Showing papers in "Feminist Review in 1984"
TL;DR: In this article, the authors identify the ways in which a particular tradition, white Eurocentric and Western, has sought to establish itself as the only legitimate feminism in current political practice, and they seek to address ourselves in very broad terms, to the theoretical and consequently political limitations of Euro-American feminism and the ways such analyses inform and distort white women's political practice.
Abstract: Our task here is to begin to identify the ways in which a particular tradition, white Eurocentric and Western, has sought to establish itself as the only legitimate feminism in current political practice. We seek to address ourselves in very broad terms, to the theoretical and consequently political limitations of Euro-American feminism and the ways such analyses inform and distort white women's political practice. In challenging such feminist writings we not only look at the ways in which analyses of racism have been significantly lacking from that work but equally importantly we look at the ways in which we as Black women have been made 'visible' in such writings and the terms in which our experiences have been explained. The growth of the Black feminist movement in Britain in the last decade has forced the question of the centrality of Black women's oppression and exploitation onto the political and theoretical agendas. The political energy of Black women who have organized at the grassroots within our communities against the myriad of issues engendered by the racism of the British state has inspired and pointed to the urgent need to challenge many of the theoretical conceptualizations and descriptions of Black and Third World women existing within white feminist literature. Bell Hook's argument (1982) that racism in the women's movement in the USA has acted to exclude the participation of Black women is equally applicable to the British situation:
564 citations
TL;DR: The classic Daphne du Maurier novel, Rebecca as discussed by the authors, was published in 1938 and became a bestseller for thirty-nine impressions and translations into twenty languages in as many years.
Abstract: Thus opens Daphne du Maurier's Rebecca, published in 1938. With thirty-nine impressions and translations into twenty languages in as many years, Rdebecca was and still is an enormous bestseller. Hitchcock made a film ofthe novel in 1940, its latest TV serialization was only a couple of years ago and even more recently it has been the subject of an opera. Whilst one study of its initial success claims that 'every good historian should read it in tandem with contemporary newspapers' (Beauman, 1983: 178), its clear that Rebecca speaks as much to readers in the 1980s as it did to those in the 1 940s. Ille story of the plain, genteel orphan girl we never learn her rurne who marries the aristocratic widower has got eveShing a romance needs and more: jealously mystery, adultery and murder. Jealousy and envy of her husband's first wife the beautifil, upper-class Rebecca propels the nameless heroine down the dark corridors of Rebecca's past. But in unlocking the secrets of Rebecca's character, the girl gets more than she bargained for: her husband turns out to have murdered Rebecca himself. All is not lc st, however, for the heroine's bourgeois virtue triumphs and in the end she manages to save both her husband and her marriage. Rebecca is a rewrite of Jane Eyre amidst a nostalgia for the wariing of the British Empire and the decline of its aristocracy. It's a lingering firewell to the world of Monte Carlo and of paid companions, to splendid brealists and devoted servants, the ease and arrogance of life in a stately home like Manderley, the Cornish mansion of the suave gentleman-hero, MaximiZan de Winter. Obviously, it is a ripping yarn. But apart from that how do feminists and socialists account for the continued popularity and appeal of a book like this? In the aftermath of Charles and Di, a lot of critical attention has been turned toward romance and its fictions, from Mills and Boon to 'boddice rippers' and the latest high-gloss consumerist fantasies (see, for example, Batsleer, 1981; Margolies, 1982; Harper, 1982 ). At the centre of the discussion has been the question of the possible political effects of reading romances what, in other words, do they do to you? Romances have on the whole, been condemned by critics on the Left{althoughJanet Batsleer's piece is a notable exception). lEey are seen as coercive and stereotyping narratives which invite the reader to identify with a passive heroine who only finds true happiness in submitting to a masterful male. What happens to women readers is then compared to certain Marxist descriptions of the positioning of all human subjects
67 citations
61 citations
43 citations
33 citations
16 citations
TL;DR: Men and women in British trade unions have a shared experience of feeling that "equality of opportunity" with men is not an adequate demand, whether we are concerned about women's job opportunities or our role within the unions as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: Maybe other people's experience always sounds more impressive than our own. Or maybe in the process of writing down any events there is a tendency to work in a coherence that wasn't always present in the Eagmented incidents themselves something I am very aware of as I write this. Next to the experience of Italy and France our experience in this country of women's organization within trade unions sounds low key, unfocused and undramatic. At the same time, there are deep resonances for anyone who has been active as a feminist in the British trade union movement. For example we all seem to be exploring the same dual strategy of separate women's organization giving ourselves the space and time to collectively explore and define our own particular needs while at the same time trying to develop confidence and strategies for raising iese needs as legitimate trade union concerns through the 'mainstream' trade union structures. Another key point of shared experience seems to be the growing recognition that 'equality of opportunity' with men is not an adequate demand, whether we are taLking about women's job opportunities or our role within the unions. 'Equality' demands can mean that we simply accept male definitions of work and union activity and of the relation (or non-relation) between home and work, instead of developing demands based on the different experiences of women that, as the Italian women put it, 'change the rules of the game for men and women'. In a 1978 Red Reg article that was profoundly influential for many socialist feminists, Bea Campbell and Val Charlton said: 'Implicit in all our strivings of the last years has been an adaption to theworld of work rather than the adaption of that world to one that allows time for children, leisure, politics. . .' Over the 1980s this approach has been clearly visible in the kinds of bargaining demands prioritized by many women union activists demands for paid family leave, a shorter working day, job sharing for men and women. Building on aspects of 'difference' as opposed to 'equality' has also become more and more central to many women's approaches to union orEariization, as we increasingly re)ect the impersonality of procedures, the hierarchical power of union committee structures, the crowding out of personal life and fFiendship commitments. What has emerged as the most common and unifying experience among women in British trade unions, whether they would label themselves as feminists or not, is the profound alienation fFom traditional (male) forms of union organization. These two comments fFom a discussion among National Union of Public Employees (NUPE) women make the point very clearly:
14 citations
12 citations
[...]
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a piece of fairly straightforward and honest writing about the language of Marxist literary criticism, which is something they felt uncomfortable with, and that it didn't represent them.
Abstract: We wrote this piece collectively; had many meetings, and disagreed with each other. Earlier drafts were more theoretical, or more concerned directly with the politics of writing. But other women felt that the language of Marxist literary criticism, for example, was something they felt uncomfortable with, and that it didn't represent them. Consequently, we have finished up with a piece of fairly straightforward and honest writing. We never gave ourselves a collective name. We are: Lindie Bilgorrie, Eva Bunker, Katie Campbell, Pat Coleman, Dora Gentry, Pat Hamilton, Angie Howard, Miranda Martin, Sibyl Ruth, Elaine Sulman, Gloria Swanepoel, Kay Syrad, Francine Winham.
TL;DR: The play gave a picture of a woman who rose in the world, but ended up by coming down as discussed by the authors, and the play was being performed inside the club. But it was difficult to hear the actors' voices.
Abstract: He was walking towards his club after seeing his family off on vacation. A play was being performed inside. At one moment he was audience; at another, actor. The play gave a picture of a woman. Respectable at first, she later had dubious liaisons with highly placed men. She rose in the world, but ended up by coming down. He was with his eldest brother who had spent the night in the room above, while he was put'on the ground floor'.