Wool & Words

I stole the title for this entry from Virginia Woolf via Susan Gubar, who just delivered the closing keynote address for the 12th Annual British Women Writers Conference here in Athens, GA. I was heartened as she began her talk, first because it was clearly not the typical conference address dissecting a text via X perspective, and next, because she appeared to be questioning the nature and future of academic feminism. Gubar, one of the most charismatic, animated, and genuine people I've come across to date, raised issues that the audience immediately connected with and that I found particularly insightful. My admittedly weak paraphrase of the question she posed: What is happening to the academy and to feminism in general, that our buildings are in decay and our presses against the wall and why do we find ourselves, as feminist writers, with a waning of public interest in what we have to say?

The response was to tackle an experiment in criticism that couches a survey of the history of feminst criticism in a narrative frame that invites, rather than alienates, readers who might be put off by the jargon and theory laden discourse that permeates the academy. The paper, "A Feminism of One's Own," related the story of an established feminist critic who encounters today's classroom, coming away with a sense that great strides have been made, but more are to come.

I was generally heartened by this paper, although I had a nagging sense that something underlying the talk would soon destroy my ease. The Q&A session quickly brought those issues to light. As Gubar was speaking, I kept thinking, "yes, finally, someone in a position to do something gets it, understands that the students we try to reach now are different than those 20 years ago, that the general public tends toward varying levels of hostility or indifference to the news from the academy, and that we have to consider the ways in which we can make ourselves relevant to audiences we want to reach (or so we say), but can't." I was hoping that this would lead to an understanding by all parties that for us to move toward "A Feminism Of One's Own," we'd have to begin with the premise that as the culture begins to internalize certain "doctrinal" messages, people will begin to accept or reject them, and that we may end up with many possible feminisms born not out of ignorance and close-mindedness, but out of an embracing of the dissonance and discord that will inevitably arise when we free individual minds from externally crafted strictures. To me, that is a true feminism.

What happened in the Q & A? Well, let's just say that by the end, I was saddened and somewhat insulted that some folks just aren't ready to listen to conservative voices, choosing instead to marginalize those who disagree with canonical positions. These are the same voices that I hear when I read online debates about the possibility of there being a "pro-life feminist," the assumption being that there is only one way to be a feminist, and that way is exclusively pro-choice. How ironic; a woman's right to choose, paramount in the decision to end emerging life, is irrelevant when it comes to choosing to espouse or adopt a position that all life is sacred and worth protecting.

I have many students who come from conservative homes, with conservative ideas. I have heard my colleagues bemoan their provincialism, assuming that their job is to open these poor, deaf ears to the gospel truth of liberal theory and philosphies. Those poor students, intelligent and eager to learn, very quickly surmise that there is only one way to think in English courses. What an absolute shame.

I want a feminism of my own, one that I craft, that I control. I want to be able to define myself in the world and for myself. I didn't ask the question I wanted to after this talk, the one that burned in my brain and is still eating at me, spurring this post.

How can we be dismayed at our apparant irrelevancy when we demonstrate no human interest in really hearing the other side? How can we be upset that fewer young women today accept our invitation when it is handed to them with restrictive conditions that require lockstep agreement with thorny issues? How can we weep and bemoan our marginalized state when we marginalize our sisters?

I don't know where this goes for me next. But I know it will go where I choose to drive it, not where the established academy tells me it must.