“ ‘By a Lady’: The Mask of the Feminine in Restoration, Early Eighteenth-Century Print Culture”

  • Margaret J. M. Ezell
Chapter

Abstract

It is a commonplace among literary critics that early modern women writers as a group shared a need for anonymity and developed authorial strategies to protect their reputations as socially acceptable females. Virginia Woolf s observation in A Room of One’s Own that “Anon, who wrote so many poems without signing them, was often a woman,” is frequently taken as being not only a description of an authorial practice, but also as a critique of the patriarchal culture which demanded that women artists—if they indeed could exist—hide their gender as a price for their artistic expression. We expect early modern women writers to give up their individual names, not because they wished to do so, but because of the cultural constraints placed upon them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Angeline Goreau, The Whole Duty of a Woman: Female Writers in Seventeenth-Century England (New York: The Dial Press, 1985), 9.Google Scholar
  2. The Norton Anthology of English Literature, ed. M. H. Abrams et al., 6th ed., vol. 1 (New York: W.W. Norton, 1993).Google Scholar
  3. 2.
    Charlotte E Otten, “General Introduction,” English Women’s Voices, 1540–1700 (Miami: Florida International University Press, 1992), 1.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Christina Wolf, “Culture is What you Experience—An Interview with Christina Wolf,” New German Critique 27 (Fall 1982), 94.Google Scholar
  5. 6.
    On early modern women, law, and property, see Antonia Fraser’s early study, The Weaker Vessel (New York: Vintage books, 1985)Google Scholar
  6. Lawrence Stone, Uncertain Unions: Marriage in England 1660–1753 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. and Susan Staves, Married Women’s Separate Property in England, 1660–1833 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990).Google Scholar
  8. 7.
    Carol Barash, “The Political Origins of Anne Finch’s Poetry,” Huntington Library Quarterly 54 (1991), 330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 8.
    Dorothy Mermin, “Women Becoming Poets: Katherine Philips, Aphra Behn, Anne Finch,” ELH 57 (1990), 338, 347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 9.
    Margaret J. M. Ezell, “Reading Pseudonyms in Seventeenth-Century Coterie Literature,” Essays in Literature 21 (1994), 14–25.Google Scholar
  11. 10.
    Elizabeth Thomas, Miscellany Poems (London, 1722).Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    See Isobel Grundy, “The Politics of Female Authorship: Lady Mary Wortley Montagu’s reaction to the printing of her poems,” The Book Collector 31 (1982), 19–37.Google Scholar
  13. 12.
    Anne McWhir argues that John Dryden’s supposedly complimentary suggestion that Thomas assumes “Corinna” as her poetic name links her both to a famous courtesan and a female poet referred to by Pindar as the “Boeotian [Theban] sow.” ELH 62 (1995), 105–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 13.
    William Hicks, London Drollery (London, 1672), 56–60.Google Scholar
  15. 14.
    Ann Messenger, “Publishing Without Perishing: Lady Winchilsea’s Miscellany Poems of 1713,” Restoration 5 (1981), 27–37 (28)Google Scholar
  16. Charles H. Hinnant, The Poetry of Anne Finch: An Essay in Interpretation (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1994).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mary, Lady Chudleigh, “To the Reader,” Essays upon Several Subjects in The Poems and Prose of Mary, Lady Chudleigh, ed. Margaret J. M. Ezell (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 248.Google Scholar
  18. 20.
    Virginia Woolf, A Room of One’s Own (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanich, 1929), 26–7.Google Scholar
  19. 25.
    See Charles H. Hannant, “Anne Finch and Jacobitism: Approaching the Wellesley College Manuscript,” Journal of Family History 21 (1996), 496–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 26.
    This concept is also expanded by the postcolonial critic Homi K. Bhabha in discussing the ways in which colonized populations perform back to the dominant social force their expected and anticipated roles as a means of preserving autonomy. “The Other Question: Difference, Discrimination and the Discourse of Colonialism” in “Race” Writing and Difference, ed. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985) andGoogle Scholar
  21. Nation and Narration (New York: Routledge, 1990).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Robert J. Griffin 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margaret J. M. Ezell

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations