The Myth of Judith Shakespeare: Creating the Canon of Women's Literature

Abstract

theory of female poetic, others, as typified by work of Virago Press, have been in search of actual texts themselves in an attempt to retrieve out-of-print works by women authors. Still other critics have focused their attentions on presenting women's writing in a format which would permit it to be integrated into a standard college curriculum. Although seemingly diverse, feminist literary criticism, regardless of differing methodologies, has as a shared goal re-visioning of literary institutions, desire to recognize assumptions which have governed reading of women's texts and their production in past and present. Given appearance of a scholarly anthology purporting to delineate the in English of women's writing, a production which would seem to unite search for a female poetic with retrieval of texts, it seems appropriate for feminist scholars themselves to stop and consider direction women's literary history is taking and conclusions it is reaching based on this new canon of women's literature, one which will provide materials for those beginning their work in women's studies. Such endeavors have opened up many valuable opportunities for study of heretofore lost women writers. I, however, would like to consider tradition behind writing of history of women's literature in this century and formation of a canon from such efforts. Whether one's interests are in gynocriticism, gynesis, 6criture feminine, or textuality, it is necessary of course to have a text to analyze. And whether or not one approves of concept of a canon, or shudders at thought of anthologies, phenomenon they embody deserves attention as an indication of wider, popular conception of women and women's writings. Are we as feminist critics fully conscious of assumptions on which