Feminist literary history

Abstract

there exists any New Wave of feminism in the 1990s, may be termed more enlightened materialism. Following the trendy 1980s cult-like adherence post-structuralism in its various forms, current feminist literary criticism calls for thorough spring cleaning of our somewhat untidy theoretical closets. Janet Todd's Feminist Literary History declares itself fmly at the forefront of this movement, adopting Wollstonecraft's much disparaged socio-historically based Enlightenment philosophy as its primary organizing principle. Todd maintains that however battered, deconstructed, and falsified, the enlightenment's individualistic bourgeois liberalism, its belief in rational advance, and its aim of increasing freedom and equality through greater awareness of self andculture still form the ground of hope and of collective action. Todd not only manages stay true this rationalist philosophy throughout this engaging work, she does service by injecting great deal of lively wit into what might otherwise become dry theoretical discourse. In what she describes as defence of the early socio-historical enterprise, Todd is particularly apt at providing intelligent and provocative assessments of the shortcomings, blindspots and assumptions of several theories. She singles out psychoanalytic theory and deconstruction for specific critique. Both, she concedes, are attractive in their conception of the decentred subject but, she warns, to decenter out of existence is leave ourselves open remaining locked in the categories that we bring bear on literature at this specific moment in intellectual history and mystifl history into the timeless model of psychoanalysis. According Todd, feminist literary critics who have employed psychoanalytic and deconstructive theories have privileged theory over literature. Furthermore, historically-rooted female experience has been cast aside in favour of the idea of woman within these paradigms. It is time, Todd declares, that we historicize the discourse, methods and aims of an otherwise unquestionable psychoanalysis, and recognize that in its unproblematized obliteration of binary opposites, deconstruction aims at the evaporation of female experience. It is time, in other words, that we don our hermeneutics of suspicion thinking-caps when confronted with an apparently wonderful new theory. Chances are that we will discover patriarchal epistemology at its root. As British feminist, Todd situates herself mid-point between the American versus the French feminist debate. For Todd, while American feminists stress history and overlook issues of class and ideology, French feminists have been overwhelmed by what she deems the howling ps ycho-babble of psychoanalysis and deconstruction. Ideologically aware yet self-righteous British feminists, Todd claims, are in need of a practical and historical feminist criticism in the ~rnerican mode. Also, certain insights from post-structuralism should be appropriated by British and American feminists. AU, in short, stand gain at this pot-luck Dinner Party featuring the culinary delights of feminist theory. Although Todd specifies in her introduction that she does not wish present an overview of feminist criticism, thedust jacket of her book labels an introductory text feminist studies. This is undoubtedly part of Routledge's marketing strategy, but is not complete misrepresentation of the work. Todd's book does trace the general movement of the Western feminist debate from the 1960s the present day and, in this, is highly reminiscent of Toril Moi's popular Sexual Textual Politics (1985). Indeed, in spite of the fact that Todd insightfully critiques Moi's book and its obvious championing of French feminist thought, Todd does not acknowledge her debt the structural outline of Moi's study for the first three chapters of her own. A certain anxiety of influence may be readily detected here. (It is interesting note that Elaine Showalter falls under attack in both books.) In the final analysis, Todd's study successfully manages cover more territory in more discerningly critical fashion than Moi's. Apart from an excellent chapter devoted the generally taboo question of men in feminist criticism, Todd provides much needed synopsis of the writings of representative British feminist theoristsMichelle Barrett and Cora Kaplan are highlighted. This latter inclusion is particularly commendable and long overdue, for if truly politicized feminist future path lies anywhere--and Todd stresses that, unlike our pioneering foremothers, we have forgotten that the primary aim of feminist criticism should be the subversion of patriarchy-it seems (to this reviewer anyway) lie in the pragmatically footed, ideologically aware standpoint of the British feminist movement. Todd seems agree, but underlines that must be revived with blood transfusion of empiricism, historicism and pragmatism in order fulfil1 our ever-expanding needs. Feminist Literary History deserves special accolades, is because forces us recognize the specificity and materiality of history and its impact on theory. If theory has taught us anything, Todd writes, it is that we are all theorized and that historicaldiscourses of differentkinds are never transcendental truths. Such historicizing process involves forging links with our feminist foremothers and revising our aims and aspirations for the movement's future. It also necessitates an examination of the specific socio-his-