Abstract
Several feminist commentaries on Emma Goldman have focused critical attention on tensions between her anarchist feminist demands for freedom in personal relations and her longing for a stable and fulfilling relationship with a man. This article turns those inquiries around, asking why feminist readings of Goldman have featured those questions. I suggest that Goldman’s implicit practices of rhetoric and genre, as much as her explicit ideology and gendered social relations, encourage critics to look for consistency between her political theory and her personal life. I look at Goldman’s habits of genre as shaped both by the chronological practices of film media versus theater and by the discursive practices of modernism versus those of romanticism and realism. My goal is to open up a field of questioning in which consistency between her ideological commitments and her love life takes a backseat to inquiry into how she made meaning in politics and in love.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
