Welcome to this lecture on, Feminist Criticism.
As you are aware, we are in series of lectures
brought under the broad ages of English language
and literature.
This course is being recorded under the aegis
of National Program on Technology Enhanced
Learning and initiative by the Indian Institute
of Technology and The Indian Institute of
Science.
We are in the 4th module of the series of
lectures.
And we have been already been through a few.
You know few lectures on literary criticism.
And you will recall that the last lecture,
was on Marxist literary criticism.
And today, we are going to divot this lecture
to feminist criticism.
Let me begin by saying, here at the beginning
of this lecture, that this lecture is not
an advanced level lecture.
This lecture is going to talk broadly about
feminist criticism.
Beginning with the feminist movement and we
will bring to you a few core, concept in feminist
criticism.
As you are also aware, these lectures are
being brought to you, to a broad spectrum
of viewers alright.
But, the target audiences comprises, students
in engineering colleges for whom, the Humanities
and Social Sciences subjects are brought as
electives.
So, let us do a recap for some work with it,
in our last lecture which is devoted to Marxist
literally criticism.
And we will recall that, historical materialism
is one of the important.
How should I put it?
One of the important descriptive and theoretical
terms used to, you know used to talk about
Marxism.
So, why do we call it historical materialism?
We found that, the two most important questions
or rather the two core questions asked here
are a.
How are societies organized and structured?
And how do societies develop and change?
So, we will note here that, a is the structure
of societies.
If you have to make sense of societies, we
first have to look at the way they organize
the structures.
And second, we have to account.
We know that, the all societies change we
have to then account or for why social change
happens?
Why societies evolve from one stage to the
other?
Then, we found that even as we talk about
Marxist literally criticism, we cannot do
without the two most perhaps, the most important
terms given to us by Karl Marx.
That is the base, economic base and the superstructure.
And we placed art in the superstructure, along
with other components.
Like consciousness, religion, education, family
and the legal system.
And then we said of Karl Marx's that, the
base the economic base, which comprises the
relations of production and the forces of
production.
Determine without being deterministic, determine
the features, the characteristics or nature
of the components of the superstructure, which
also meant that literally texts will be would
be determinant by the economic base of the
period, in which they were written.
Of course, it is not simplistic as it sounds.
There are different ways in which literally
texts.
Creative writers, will engage with different
elements of both the base and the superstructure.
Their responses, their reactions would take
different forms.
In some cases, you would find that a text,
a literally text, would you know be with the
dominant ideologies of this time, whereas
another literally texts.
May, you know make quite severely critic,
the status quo of the times concerned.
So, these are the two terms we found.
We cannot do without or when we talk about
literally criticism.
We cannot brush them aside as sort of clearly
or purely Marxist concept of or concept of
political science or sociology.
Then, we saw a quotation from Plekhanov, who
said very rightly, that the social mentality
of an age is conditioned by that, age’s
social relations.
And where did we come across that, words social
relations?
Remember in the previous slide we came across
relations of production or social relations,
as being parts of the economic base.
So, the social mentality of an age will be
conditioned, you look at the word condition.
You rightly uses the word condition, because
you are not talking about the deterministic
causal, about your causality.
The social relations of the age would be conditioned
by that ages.
Social mentality will become conditioned by
that age of social relations.
And then, he says this is no way quite as
evident as in the history of art and literature.
This changing social mentality or the fact
this conditioning of social mentality by social
relations is according to Plekhanov.
The most evident or as indicator in a, as
you know most evident as he uses the word,
most evident in the history of art and literature.
That is the entire history of art or the entire
history of literature may be read, as changing
mentality changing social mentalities given
changing social relations.
So, this is really is a crux of Marxist literally
criticism.
Then, we also saw this.
We said that really we.
After we have known the basic tenets of Marxism
of historical materialism, that are useful
for Marx and literally scholars.
Then, what is the method by which we analyze
a text by which we analyze a literally period
or a literally movement.
So, here are some of the examples which have
taken.
You know from several authors.
For instance, let us look at the first question.
You may ask questions like, what ideology
or ideologies does the text or literally movement
reinforces.
does not reinforce the dominant ideology.
That looks at this quickly, because we already
talk about this in the last lecture.
In what ways, does the text reveal and invite
us to attest to all to condemn the ideology.
And how far, is it takes ideologically straight
forwarded or conflicted or how far is it propagandist.
So, these are another, you know points.
And these are some of the things you may ask
from the text, if you are in a planning to
do a Marxist literally analysis.
So, now we will move on to the topic of discussion.
Our topic of discussion today, that is feminist
criticism.
And of course, a feminist criticism is a very
well established field.
And there are so many text books, so many
hand books, so many you know critical anthologies.
That, you may use for an understanding of
feminist literally criticism.
What I have done here is?
I have selected a few texts.
So, that in my lecture draws upon these and
I shall be quoting from this, also using examples.
So, our first book is Guerin Wilfred, a Handbook
of Critical Approaches to Literature.
Then, Maples and Paul Wakes, The Routledge
Companion to Critical Theory.
The essay by Susan Heckman in this, in a collection
entitled feminism.
That is, it takes that what we are taking
up and another book that has been with us,
in all our lectures.
Almost all our lectures, that is Pramod K.
Nayar’s, Contemporary Literally and Cultural
Theory.
And two more books, which you know which point
to a post feminist approach.
And among which we find Judith Butler, Gender
Trouble and Bodies that Matter to be useful
for our purposes.
Again, let me remind you, these are by no
means you know, The texts or you know the
only take, that you may read they are several
other books.
And we will first begin by reading from the
Routledge, Companion to Critical Theory.
So, let us now read from the Routledge Companion
to Critical Theory, as I had mentioned this
essay as by Suzan Hackman, entitled feminism.
Now, let us look at this carefully.
Since its inception, feminism has passed through
a number of different stages.
This is, what is very important.
We need to keep in mind that, feminism a is
not temporarily or over time or homogeneous
discourse or a homogeneous.
You know, analytical tool for literary or
cultural analysis.
Nor, is it especially that is over different.
You know, different geographical spaces and
nations and states.
You know, feminism is not homogeneous.
It is important for us to note that, today
there are what would you call various feminisms.
Like, we say there are various Englishes in
the world.
So, also they are various feminisms.
There are various feminist discourses.
That talks about the issues of human and gender,
from various perspectives.
And these are also no doubt, enriched the
whole field of feminist studies.
So, with Hackman we come to learn right at
the beginning.
That feminism is not to be taken as a temporarily
and spatially, homogeneous terms.
So, again since it is inception, it has passed
through a number of different stages.
In the 19th and early 20th century’s, liberal
feminism look, these are important terms.
Liberal feminism and socialist feminism, allied
feminism with the dominant political theories
of
the day.
So, now you note the early, in other words
say early it does not mean that, these schools
or these approaches in feminism and feminist
literate theory.
That, they I do not want to talk mean or not
mean in any way to suggest that, these are
in old theories and they are not relevant
today.
However, we trace it from at the 19th century
and the early 20th century.
And we said that, there will basically two
schools.
The liberal feminist school and the socialist
feminist school, which socialist feminist
school draws obviously, from draws it is main
analytical tools from socialism or from Marxism.
And these were allied.
I mean, they were not separate well.
It is allied to the general political theories
of that time, to follow.
One is socialist feminism, would draw its
discourse.
By seeing women in terms of a class, would
consider women to be analogues to the working
class for instance to an exploited class.
And the discourse would be you generally built
around this political.
You know political focus of looking at women,
as you know akin to an oppressed class.
So, then Hackmen goes on to say, beginning
in the 1960’s.
However, feminist develop the approaches that
did not depend on male defined theories.
Now, what she suggests here.
What she seems to suggest here that, the liberal
approaches or the Marxism approaches which
are basically theories that of made by or
made from, so to speak.
Already established discourses, which she
calls male defined theories.
For instance, then you already have theories
and you just simply have to see women in the
light of this Maxis feminism, in the light
of an oppressed class.
So, then she goes on to say that, radical
feminism, psychoanalytic feminism.
The feminisms, now look at this word.
The feminisms of women of color and postmodern
feminism are attempts to develop analyses
of woman’s role in society, from a woman’s
perspective.
This is very important.
This seems now to be, you know in beginning
from the middle of the 20th century.
This seems to be change, the plethora of different
ways on sort of doing feminism.
For instance, radical feminism or a postmodern
feminism or psychoanalytic feminism, which
in the case of psychoanalytic feminist criticism,
moving away from a basic Freudian module,
to a model in which we find women talking
about in a form of psychoanalytic prospective,
which differs from the older Freudian model
for the instance of the castration anxiety
model for instance.
So, these are reading of Freud in the psychoanalytic
domain.
So, these feminisms radical postmodern, psychoanalytic,
etcetera are at once feminist movement.
Social political feminist movement that also
sort of spawned that, also spawned different
critical or you know feminism with different
critical shades.
Each being different from the other.
This really if you look at it carefully and
if you go and read in these areas, are extremely
rich in the nuanced differences.
Both nuance and both you know fights for political
differences among themselves.
So, then radical psychoanalytic, for this
is the feminism of woman of color for instance.
One of the most important things, slogans
that they raise was That the, when you talk
about feminism for a long time, you know the
category women was red seen and understood
in terms of white middle class women.
The problems of women all over the world were
explored, was seen as being akin to the problems
of women or the white western women.
So, I would not use the word recent.
Of course, it has been quite many years.
There have been decades of work, for instance,
The word, you know the word womanism being
preferred by many African, American or many
African women writers.
In place of feminism, they found the word
feminism to sort of separatist or radical,
a term.
And they tried to you know they suggested
the word womanism, would be more you know
appropriate in indicating the cultural situation
of black women for instance.
So, you see that from, you know from the basically
liberal socialist approaches, which drew their
terminology, their discourses or their orientation
from already established male.
You know, what she calls her male defined
theories came to have different shades and
came to have, you know different orientation
for instance and which a woman’s perspective
was sought to be upheld.
Next, I read on.
These approaches analyze, how gender is constructed
and maintained.
This is I would say, one of the most important
sentence here.
These approaches analyze, how gender is constructed
and maintained as one of the central meaning
structures of society.
Now, quickly let us look at the term, gender.
We, in feminist criticism differentiate between
the two term sex and gender.
So, sex of course, this is no longer the entire
you know story regarding sex and gender.
But, there was an important differentiation
made in.
You know in says the middle of the 20th century
and important differences was made between
sex and gender.
And one of the first most important formulation
came from a philosopher, a French philosopher
who you are I am sure, at least you heard
of...
This is Simone de Beauvoir in her famous text,
The second Sex.
The second sex obviously, refers to women.
And in this book, there is you know there
is a famous statement that came to be, you
know upheld as sort of the slogan of feminism
of a certain kind.
Feminism of a certain, you could say or certain
time period.
The statement was that women is not born,
the woman is rather constructed.
You know, I am not quoting her verbatim.
One is not born that, how it goes.
One is not born but, rather becomes a woman.
So, this is the important difference.
So, you see sex is of course, a biological
identity.
And in this discourse of feminism in this
time, usually the today it is not the way
we do it.
Talk about two sexes, male and female.
So, when a child is born, it is usually a
male or a female child.
But, as Beauvoir says one is not born but,
rather become woman Beauvoir says that, it
is social conditioning or social construction.
That gives us the other part of the story.
That is, when you read grammar in the school,
we found
in gender.
When we talk about gender in grammar, we did
not use the word, the term male and female.
What was the term, we use.
We use the term, feminine and masculine.
It is the other one that this, neuter or neuter
some call it.
So, what does this imply?
This implies that, gender sex is, when we
talk about sex, we talk about you know we
should use the term male and female.
And we talk about gender, we should use the
term feminine or masculine.
So, feminine and masculine are therefore,
not physiological.
Not so much physiological, attributes as behavioral
attributes.
So, feminine kind of behavior is a behavior
pattern or behavior tendency.
That is not necessarily with husband, we are
born.
So, called masculine tendencies according
to this schema, it is not something that a
male child is you know, inherently sort of
born with.
These behavior patterns are patterns to which
you know, in which we are brought up, you
know in the process of socialization by our
parents first.
And then, that is family or extended family
and then by educational system and by society
in general.
Hence it is said, one is not born a woman
but, becomes one.
And we will also say one is born a male but,
a man or becomes one, do you follow.
So, what did we learn here?
We learnt two very important terms here, that
is the distinction.
Now, which by now we of course, we call this
traditional description of sex in gender.
With post feminism, which has become a bit
more complex, I will go move onto that a while
later.
But, we will still have to acknowledge the
fact that, this sort of division between sex
and gender was the very important theoretical
conceptual description.
For the establishment of feminism as a discourse
for the establishment of feminist literary
criticism, for instance.
Now, in this stage for instance if you look
at the female character in a novel, what could
you do?
You would then you try to understand so many
thing about the, you know the character for
instance.
Her desires, her goals in life for sometimes
a lack there of or her patterns of behavior,
her emotion.
And you would as a feminist critic, look at
all these attributes as emanating from the
way the character was socialized.
So, you then also look at the way in which
the dialogue, that are given to the woman
character.
And then, you would place her, you know in
the general milieu social cultural, milieu
of the age or the era of the period, that
in which the play or the novel or even poem
is set.
That is, how you account for such behavior.
You also then, talk about both male and female
characters and their attributes.
And also the way the plot runs in the text,
as the writers understanding.
And there are sometimes a writer’s intervention,
in a given social cultural milieu.
So, these are the some of the ways in which,
feminist criticism was done.
Following the division of sex, division you
know or understanding of these two terms.
That is separating the gender from the main
term sex, do you follow.
So, let us now return to our slides.
The next slide, here is a very important term,
that is patriarchy.
This is the term that you are, some of you
are aware of.
Patriarchy comes from the term, the root term
Pater.
Pater, the root term Pater, meaning some of
you may have got it, father.
And archy means rule of or rule by.
So, patriarchy means rule of the father or
rule by the father.
Obviously, the first in the family.
So, the father is traditionally understood
as the head of the family.
The father is traditionally understood as
you know, the main source of earning for the
family.
Also the one who sets the rules and regulations,
you know of the family.
So, the rule by the father is first at a family
level.
But, when you know feminist critics realize
that patriarchy was not simply a family phenomenon.
It was a larger, social or even
global phenomenon.
It also meant not simply the rule by the father
or the setting of a rules by the father or
the domination of the other members of the
family like the wife and the children by the
father.
It also meant suggested that, all the norms,
rules and regulations we can even say of most
communities, most nations in the world are
in favor of the male sex, do you follow.
So, patriarchy then obviously, as you can
imagine became the target of, you know of
staunch you know attack, we may use a word
in radical feminism, in feminist protest movements.
And also, patriarchy became the discourse.
It became the discourse by which feminist
critiques try to understand the representation
of woman and of course, of male characters
in literature.
That is how are woman represented in literature.
Is the text showing clearly, the patriarchal
inclination?
Or is the writer and in this case, you know
the words of woman writers who were hitherto
not a part on that important part of the canon.
Did you remember woman writer in the 19 century.
And even before that, you know in England
had to write using pseudo names, had to write
using male names, do you follow.
And in order you know, to hide the fact that
the women writing.
So, there is many such culture phenomenon,
that are also looked into or also studied
by feminism.
But, we have to understand that patriarchy
is essentially the discourse, that is explored
critiqued and sought to be dismantled by feminist
by both feminist movement and feminist literary
criticism.
Now, what this patriarchy gives us.
Patriarchy is all about, ideologies a.
And what is an ideology?
In ideology may be define as a world view.
As a world view or it is define as a set of
values for instance and norms and regulations
through which you view the world.
All us have an ideology, do you understand.
So, if we are tremendously religious, then
we look at the world and the reason for our
existence there in, from a religious point
of view or from a religious world view.
And this determines or condition even.
That is conditions our values condition, our
belief condition our desires and the actions
that, we take up.
So, patriarchy is therefore, a set of ideologies,
a set of world views.
Then, obviously patriarchy is you know, when
he says the rule of the father.
Patriarchy is also a power structure or structures
of power, in which you know the male is the
norm and the female is the deviant.
Patriarchy also has a lot of say, could say
or lot of power over how things are represented.
You only have to look at popular culture,
for instance.
You have to look at popular for instance,
popular novels in our time mills and boon,
romances.
They will, if you work on these novels, you
find clearly stereotype of woman.
And even the stereotype of man that is, being
shown in these novels.
So, patriarchy also has a hold or at least
has to you know till, recent time has had
a hold Over what is represented and how.
And finally, obviously patriarchy has a hold
over our material lives.
Now, what do we mean by our material lives.
A material lives or the you know, basically
the you know the way we live our life from
an economic point of view, from things that
have to do with matter, thing have to do with
wealth and power.
Our material lives are also in our everyday
lives.
For instance, I will give you a very small
example.
There was a time not very long ago, when food
was laid out in the family for the entire
family you know, it was quite the norm and
you and many quite accepted the fact that,
you know the plate or the dish or what we
call Thali in India for the man, the head
of the family would be much larger than the
ones that were given to the other members
of the family.
You see, so many movies of a certain films
of a certain era, in which you always see
the man being first served by the woman of
the family.
And only then you know, after she has looked
after the children next, she part takes of
whatever is left.
So, material lives is not simply big economic,
that we are talking about.
But, we also talking about everyday lives,
which as saw also includes the use of certain
utensils of certain sizes for certain people.
So, patriarchy has to do it as you saw here,
Ideologies, power structure, representations
and are materialized.
Now, when you look at the text, when you look
at the novel or short story or poem, you know.
One of the first thing you do, you know to
when you first begin to do feminist literary
criticism at an elementary level, is to try
to see the you know, you try to see how patriarchy
plays an important part in the setup of the
novel.
Or you know in the entire, you see the entire
ambience of the novel.
You see, you look at the ideologies, the world
views that are subscribe to by the characters.
And then, you find out why certain characters
are shown in a certain light.
You see the power structures.
For instance, family for instance, you see
if there is a family being depicted,
you see what the power dynamics are in that
family.
And you also see, how the writer has represented.
How the sexes are represented?
What is seen as feminine, appropriately feminine
behavior?
What is seen as for instance the mills and
boon romances that I had talked about?
The appropriately feminine behavior is very
evident as also appropriately a masculine
behavior, you follow.
And see the material, setting the material,
not just setting them, you know, beginning
from the props, starting in the props starting
direct to the distribution of wealth and you
know labor in the novel.
And you will find whether, it is a patriarchy
novel or whether that novel is a strong in
a critic of a patriarchal system.
So, these are the some of the ways in which,
you begin to look at texts in feminist literary
criticism.
Now, therefore there are some there are few
names that I would like to bring to you.
Because, these names are important, at least
few of them in the establishment of the feminist
movement and of feminist criticism.
And the first name we have to take is obviously
the name of the British feminist Mary Wollstonecraft,
whose indication of the rights of woman, is
one of the most famous books.
And you can well imagine, you know this book
was published in 1798.
end of the 18th century in England.
And you know, Mary Wollstonecraft wrote in
indication.
She call for you know, upholding the rights
of women and she describe in her beautiful
piece of work you know, how women are conditioned.
This is one of the first and foremost books
that one reads.
And it is really the beginning of you know,
western feminism if we may put it in that
way.
Then, we come to writers, American writer
like Betty Friedan and Kate Millett.
Betty Friedan book the Feminine Mystique.
The Feminine Mystique is a piece of work that
shows, you know how feminine qualities are?
women are indoctrinated into the feminine
qualities and how it remains, sort of as the
title suggests, a Mystique.
Next, Kate Millett book Sexual Politics is
one such early books that delve into literature
went on to talk about the representation and
the politics of sexuality.
The politics of gender in certain canonized
writers.
DH Lawrence for instance and talk about the
representation and the social politics, you
know in those novels.
Then, we came to another important book by
Elaine Showalter.
Elaine Showalter, A literature of her own.
A literature of her own.
Obviously, those of you who are from literature
would understand that it is a take off from
another important title by the feminist, by
the British writer Virginia Woolf, room of
her own.
So, literature of her own is another landmark
book.
You know published in the 20th century by
Elaine Showalter in which she propound this
theory of Gynocriticism.
Obviously, the word gyno from gynecology.
Gynocriticism or woman centered criticism
in which she talk about various phases of
you know, the feminine the feminist female
for instance, various phases of feminist writing.
And then, we have another important book Sandra
Gilbert and Susan Gubar booked the mad woman
in the Attic.
A mad woman in the Attic is one of the you
know, it is a even more detail exploration
of writing by women.
And the illusion of course, here is you know
is to the repressed female.
The repressed female as being the mad women,
who is in the attic, who is not accessible,
who one does not want to access and who is
labelled a mad woman.
You know because of subversive potential.
Then, we have Luce Irigaray, French feminist
critic, who you know who propounded the theory
of accreted feminine or feminine writing,
which celebrates you know, that celebrates
particularly female way of writing.
And these are some of the critiques, who have,
who early on had established the feel of feminist
literally criticism.
So, but this is not really the entire story
of feminist criticism.
A) of course is even you know, within this
discourse we find that there are many feminist
critics, who in the larger cultural domain.
For instance, not just literature in larger
cultural domain, sought to look for instance,
we talked about power and representation.
But, also issues like popular culture, how
are women represented in popular culture,
In films, in popular fictions, in theatre
for instance in the media.
The representation of you know, women and
the attributes of the so called you know the
normative women.
These are some of ways in which feminist criticism
looked into the representation, then, also
a female subjectivity and feminist subjectivity.
What is subjectivity?
Subjectivity is as identity.
Subjectivity is in a very simple way, what
it is like to be?
What it is like to be, in this case what it
is like to be a women.
You may extend this to answer the question
by what is it like to be a woman of color.
What is it like to be women of certain region
of the world or from the certain region in
India, for instance?
What does it mean?
what are the feelings?
what are the, you know what are the understandings
and what are the experiences of being a woman
in a certain
condition.
So, the subjectivities particularly was, the
study of subjectivity this was particularly
also helpful for the study of literally texts.
And particularly say, characters in novels
or you know female person of the female persona
in poems for instance.
So, how it feels?
You seem to get a direct look.
So, to speak into the inner life of women,
there is an interesting book that I have read,
by Rama Mehta, inside the Haveli.
So, the Haveli or if you look at you know,
other communities.
The word like, Zenana for instance.
What does it mean to be?
What does it feel like to be under a system
of, what you call Purdah or what is this seems
to be like a women performing certain chores,
inside a having certain clear cut behavioural
norms inside Haveli .Do you follow?
So, these are some of the, you know these
are some of the ritual areas in which a feminist
criticism found.
That they could talk a lot about.
Consumption also in popular culture, consumption
what do women consume?
What are women allowed to consume and what
kind of things women are allowed to consume
or not at all.
And finally, of course given all these, what
are the identities that are given to women.
How is the women looked at and how does she
perceive her own identity .Do you understand?
all these create a sort of a female identity,
which takes on different colors in different
times and different, in which you know in
different temporal situation.
Now, we are which are mentioned this state
you know, following the first phase of liberal
and social feminism.
We also came across radical feminism.
There was radical feminism, psychoanalytic
feminism, feminisms of you know, based on
difference in color for instance.
And we also have other kinds, for instance,
different feminism ,we are not gonna go into
that.
And mentioning the important point, which
I would like to end this slide, which is post
feminism.
When we were writing you know, doing our PhD
work, this was not, so much at least in India,
this was not so much in focus really.
We were still in the older discourses of Elaine
Showalter, Gilbert and Gubar also some of
Luce Irigaray for instance.
But, there is a clear shift here.
And we and this is indicated and by this very
word post feminism.
Now, what is post feminist criticism?
Does it mean, that feminism has ended or is
it like the post in for instance, post structuralism,
where some of the tendencies of structuralism
lead to a post structuralist approach.
Post feminism is a post enlightenment discourse.
Now, for this again obviously we have to go
back to a term like enlightenment.
And what is enlightenment?
Enlightenment is a way of thinking.
Enlightenment is an ideology.
Enlightenment is the history also, the historical
period 
in which, you know the belief in the potential
of science, of technology, of reason and rationality,
was paramount.
And it was discourse in which everything was
seen in as being able to be conquered so to
speak, enable to be accounted for, so to speak
by science, reason and rationality.
So, many critiques are of the opinion, that
these what they call grand narratives or these
grand stories, for instance.
Given to us by Marxism, you know Marxism is
you know, a macro theory of accounting for
the structure as you saw the structure and
change in societies.
A religion, again is another such a grand
theory, do you follow?.
So, these are some of the ways in which there
was a certainty.
But, in post feminism, we will find, which
also called clear studies, that the difference
between sex and gender is problematized here.
Some of the main things here is the problematisation
of the sex gender dichotomy.
The importance or representation in sexual
identity, discourse and gender biological
truths are accessed through the discourse.
This is very important.
If you look at the difference here, even biology
we saw that when we defined gender as being
not sex.
Here as being, in fact also the certainty
of sex.
The certainty of the biological identities
question and it sets biological truths are
also a matter of discourse.
And the function of regulatory ways of speaking
in the formation and determination of the
sexed bodies, the regulatory following writer
like Foucault forces regulatory practices
and make up you know, a gendered being.
These are some of the important aspects, which
again are feminist.
But, the post feminist in the sense for instance
of, what a post feminist pertaining to that
practices.
A gender is not our only identity.
As partakers of other domains and discourses,
we both belong to and not belong to particular
discourses.
And finally, she says gender is always a failure,
an accumulated fact of social relations that
have become naturalized over time.
She also says that, this is the most important
point of gender.
Point, if you think here are, a masculine
or feminine.
It is an illusion.
First you say, that is a failure because,
it is an
unattainable ideal.
And it is also an illusion of an abiding gendered
self.
If you think that I am feminine, then it is
an illusion for the post feminist, because
she says here that it is with this, the effect
of gender must be understood as the mundane
ways in which, bodily gestures, movements
and styles constitute the illusion of an abiding
gendered self.
Gender is an effect.
It is an effect that is reiterated over and
over again.
So, that it seems natural to us.
It is a performance.
The series of performances that are done by
us.
So, there is nothing anthological or essentially
feminine, even in a feminine person, so called
feminine person.
Therefore, it becomes a critique of traditional
feminism, do you follow?
So, from a pure study’s perspective we then
look at regulatory practices and those silences
and gaps in your text.
When you are looking at the female character,
how certain attributes that are neither male
nor female are sort of silenced in the text.
And also silence by the way, we read the text.
And we missed those gaps in to the text.
Do you understand?
certain situations or episodes even lines
in the dialogues given to them.
These are certain potential that, we have
missed.
So, this new school or this new school of
feminism exhorts us to look into those gaps
and silences.
And to see these things are not given but,
something that is an effect much in the post
structuralist manner.
So, this is really as I said in the beginning,
the very elementary you know, way of looking
at gender, I tried to show you, how gender
you know, the traditional way of liberal and
social feminism gave way to feminist critiques.
And writers theorists who wanted to move away
from the male defined theories.
And have their own theories via radical feminism
for instance.
A feminism ,feminism of difference and feminism
of color, for instance.
So, for instances if you get the question
like see, what kind of question you may get
towards.
If you asked the question, why was the, you
know why was what were be early breakthroughs
made by feminists?
And then, you would say that it is held that
liberal feminism and social feminism which
borrowed from the discourses, which borrowed
from the already existing liberal and socialist
Marxist.
Discourses had already created by men and
then replaced certain class or you know, economic
class with female gender, these were the earlier
discourses of feminism.
And then, the next question if you say what
are the interventions that were made by
women feminist, by these theorists to carve
out the niche or carve out whole, not just
a niche, to carve out a whole.
You know, only opposite and you know a counter
sort of discourse to the male discourse.
Then, you say that feminism really broke.
Not.
Broke is not the word here.
Really carved out several areas and several
approaches in orientations like psychoanalytical
criticism, which was against the Freudian
castration, castration complex or Oedipus
complex models of looking at men and women,
understanding even children, all characters
enables.
And far more nuanced way of looking you know
at women through psychoanalysis, then radical
feminism that the way.
Women began to talk about you know, the differences
within feminism.
The clear dismissal of the homogenized subjectivity
of what it means to be women, because there
are other variables here.
There is a variable of class, variable of
caste or race for instance and sextual orientation.
Following the LGBT movement, the gay activist
movement for instance.
These have you know, have completely done
away with the fact, that the female experience
is simply a homogenized experience.
You know all over the world, throughout different
parts of the globe.
Then, next is what is patriarchy?
patriarchy is we divided into two words, root
words.
Patri meaning father and archi, is rule of
or rule by.
Patriaches, is basically an ideology.
It is a worldview.
It is a power structure.
It is also ways of representation and patriarchy
also is the way of material lives and concern.
And how does it help a feminist literally
criticism?
These understanding, helps a feminist literary
critique in trying to explore, how a) for
instance, women are represented in literary
texts.
b), what are the power dynamics between or
among characters in a literary text.
what are the details of, you know power dynamics
in the material lives of characters.
And you know, the subjectivities of female
characters also male characters.
Identities they are given, then also as I
said looking at popular culture not simply
canonized literature, looking at popular culture.
Finally, we end by asking a question on post
feminism.
Why do we have at all, a feminist literary
critical school known as post feminism, today?
This came about with a, you know with a clear
attack on the earlier division of sex and
gender.
The differentiation between sex and gender,
as sex being completely physical, physiological
and biological.
And gender being a more of a social construct.
Critics like Judith butler said that, even
sex that is biological definitions descriptions
are couched in a certain discourse.
So, sex cannot be completely a biological
thing.
Sex is also a discourse.
So, again redefining the boundaries between
sex and gender, a gender is a discursion activity.
So, also according to these critiques is sex.
So, let me end here.
I hope this was useful to you.
Again, let me remind you this is an elementary
lecture.
Those who are interested, may go on to look
at various aspects today.
The scenario is very different from what it
was before.
It is a scenario in which you have a plethora
of analytical tools and extremely exciting
time to be doing feminism.
Thank you.
