Wednesday, September 18, 2019
The Scope of Woolfââ¬â¢s Feminism in A Room of Oneââ¬â¢s Own Essay -- Woolf A
The Scope of Woolfââ¬â¢s Feminism in A Room of Oneââ¬â¢s Own Missing Works Cited A highly contested statement on women and fiction, Virginia Woolfââ¬â¢s extended essay A Room of Oneââ¬â¢s Own has been repeatedly reviewed, critiqued, and analyzed since its publication in 1929. Arnold Bennett, an early twentieth-century novelist, and David Daiches, a literary critic who wrote an analysis entitled Virginia Woolf in 1942 (Murphy 247), were among those to attempt to extricate the themes and implications of Woolfââ¬â¢s complex essay. The two critics deal with the often-discussed feminist aspect of Woolfââ¬â¢s essay in interestingly different ways. Bennett states that Woolfââ¬â¢s essay is not a feminist work, rejects the idea that Woolfââ¬â¢s discussion of women and fiction may lean towards the political, and reduces the essayââ¬â¢s scope to a collection of musings on women and fiction. Daiches responds to A Room of Oneââ¬â¢s Own in the opposite way: he claims that Woolfââ¬â¢s work is feminist, and Woolfââ¬â¢s feminism emphasizes not only women and their relationship to fiction, but all people of genius who have not had an opportunity to use it because of their lack of money and privacy. While Bennett restricts the scope of the essay to a non- feminist, completely apolitical ideology and Daiches enlarges the scope to a wide, universal feminism, Woolfââ¬â¢s own intention in writing A Room of Oneââ¬â¢s Own may have actually been to create a work that lay somewhere in between these two extremes. In one of the earliest reviews of A Room of Oneââ¬â¢s Own, British novelist Arnold Bennett addressed the question of feminism in the essay and concluded that Woolf was not writing from a feminist perspective. ââ¬Å"It is a book a little about men and a great deal about women. But it is no... ...ments do point out important limits on Woolfââ¬â¢s feminism. As Arnold Bennett says, Woolfââ¬â¢s concerns are not political; although our modern definition of feminism is wider than Bennettââ¬â¢s was, Woolfââ¬â¢s lack of political interest does certainly limit the scope of her feminism. David Daichesââ¬â¢s critique of the essay points out another important characteristic of Woolfââ¬â¢s feminist thought. Her feminism is not, as Daiches believes based in a ââ¬Å"larger democratic feeling.â⬠Woolfââ¬â¢s feminism is in actuality quite limited in tha t she only applies it to British, upper middleclass women writers. Virginia Woolfââ¬â¢s essay-which to Bennett seemed non- feminist and to Daiches seemed feminist- universalist-is, by our modern definition, feminist; however, the borders of culture, class, and profession that composed her frame of reference drastically limit the scope of Woolfââ¬â¢s feminism.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.