04304nam 2200805Ia 450 991045055320332120210603024103.01-282-53740-70-226-40179-0978661253740010.7208/9780226401799(CKB)1000000000009221(EBL)485971(OCoLC)593240116(SSID)ssj0000337333(PQKBManifestationID)11278195(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000337333(PQKBWorkID)10288742(PQKB)11017369(MiAaPQ)EBC485971(DE-B1597)535557(OCoLC)1135592181(DE-B1597)9780226401799(Au-PeEL)EBL485971(CaPaEBR)ebr10366849(CaONFJC)MIL253740(EXLCZ)99100000000000922119940712d1995 uy 0engur||#||||||||txtccrEquivocal beings[electronic resource] politics, gender, and sentimentality in the 1790's : Wollstonecraft, Radcliffe, Burney, Austen /Claudia L. JohnsonChicago University of Chicago Press19951 online resource (256 p.)Women in culture and societyDescription based upon print version of record.0-226-40184-7 0-226-40183-9 Includes bibliographical references (p. [205]-231) and index.Front matter --CONTENTS --FOREWORD --ACKNOWLEDGMENTS --ABBREVIATIONS --INTRODUCTION. The Age of Chivalry and the Crisis of Gender --PART TWO. Ann Radcliffe --PART THREE. Frances Burney --AFTERWORD. Jane Austen --NOTES --INDEXIn the wake of the French Revolution, Edmund Burke argued that civil order depended upon nurturing the sensibility of men-upon the masculine cultivation of traditionally feminine qualities such as sentiment, tenderness, veneration, awe, gratitude, and even prejudice. Writers as diverse as Sterne, Goldsmith, Burke, and Rousseau were politically motivated to represent authority figures as men of feeling, but denied women comparable authority by representing their feelings as inferior, pathological, or criminal. Focusing on Mary Wollstonecraft, Ann Radcliffe, Frances Burney, and Jane Austen, whose popular works culminate and assail this tradition, Claudia L. Johnson examines the legacy male sentimentality left for women of various political persuasions. Demonstrating the interrelationships among politics, gender, and feeling in the fiction of this period, Johnson provides detailed readings of Wollstonecraft, Radcliffe, and Burney, and treats the qualities that were once thought to mar their work-grotesqueness, strain, and excess-as indices of ideological conflict and as strategies of representation during a period of profound political conflict. She maintains that the reactionary reassertion of male sentimentality as a political duty displaced customary gender roles, rendering women, in Wollstonecraft's words, "equivocal beings."Women in culture and society.English fictionWomen authorsHistory and criticismPolitics and literatureGreat BritainHistory18th centuryWomen and literatureGreat BritainHistory18th centuryEnglish fiction18th centuryHistory and criticismFemininity in literatureSentimentalism in literatureAuthorshipSex differencesSex role in literatureElectronic books.English fictionWomen authorsHistory and criticism.Politics and literatureHistoryWomen and literatureHistoryEnglish fictionHistory and criticism.Femininity in literature.Sentimentalism in literature.AuthorshipSex differences.Sex role in literature.823/.6099287Johnson Claudia L871851MiAaPQMiAaPQMiAaPQBOOK9910450553203321Equivocal beings1946306UNINA