Reply to comment

I think that Sosnoski’s article is a very thought provoking piece. I noticed a lot of parallels between this article and Woolf’s Three Guineas, in particular Sosnoski’s denouncement of inherent, male competitiveness and the importance of degrees and prestige. He explains how modern literary criticism was brought about due to an increasingly competitive atmosphere of professionalism and the “vertical movement” or climbing of career ladders.

We established in class that Bryn Mawr was modeled on patriarchal institutions and is very distinct from the type of university that Woolf describes as necessary, however can something not be said for its policy of not discussing grades? I realize that Bryn Mawr still awards student Cum Laude and academic awards, however I do believe that in agreeing to not discuss grades openly we are striving to eliminate the competitiveness that is inherent in so many colleges and institutions?

Sosnoski uses the image of a ‘Magister Implicatus’ to “concretize the sum total of performances now demanded for accreditation as a professional critic”. He seems to suggest that is the profile that the majority of the business and professional world has to submit to in order to be “successful”. It is interesting to think about the role of a business-woman in this context. What is considered of a woman who strives to achieve a top position in a company? Is she succumbing to the image of ‘Magister Implicatus’?

I’m a new to feminist thought and theory… but does this type of thinking devalue the achievements of the First Wave Feminists? In striving for equal rights and participation in predominantly male institutions and politics are we too participating in a world of ‘Magister Implicatus’ and simply perpetuating the status-quo?