Serendip is an independent site partnering with faculty at multiple colleges and universities around the world. Happy exploring!

Reading Notes from "Genre and Gender"

Reading Notes from Mary Eagleton,
"Genre and Gender"

feminist criticism looks at genre in terms of sexual difference
and asks if we can create a criticism which is non-essentialist and non-reductive...

the novel became a possible form for women; lyricism was too assertive/egotistic
literary history privileges male-cominated forms; female forms were seen as less literary
generic divisions are not neutral , impartial; aesthetic judgements are ideologically bound

restricted access to literary production, women turned to private forms
subversive potential of women's writing: how transform male-dominated forms?
questioning (truth, coherence, resolution of) realist forms of writing: undermine symbolic order
non-realist forms permit women to express contradictions, fantasties, desires (l'ecriture feminine)

popular romantic fiction produced by, for, about women
female sub-culture classic case-study of sexual difference
romantic fiction a sign of women's dissatisfaction with their social lot, unfulfilled desires
subversive potential in compulsive, pleasurable aspects of romantic fiction:
fantasies in excess of the socially possible/acceptable

pre-condition: development of capitalism, industrialisation, urbanization:
denied middle-class women traditional occupations
opportunities in newness of form, low status, relative easiness to read
novel writing: domestic form of production (didn't disturb household, demanded no equipment)
materialist? rank biologist? interpretation?

theoretical problem:
concept of sexual difference can be used to promote reactionary and radical politics:
"narrowing of framework of experience and attitudes"
valorize difference as important, oppositional?
or expose fictive nature of socially constructed difference?

difficulty of locating specificity of women's writing
ambiguity/bisexuality of writing
gender as a critical category disappears

Can we create a criticism which is non-essentialist, non-reductive?