William Bradford's Books: Of Plimmoth Plantation and the Printed Word (review)

Julie Sievers
{"title":"William Bradford's Books: Of Plimmoth Plantation and the Printed Word (review)","authors":"Julie Sievers","doi":"10.1353/LAC.2005.0078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Other reviews, including Allison Keith’s 2004 assessment in the Bryn Mawr Classical Review, have testified to the place of this volume in classical studies, describing its value in making these female-authored texts available and its uses in the curriculum. Owen Hodkinson, in a 2005 issue of Scholia Reviews, articulates the significant difficulty of determining, in some cases, an author’s sex, in effect rejecting Plant’s neat resolution of such problems by declaring these works as representative of women’s ideas and skills. The aliterary quality of the translations has seen some comment as well, though fairness requires that any such criticism acknowledge the editor’s own introductory statement that his interest was in conveying meaning rather than preserving poetic phrasing. Given that the vast majority of texts presented in this volume are poetry, one might nonetheless take issue with this decision. A question that remains, then, pertains to the value of this work for scholars interested in library history. In short, it is the historical perspective that Women Writers of Ancient Greece and Rome provides regarding women’s literacy. The texts in this volume portray women as writers, as readers, and as participants in discourse communities. These translations allow those interested in questions about women’s literacy in historic context to consider early demonstrations of the creation and consumption of texts. As Plant states in introducing one such early female author’s advice treatise, “it offers evidence for the literacy of women and the sharing of books” (69). A particularly interesting feature of classical women’s writing that emerges from this anthology is the not inconsiderable number of texts that deal with medicine and science, with women’s health and that of their families. While it may be tempting to read these scientific and medically oriented texts as signs of women’s advances toward a more equal footing with men, excerpts from a conduct manual translated by Plant suggest the ways that concerns with health remain firmly connected to traditional sex roles in these cultures: “On the whole a woman must be good and orderly; and one could not become such a woman as this without virtue. . . . The virtues of the body are health, strength, good perception, and beauty” (84–85). Thus women’s writing, reading, and even knowledge about health, while indicating education and participation in the production of discourse, may also reinforce conservative cultural norms. Plant’s volume aptly reveals the sometimes paradoxical situations of women writers in early Greek and Roman society.","PeriodicalId":81853,"journal":{"name":"Libraries & culture","volume":"40 1","pages":"570 - 572"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/LAC.2005.0078","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Libraries & culture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/LAC.2005.0078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Other reviews, including Allison Keith’s 2004 assessment in the Bryn Mawr Classical Review, have testified to the place of this volume in classical studies, describing its value in making these female-authored texts available and its uses in the curriculum. Owen Hodkinson, in a 2005 issue of Scholia Reviews, articulates the significant difficulty of determining, in some cases, an author’s sex, in effect rejecting Plant’s neat resolution of such problems by declaring these works as representative of women’s ideas and skills. The aliterary quality of the translations has seen some comment as well, though fairness requires that any such criticism acknowledge the editor’s own introductory statement that his interest was in conveying meaning rather than preserving poetic phrasing. Given that the vast majority of texts presented in this volume are poetry, one might nonetheless take issue with this decision. A question that remains, then, pertains to the value of this work for scholars interested in library history. In short, it is the historical perspective that Women Writers of Ancient Greece and Rome provides regarding women’s literacy. The texts in this volume portray women as writers, as readers, and as participants in discourse communities. These translations allow those interested in questions about women’s literacy in historic context to consider early demonstrations of the creation and consumption of texts. As Plant states in introducing one such early female author’s advice treatise, “it offers evidence for the literacy of women and the sharing of books” (69). A particularly interesting feature of classical women’s writing that emerges from this anthology is the not inconsiderable number of texts that deal with medicine and science, with women’s health and that of their families. While it may be tempting to read these scientific and medically oriented texts as signs of women’s advances toward a more equal footing with men, excerpts from a conduct manual translated by Plant suggest the ways that concerns with health remain firmly connected to traditional sex roles in these cultures: “On the whole a woman must be good and orderly; and one could not become such a woman as this without virtue. . . . The virtues of the body are health, strength, good perception, and beauty” (84–85). Thus women’s writing, reading, and even knowledge about health, while indicating education and participation in the production of discourse, may also reinforce conservative cultural norms. Plant’s volume aptly reveals the sometimes paradoxical situations of women writers in early Greek and Roman society.
威廉·布拉德福德的书:关于普利茅斯种植园和印刷文字(书评)
其他评论,包括艾莉森·基思2004年在《布林莫尔古典评论》上的评价,已经证明了这本书在古典研究中的地位,描述了它在使这些女性撰写的文本可用以及在课程中的应用方面的价值。欧文·霍金森(Owen Hodkinson)在2005年出版的《斯科拉评论》(Scholia Reviews)上阐述了在某些情况下确定作者性别的重大困难,他通过宣称这些作品代表了女性的思想和技能,实际上拒绝了普兰特对此类问题的简洁解决方案。翻译的文学质量也有一些评论,尽管公平要求任何这样的批评承认编辑自己的介绍性声明,他的兴趣是传达意义,而不是保留诗意的措辞。考虑到这本书中出现的绝大多数文本都是诗歌,人们可能会对这个决定提出质疑。那么,对于对图书馆史感兴趣的学者来说,这项工作的价值是什么呢?简而言之,这是古希腊罗马女作家提供的关于女性读写能力的历史视角。在本卷的文本描绘妇女作为作家,作为读者,并作为话语社区的参与者。这些翻译让那些对历史背景下女性读写能力问题感兴趣的人可以考虑文本创作和消费的早期表现。正如普兰特在介绍一位早期女性作家的建议论文时所说,“它为女性的读写能力和书籍的共享提供了证据”(69)。从这本选集中可以看出古典女性作品中一个特别有趣的特点,那就是有相当数量的文本涉及医学和科学,以及女性和她们家庭的健康。虽然人们很容易把这些以科学和医学为导向的文本解读为女性在与男性更平等的基础上取得进步的标志,但普兰特翻译的一本行为手册摘录表明,在这些文化中,对健康的关注仍然与传统的性别角色紧密相连:“总的来说,女人必须善良、有秩序;没有美德就不可能成为这样的女人. . . .身体的美德是健康、力量、良好的感知和美丽”(84-85)。因此,女性的写作、阅读,甚至关于健康的知识,在表明教育和参与话语生产的同时,也可能强化保守的文化规范。普兰特的书恰如其分地揭示了早期希腊和罗马社会中女作家有时自相矛盾的处境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信