{"title":"Fantasies of Belonging, Fears of Precarity","authors":"M. Bradshaw","doi":"10.2307/j.ctvx070vh.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"“Fantasies of Belonging, Fears of Precarity” considers the politics of late twentieth-century feminist reclamation work in modernist literary studies. Many prolific women artists were doubly left behind, first by the New Critics, and then, several generations later, by feminist scholars who, in their work recovering women artists lost to New Criticism’s masculinist narrative did not find a place for them in what quickly became a narrow, and predictable, feminist canon. This chapter focuses on Amy Lowell and Edith Sitwell, women whose multiple roles as poets, editors, and critics allowed them significant access to power and with it, the opportunity to mentor and support other women. And yet, as the chapter demonstrates, they did not. Despite rich personal relationships with women, neither Sitwell nor Lowell had significant or lasting professional relationships with other women. Their subsequent exclusion from feminist modernist literary criticism perhaps tells us as much about the identifications and interests that drove late twentieth-century feminist recovery work as it does about the inclusion of more now-canonical figures.","PeriodicalId":434558,"journal":{"name":"Women Making Modernism","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Women Making Modernism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvx070vh.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
“Fantasies of Belonging, Fears of Precarity” considers the politics of late twentieth-century feminist reclamation work in modernist literary studies. Many prolific women artists were doubly left behind, first by the New Critics, and then, several generations later, by feminist scholars who, in their work recovering women artists lost to New Criticism’s masculinist narrative did not find a place for them in what quickly became a narrow, and predictable, feminist canon. This chapter focuses on Amy Lowell and Edith Sitwell, women whose multiple roles as poets, editors, and critics allowed them significant access to power and with it, the opportunity to mentor and support other women. And yet, as the chapter demonstrates, they did not. Despite rich personal relationships with women, neither Sitwell nor Lowell had significant or lasting professional relationships with other women. Their subsequent exclusion from feminist modernist literary criticism perhaps tells us as much about the identifications and interests that drove late twentieth-century feminist recovery work as it does about the inclusion of more now-canonical figures.