解构女性主义书籍历史学术对启蒙方法的依赖

IF 0.4 3区 文学 0 LITERATURE
Micaela Rodgers
{"title":"解构女性主义书籍历史学术对启蒙方法的依赖","authors":"Micaela Rodgers","doi":"10.3138/ecf.35.4.517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Historically, canonical novels have been written primarily by men either for other men or for the “education” of women to encourage conformity to patriarchal standards. Yet, throughout much of the eighteenth century, novels written by and for women outsold most materials written by their male counterparts. Nevertheless, scholarship on the female writer and reader has been difficult to find or produce, mainly due to inherited structures that prevent radical feminist scholarship from flourishing. This essay examines the Western scholarly reliance on white, hetero, Eurocentric thought and knowledge-production and describes how those power structures discourage new methods of scholarship. It looks to feminist and queer literary theorists and book historians for a paradigm of future scholarship that prioritizes ways of knowing outside the Enlightenment model.","PeriodicalId":43800,"journal":{"name":"Eighteenth-Century Fiction","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deconstructing Reliance on Enlightenment Methods in Feminist Book Historical Scholarship\",\"authors\":\"Micaela Rodgers\",\"doi\":\"10.3138/ecf.35.4.517\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Historically, canonical novels have been written primarily by men either for other men or for the “education” of women to encourage conformity to patriarchal standards. Yet, throughout much of the eighteenth century, novels written by and for women outsold most materials written by their male counterparts. Nevertheless, scholarship on the female writer and reader has been difficult to find or produce, mainly due to inherited structures that prevent radical feminist scholarship from flourishing. This essay examines the Western scholarly reliance on white, hetero, Eurocentric thought and knowledge-production and describes how those power structures discourage new methods of scholarship. It looks to feminist and queer literary theorists and book historians for a paradigm of future scholarship that prioritizes ways of knowing outside the Enlightenment model.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Eighteenth-Century Fiction\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Eighteenth-Century Fiction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3138/ecf.35.4.517\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eighteenth-Century Fiction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/ecf.35.4.517","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

从历史上看,经典小说主要是由男性写的,要么是为其他男性写的,要么是为了“教育”女性,鼓励她们遵守父权标准。然而,在18世纪的大部分时间里,女性所写和为女性所写的小说的销量超过了男性所写的大部分作品。然而,关于女性作家和女性读者的研究一直很难找到或产生,主要是因为继承结构阻碍了激进女权主义研究的繁荣。本文考察了西方学术对白人、异性恋、欧洲中心思想和知识生产的依赖,并描述了这些权力结构如何阻碍新的学术方法。它向女权主义者、酷儿文学理论家和书籍史学家寻求未来学术研究的范式,这种范式优先考虑启蒙运动模式之外的认识方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Deconstructing Reliance on Enlightenment Methods in Feminist Book Historical Scholarship
Historically, canonical novels have been written primarily by men either for other men or for the “education” of women to encourage conformity to patriarchal standards. Yet, throughout much of the eighteenth century, novels written by and for women outsold most materials written by their male counterparts. Nevertheless, scholarship on the female writer and reader has been difficult to find or produce, mainly due to inherited structures that prevent radical feminist scholarship from flourishing. This essay examines the Western scholarly reliance on white, hetero, Eurocentric thought and knowledge-production and describes how those power structures discourage new methods of scholarship. It looks to feminist and queer literary theorists and book historians for a paradigm of future scholarship that prioritizes ways of knowing outside the Enlightenment model.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
53
×
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