Scan barcode
Reviews
A Literature of Their Own: British Women Novelists From Brontë to Lessing by Elaine Showalter
krobart's review against another edition
3.0
See my review here:
https://whatmeread.wordpress.com/2021/02/02/review-1609-a-literature-of-their-own-british-novelists-from-bronte-to-lessing/
https://whatmeread.wordpress.com/2021/02/02/review-1609-a-literature-of-their-own-british-novelists-from-bronte-to-lessing/
misajane79's review against another edition
4.0
This is one of the classics in feminist literary theory. It's a survey of British women writers, showing how their womanhood shaped their writing. It both confirms and refutes the idea that there is such a thing as "women's literature" It pleased the former English major in me.
flappermyrtle's review against another edition
3.0
A Literature of Their Own is one of the major works of feminist literary criticism written in the second feminist wave. It is truly seminal in many of its ideas, and forms a brave attempt at finding and (re)creating a sense of feminine heritage in literature.
However, it is also flawed in many points. The work is barely intersectional and focuses on works written by white, middle-class female authors, mostly from England. Furthermore, it is a little unclear in its actual theory and methodology, while it clearly does have a political agenda. Showalter at times judges certain authors or groups of authors for their practice (be it feminine, feminist or female) and fails to admit this. As Toril Moi has also pointed out, Showalter basically wishes to set up a new canon, a female one, without questioning the need and logic behind a canon - enforcing one's idea of 'good literature' upon others, which is problematic.
This is a very good text to use as a spring board into the concept of gynocriticism, but I'd recommend reading it in tandem with Gilbert and Gubar's Madwoman in the Attic, which is clearer in its theoretical approach and is kind of driven by the same issues, while also looking at subsequent criticism of these books.
However, it is also flawed in many points. The work is barely intersectional and focuses on works written by white, middle-class female authors, mostly from England. Furthermore, it is a little unclear in its actual theory and methodology, while it clearly does have a political agenda. Showalter at times judges certain authors or groups of authors for their practice (be it feminine, feminist or female) and fails to admit this. As Toril Moi has also pointed out, Showalter basically wishes to set up a new canon, a female one, without questioning the need and logic behind a canon - enforcing one's idea of 'good literature' upon others, which is problematic.
This is a very good text to use as a spring board into the concept of gynocriticism, but I'd recommend reading it in tandem with Gilbert and Gubar's Madwoman in the Attic, which is clearer in its theoretical approach and is kind of driven by the same issues, while also looking at subsequent criticism of these books.
shaunnow38's review against another edition
4.0
Comprehensive study of the development and genealogies of women's writing in England from the early 19th century to the late 20th century. Showalter's writing is effective but very pleasant to read. The largest gaps I would note are in the exclusion of lesbian and bisexual cultures within women's writing, even as Showalter makes gestures towards those possibilities. Her analysis of Virginia Woolf's life and writing, for example, seems to lack a lot in the exclusion of her relationship with Vita Sackville-West. I don't know if this was a gap in knowledge at the time, or simply a choice on Showalter's part. If it is the former, then there is no fault to be had, if the latter, a serious gap in my opinion.
Overall, this text was a good introduction to the various threads of women's writing. It is definitely more literary history than literary theory, and it should be read as such.
Overall, this text was a good introduction to the various threads of women's writing. It is definitely more literary history than literary theory, and it should be read as such.
hannahmayreads's review against another edition
informative
medium-paced
4.0
…the Austen peaks, the Brontë cliffs, the Eliot range, and the Wolfe hills.
The four corners of women’s literature. But what lies between them? Lots!
There is still lots missing, writers of colour being the most obvious gap. Though Angela Carter, Audre Lord and Alice Walker are included in the last chapter, ‘Beyond the Female Aesthetic’, with particular reference to the collective acceptance speech Lord and Walker (along with Adrienne Rich) wrote for the 1974 National Book Awards that Showalter calls the “first manifesto of women’s literature". I recommend looking it up - it’s a profound read. But this book does stop fairly early on given it was first published in the 70s. The acknowledgements alone are a veritable who’s-who of writers from the 60s to 80s who are otherwise not mentioned in the book.
The chapter headings give a good indication of the ground to be covered, beginning with ‘The Female Tradition’ and ending on ‘Beyond the Female Aesthetic: Contemporary Women Novelists'. What unites them and what divides them is largely the theme throughout, and perhaps that thing is one and the same. But as Showalter points out,
There is still lots missing, writers of colour being the most obvious gap. Though Angela Carter, Audre Lord and Alice Walker are included in the last chapter, ‘Beyond the Female Aesthetic’, with particular reference to the collective acceptance speech Lord and Walker (along with Adrienne Rich) wrote for the 1974 National Book Awards that Showalter calls the “first manifesto of women’s literature". I recommend looking it up - it’s a profound read. But this book does stop fairly early on given it was first published in the 70s. The acknowledgements alone are a veritable who’s-who of writers from the 60s to 80s who are otherwise not mentioned in the book.
The chapter headings give a good indication of the ground to be covered, beginning with ‘The Female Tradition’ and ending on ‘Beyond the Female Aesthetic: Contemporary Women Novelists'. What unites them and what divides them is largely the theme throughout, and perhaps that thing is one and the same. But as Showalter points out,
…the concept of greatness for women novelists often turns out to mean four or five writers - Jane Austen, the Brontes, George Eliot, and Virginia Woolf… having lost sight of the minor novelists, who were the links in the chain between one generation to the next, we have not had a very clear understanding of the continuities in women’s writing…”
There is a vast number of years between Austen and Woolfe, and even more books. And this is before we’ve even mentioned that it was more often than not men doing all the talking about these novelists! The “Scylla of insufficient information and the Charybdis of abandons prejudice” as Showalter calls this conundrum.
The whole idea of there being 'women's literature', given we don’t talk about there being a 'men's literature', may feel preposterous in one sense. But there is so much food for thought here that I largely welcome the conversation. Sad though that the same conversation has been happening since the dawn of the female novelist in the 19th century (Austen, Brontë, Eliot, et al).
I’d love to know what Showalter would make of the 21st-century woman writer - does the label still apply? Have we regressed or pushed forward? You could probably make arguments for both, much as you could 100 years ago.
The whole idea of there being 'women's literature', given we don’t talk about there being a 'men's literature', may feel preposterous in one sense. But there is so much food for thought here that I largely welcome the conversation. Sad though that the same conversation has been happening since the dawn of the female novelist in the 19th century (Austen, Brontë, Eliot, et al).
I’d love to know what Showalter would make of the 21st-century woman writer - does the label still apply? Have we regressed or pushed forward? You could probably make arguments for both, much as you could 100 years ago.
As the women’s movement turns to these silent women, they may find their voice at last: perhaps the next literary generation will be theirs.
bowienerd_82's review against another edition
4.0
This basically boils down to a textbook, but it's still a well-written, interesting one. Clearly, Showalter put a lot of love, thought, and research into it, and it shows.
My main critique is that at times, I wished the scope was either much wider, or much smaller. There were many times when Showalter would make minor mentions of an author or a work before moving on to another topic, and I'd be left wishing for more details. Also, the appendix of female author biographies could definitely have been far more detailed.
But still, this was an ambitious project that was well-realized.
My main critique is that at times, I wished the scope was either much wider, or much smaller. There were many times when Showalter would make minor mentions of an author or a work before moving on to another topic, and I'd be left wishing for more details. Also, the appendix of female author biographies could definitely have been far more detailed.
But still, this was an ambitious project that was well-realized.
notafraidofvirginiawoolf's review against another edition
4.0
Highly interesting and readable, though obviously a little "2nd wave" in its conclusions for my tastes. Extremely well written and organized