Feminist Criticism in the Wilderness by Elaine Showalter

Feminism by Elaine Showalter: [Elaine Showalter (b. 1941). Along with Nina Baym’s, Woman’s Fiction, Fiction, (197), Showalter’s The  New Feminist Criticism Criticism,, (19!) an" Speaking of Gender (199) ha#e arg$e" %or, a s&e'i%i'ally, ’ female framework framework for the analysis analysis of women’ women’ss literature literature.. er boo, A boo, A iterature iterature of Their Their !wn (1977), *$i'ly establishe" itsel% as an a$thoritati#e st$"y o% its s$b+e't an" a stan"ar" tet boo in the ra&i"ly b$rgeoning %iel" o% women’s st$"ies. Showalter’s wor has &ioneere" %rame wor on 'reating a woman-'entere" literary history as well.

Introduction:

/eminist literary 'riti'ism is essentially line" to the &oliti'al mo#ement %or the sees an" an en" to "is'rimination against women. /eminist 'riti'ism sees to $n'o#er the i"eology o%  &atriar'hal so'iety in wors o% art. 0t &lea"s %or the the re&resentations o% women an" arg$es that these re&resentations mas so'io-&oliti'al o&&ression o% the 'ategory o% women, b y +$sti%ying these o&&ressions an" nat$raliing them. /or %eminist, the tet is a b attle gro$n" where a't$al  &ower relations between men an" women are &laye" o$t. Origins and Historical Background:

2riters lie 3arry 2ollstone'ra%t in A in"i'ation o% the 5ights o% 2omen, (1796), male a$thors lie . S. 3ill in 8he S$b+e'tion o% 2omen, (19), an" /rie"ri'h Engels in 8he :rigin o% the /amily, (14), wrote o% the nee" to rethin the role o% women an" so'ial o&&ression against them. 0n the early 6;th 'ent$ry, :li#e S'hreiner, irgi irginia nia 2ool% 2ool% an" later Simone "e Bea$#oir ha#e written on the gen"er *$estions %rom the &ers&e'ti#e o% women an" oriente" women towar"s iss$es lie e"$'ation, marriage, e'onomi's, se an" morals. 2ith 19;s the women’s mo#ement be'ame a ma+or &oliti'al %or'e, while the mo#ement too  #ario$s iss$es %or the gen"er "ebate, in'l$"ing s'ien'e, &oliti's, e'onomi's, '$lt$res, an" e&istemology. riti'al 0n*$iry, in 191, she %in"s %eminist 'riti'ism no more $ni%ie", b$t more a"#ent$ro$s in assimilating an" engaging with theory= “it now appears that what looked like a theoretical impasse was actually an evolutionary

 phase.” 

She s$b-"i#i"es her essay into si s$b-"i#isions, an" ea'h "i#ision has s$btitles also. 0n these, si "i#isions she "is'$sse", at length, the #ario$s as&e'ts o% women writing. 8hey are as %ollows?

 "luralism and the Feminist Criti#ue$ Showalter begins with *$oting riti'ism in the 2il"erness’, (19;), where no women 'riti's are "is'$sse", b$t artman "oes "es'ribe a %eminine s&irit 'alle", the m$se o% 'riti'ism. 3oreo#er, she s$ggests that the wil"erness o% theory lies between %eminist i"eology an" the liberal i"eal o% "isintereste"ness. Cntil #ery re'ently she says? “feminist criticism has not had a theoretical  basis; it has been an empirical orphan in the theoretical storm.” 

Showalter arg$es with Dolo"$y’s &oint o% #iew that %eminist 'riti'ism m$st altogether aban"on its ho&e “…of establishing some basic conceptual  model.” 

Showalter a#ers that i% women 'riti's see their 'riti'al +ob as inter&retation an" reinter&retation, they m$st be 'ontent with F&l$ralism’ as their 'riti'al stan'e. B$t i% they wish to as *$estions abo$t the &ro'ess an" the 'ontets o% writing, i% they gen$inely wish to "e%ine themsel#es to the $ninitiate", they 'annot r$le o$t the &ros&e't o% theoreti'al 'onsens$s at this early stage. She 'on'l$"es the %irst &ortion with ass$m&tion that, %eminist 'riti'ism m$st %in" its own s$b+e't, its own system an" its own #oi'e. G He%ining the /eminine I @yno-'riti's?

Showalter belie#es that /eminist >riti'ism has gra"$ally shi%te" its 'entre %rom re#isionary rea"ing to a s$staine" in#estigation o% literat$re by women. ere, 'alling %or new mo"els base" on the women’s e&erien'e rather than a blin" a""i'tion to an" a"a&tation o% mas'$line theories an" mo"els. Showalter la$n'he" the sear'h %or gyno'riti's. @yno-'riti'ism sho$l", in Showalter’s "es'ri&tions, loo at “the history, style, themes, genres, and  structures of writing by women; the  psychodynamics of female creativity” 

She arg$es that it is this in" o% 'riti'ism that rein%or'es &atriar'hal str$'t$res o% &owers. 8he 197;s ha#e been mare" by a shi%t o% 'riti'al attention %rom s$'h e#i"ently &atriar'hal an" an"rotets to Fgynotets (i.e. tet by women). G 2omen’s 2riting an" 2omen’s Bo"y? “…more body, hence, more writing.” 

 I  >io$s. Showalter asserts that %eminist 'riti'ism whi'h itsel% tries to be biologi'al to write %rom the 'riti'’s bo"y has been intimate, 'on%essional, o%ten inno#ati#e in style an" %orm. /$rther, she states that the &ro'ess o% literary 'reation is analogi'ally m$'h more similar to gestation, labo$r an" "eli#ery that it is to insemination. ere, Showalter ra"i'ally ass? “If to write is metaphorically to give birth from what organ can males generate tets!” 

owe#er, she 'on'l$"es this &ortion o% the essay by *$oting 3iller’s wor"s, who so$ght the "i%%eren'e o% women’s literary &ra'ti'e in,

“…the body of her writing and not in the writing  of her body” 

2omen’s