Reply to comment

I wanted to thank you all, again, for taking the time to respond so thoughtfully to the paper that Liz and I wrote. One writes, sends it out...

and wonders if-and-how it might matter. So it was great to learn.

I got a lot from your responses, including some very useful critiques of Liz's and my decision not to locate ourselves personally (and not to locate Bryn Mawr as a women's college--how wierd was that?). We also got a challenging account of what it feels like to participate in a classroom that is an "experimental lab," under the instruction of a professor who is as much an observer as a participant --not only in class, but on the forum, and in her reflections and writings elsewhere.

What also matters a great deal to me, in your responses, is your appreciation of the large and general usefulness of the literary concept of "synecdoche" (real interdisciplinary satisfaction there!). You asked if the word "feminist" is synecdochtal: Is it impossible for one word to encompass everything that feminism implies? (so--are all words synecdochal?). And you saw that synecdoche could also be a way of figuring intellectual practice generally conceived: Such a realization and statement speaks to the exclusiveness and reduction of academia.

Non-exclusively: Thanks!