academic, does not write like one. That doesn’t mean the reader doesn’t have to think or pay attention, Gilbert is very smart, but she is also accessible.