Bluestockings ...
Posted by Leanne S on July 03, 1998 at 12:18:39:
In response to Jane Austen & Feminism, written by Patricia Bingham on July 01, 1998 at 20:56:16
] Among early reviewers, Scott shows an uneasy awareness of Austen's feminist morals, while Whately reveals a more sympathetic understanding, but neither discusses it overtly, perhaps because it could not be discussed without resurrecting discredible scandal and misunderstanding. By the mid-19c, no one thought of connecting Jane Austen and Wollstonecraft as feminist moralists, and in the mid-20c, the ‘enduring problem of Jane Austen criticism' was defined as ‘scale versus stature; the slightest of the matter and the authority of the matter'. As more has become known about Wollstonecraft as ‘female philosopher' and about the rational feminism of her time, it has become easier to place the Austen novels in a context of feminism ideas, where the ‘enduring problem' can be seen in a new light.
Ah, me! Well, you've got me netsurfing for bluestocking information :) I turned up an interesting pamphlet by a contemporary of Austen's, as well as an archive of resources on bluestockings of the 18th & 19th centuries, with some contemporary commentary (by the likes of Byron). In the pamphlet, Mary Robinson speaks of the social double-standards of the day. Reminded me a little of Lizzie.
Mary Robinson's Thoughts on Mental Subordination
- Egads! The links again Leanne S 12:23:06 7/03/98
(2)
- The link yet again (sorry all) Leanne S 12:25:47 7/03/98
(1)
- Glad you got there eventually! Caroline 12:13:52 7/04/98
(0)
- Glad you got there eventually! Caroline 12:13:52 7/04/98
(0)
- The link yet again (sorry all) Leanne S 12:25:47 7/03/98
(1)
Posting followups to old messages is disabled; instead go to the main index and post a new message which mentions this one.
