Page 139 - Contemporary Cultural Theory 3rd edition
P. 139

ContCultural Theory Text Pages  4/4/03  1:42 PM  Page 130





                                      Contemporary Cultural Theory



                   autonomous being like all human creatures... finds herself living
                   in a world where men compel her to assume the status of the
                   Other’ (de Beauvoir, 1972, p. 29). Her understanding of femininity
                   as a masculine project to construct women as objects, with which
                   women themselves were nonetheless complicit (p. 21), anticipated
                   much subsequent feminist debate over the objectification of
                   women, as well as over the distinction between biological ‘sex’
                   and culturally constructed ‘gender’. That Woolf and de Beauvoir
                   were both novelists seems more than coincidental, given the
                   peculiar salience of writing about writing in second-wave
                   feminist discourse.



                   Culture, ideology and gender
                   Despite the occasionally ‘separatist’ ambitions of feminist
                   politics, feminist cultural theory was far from self-contained. As
                   Ruthven rightly noted, feminist cultural criticism drew on a
                   number of ‘discursive categories’ originally ‘marxist, structur-
                   alist, and post-structuralist or deconstructionist’ in character
                   (Ruthven, 1984, p. 26). Ruthven might have been ‘the Crocodile
                   Dundee of male feminism’, as Elaine Showalter described him
                   (Showalter, 1989, p. 366), but she had made much the same
                   point herself: ‘English feminist criticism, essentially Marxist,
                   stresses oppression; French feminist criticism, essentially psycho-
                   analytic, stresses repression;  American feminist criticism,
                   essentially textual, stresses expression. All, however, have be-
                   come gynocentric’ (Showalter, 1985, p. 249). She misrecognised
                   post-structuralism as psychoanalysis (it was both more and less),
                   but quite rightly drew attention to a ‘textual’ focus in American
                   feminist criticism, which actually bespoke the often unac-
                   knowledged influence of older culturalist notions of tradition
                   and disinterestedness. Showalter herself is Professor of English
                   at Princeton University and a longstanding opponent of depend-
                   ence on French or Marxist ‘masters’, but there was clearly a
                   parallel indebtedness to culturalist ‘practical criticism’ at work
                   in her own writing.
                      When Showalter referred to all three feminisms as having
                   ‘become gynocentric’, she called attention to how second-wave

                                               130
   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144