Untitled Page

Morality and Maidens: The Ethics of Women in Literature by Joanna Johnson Overview 1. Setting the Stage: Questions to Think About What is sexist literature and why is it bad? Why don't we read more women authors in schools? And of those women authors we do read, to what extent are they included in the schools' curriculum because they fulfill a quota? Are those women authors truly on a par with the other canonical authors we read? Are we really "exploding" the canon by including more female writers, or are we just including them to be fair? Is the sex of the author even relevant to whether a work of literature is great? 2. Introduction In well-known English academic Harold Bloom's literary canon, the vast majority of the authors are men. Out of the last 104 Nobel prizes for literature, eleven have been awarded to women (and out of 777 Nobel prizes overall, only thirty-four have been awarded to women). Are women being deliberately ignored, have they lacked opportunity, or are they just not as good as men at writing works of literature? The aim of this ethics module is to consider the ethical aspects of the roles of women in literature. Understanding ethical choices comes from both understanding the values that are behind moral decisions, and from developing critical thinking skills. Examining literature with attention to gender allows us to consider a number of issues: the status and equality of women historically and today, via the number of female authors (for example the number who are in the canon) the types of representations of women in literature, in other words, what obligations texts (or authors) have to represent people accurately, even if that means reinforcing the notion that women are subservient to men whether language is "gendered." In other words, is there such a thing as women's writing and men's writing? What criteria do we base these judgments on? what obligation "good" literature has to make us consider ideas of gender and of inequality when we read how far should we employ an "affirmative action" policy in allowing women authors into the canon? Would this redress the balance, or lead to further accusation in that women have to be given a free pass because they can't make the grade? Situations this module will consider include the following: Virginia Woolf argued in the early twentieth century that if Shakespeare had had a sister with equal gifts, she would never have been able to produce the same work as Shakespeare himself because of the expected role and status of women at the time. Is this still true today? Would an author today ever need to use a male pseudonym, as George Eliot had to when she was writing in the nineteenth century? What are the moral responsibilities of authors to portray historically and traditionally subjugated (i.e. completely controlled by someone else) groups of people in ways that try to counter that subjugation? If authors portray women in subservient roles, do women in real life get a worse deal? In other words, does a portrayal reify (make real) such a role? Or perhaps the portrayal highlights the subservience and acts as a criticism of such roles? The ethical issues covered in the module are important for high school students to learn because they will help them to consider the ethical aspects of including and fairly representing all minority groups of people, of which women are just one, in the mainstream of society. And, as the Victorian Web points out: To enter the canon, or more properly, to be entered into the canon is to gain certain obvious privileges. The gatekeepers of the fortress of high culture include influential critics, museum directors and their boards of trustees, and far more lowly scholars and teachers. Indeed, a chief enforcer of the canon appears in middlebrow anthologies, those hangers on of high culture that in the Victorian period took the form of pop anthologies like Golden Treasury and today that of major college anthologies in America. To appear in the Norton or Oxford anthology is to have achieved, not exactly greatness but what is more important, certainly -- status and accessibility to a reading public. And that is why, of course, it matters that so few women writers have managed to gain entrance to such anthologies. (http://www.victorianweb.org/gender/canon/litcan.html)

Morality and Maidens: The Ethics of Women in Literature

by Joanna Johnson

Overview

1. Setting the Stage: Questions to Think About

What is sexist literature and why is it bad?
Why don't we read more women authors in schools?
And of those women authors we do read, to what extent are they included in the schools' curriculum because they fulfill a quota?
Are those women authors truly on a par with the other canonical authors we read?
Are we really "exploding" the canon by including more female writers, or are we just including them to be fair?
Is the sex of the author even relevant to whether a work of literature is great?

2. Introduction

In well-known English academic Harold Bloom's literary canon, the vast majority of the authors are men. Out of the last 104 Nobel prizes for literature, eleven have been awarded to women (and out of 777 Nobel prizes overall, only thirty-four have been awarded to women). Are women being deliberately ignored, have they lacked opportunity, or are they just not as good as men at writing works of literature?

The aim of this ethics module is to consider the ethical aspects of the roles of women in literature. Understanding ethical choices comes from both understanding the values that are behind moral decisions, and from developing critical thinking skills. Examining literature with attention to gender allows us to consider a number of issues:

1. the status and equality of women historically and today, via the number of female authors (for example the number who are in the canon)
2. the types of representations of women in literature, in other words, what obligations texts (or authors) have to represent people accurately, even if that means reinforcing the notion that women are subservient to men
3. whether language is "gendered." In other words, is there such a thing as women's writing and men's writing? What criteria do we base these judgments on?
4. what obligation "good" literature has to make us consider ideas of gender and of inequality when we read
5. how far should we employ an "affirmative action" policy in allowing women authors into the canon? Would this redress the balance, or lead to further accusation in that women have to be given a free pass because they can't make the grade?

Situations this module will consider include the following:

Virginia Woolf argued in the early twentieth century that if Shakespeare had had a sister with equal gifts, she would never have been able to produce the same work as Shakespeare himself because of the expected role and status of women at the time. Is this still true today?

Would an author today ever need to use a male pseudonym, as George Eliot had to when she was writing in the nineteenth century?

What are the moral responsibilities of authors to portray historically and traditionally subjugated (i.e. completely controlled by someone else) groups of people in ways that try to counter that subjugation? If authors portray women in subservient roles, do women in real life get a worse deal? In other words, does a portrayal reify (make real) such a role? Or perhaps the portrayal highlights the subservience and acts as a criticism of such roles?

The ethical issues covered in the module are important for high school students to learn because they will help them to consider the ethical aspects of including and fairly representing all minority groups of people, of which women are just one, in the mainstream of society. And, as the Victorian Web points out:

To enter the canon, or more properly, to be entered into the canon is to gain certain obvious privileges. The gatekeepers of the fortress of high culture include influential critics, museum directors and their boards of trustees, and far more lowly scholars and teachers. Indeed, a chief enforcer of the canon appears in middlebrow anthologies, those hangers on of high culture that in the Victorian period took the form of pop anthologies like Golden Treasury and today that of major college anthologies in America. To appear in the Norton or Oxford anthology is to have achieved, not exactly greatness but what is more important, certainly -- status and accessibility to a reading public. And that is why, of course, it matters that so few women writers have managed to gain entrance to such anthologies. (http://www.victorianweb.org/gender/canon/litcan.html)