How to write literary criticism?

Gender Orientation in Literary Acceptance —— Taking Feminist Literary Criticism as an Example

abstract

Gender orientation in literary acceptance is a deep-seated problem in literary theory, and it is also a realistic problem that must be fully expounded in the construction of basic literary theory. This paper mainly reviews and reflects the reader acceptance theory of feminist literary criticism, and emphasizes the importance of gender factors in the open space of literary interpretation.

For a long time, in China's theoretical circles, the issue of gender orientation in literary acceptance has been ignored, and feminist criticism has not been paid attention to the expansion of reader acceptance theory. The gender orientation of the recipients is not involved in many critical works and related contents of popular literature theory textbooks accepted by readers. There is no doubt that the gender tendency in literary acceptance does exist, which expands the connotation of works and enriches aesthetic perception. This paper mainly discusses the related achievements of feminist literary criticism.

one

Feminist literary criticism has a history of more than 30 years, which emphasizes the gender orientation of literary recipients and some theorists pay attention to the gender process in reading at the turn of the century.

Feminist literary criticism conforms to the general trend that world literary theory attaches importance to readers' response. The absolute objectivity of literary works is the first subverted concept in literary theory since the 1960s. Readers' acceptance theory enables people to understand literature and its history from a new angle by readjusting the relationship between works and readers. Is it from Rome? Ingden, Hans? Robert? Hans Robert Jauss, Wolfgang? Ethel or other reception theorists should first deconstruct that his works have objective and unchangeable values. They pointed out that a line of words, a page of words or a book seems to exist there obviously and objectively, but it is actually a deceptive illusion. The structure of the work is an absolutely eternal pattern, which has nothing to do with specific reading and evaluation. This is also nonsense. The meaning of the work comes from a specific environment and is closely related to the reader.

From the time point of view, the reader acceptance theory and the rise of feminist literary criticism are almost the same period, so it can be said that the reader acceptance theory logically issued a passport for feminist literary criticism. Whether it is admitted or not, feminist literary criticism is based on this. Meaning is the product of history, which is produced in the process of deconstruction and reconstruction. Different works actually mean different types of readers, and different subjective regulations of readers also lead to different understandings of works. The realization of literary significance lies not only in this paper, but also in the dynamic construction of two-way interaction. This view puts feminist criticism and reader acceptance theory on the same level, which is their compound superposition. However, feminist criticism is advancing step by step, not only abandoning the absolute objectivity of traditional literary theory, but also questioning its pure scientific nature. It is believed that the vast majority of traditional works and theories are male chauvinism, a transformation form in which men suppress women, and the literary field is full of traps. If the reader accepts this theory or hermeneutics and asks, "How do we know?" On this issue, feminist literary criticism continues to ask: What do we need to know? The Authority of Experience (1977), an early collection of feminist criticism, tries to link the works with readers' reactions and make a gender analysis in a special cultural background. It was followed by another feminist critical work, JudithFetterley, TheResistingReader, 1978, which focused on the male writers such as Washington? Owen, Hawthorne and Norman? Mailer and others believe that these so-called literary classics are based on men's experience, which is contrary to the experience of female readers, thus advocating female readers' suspicion and rebellion against traditional works.

Many feminist critics point out that the view that literary works are regarded as conveying true and "human" experience is a deceptive story emphasized by the western patriarchal humanistic tradition. Even a writer who is more friendly to women like Shakespeare shows his contempt for women through the characters in his works. For example, in Hamlet, the author expresses his misogyny through Hamlet's criticism of Sophie:

Hamlet's understanding of Sophie's behavior depends entirely on his view of female man, Sophie's behavior is also completely monitored by two potential men, and her chastity or lewdness depends entirely on Hamlet's attitude. If he loves her and she accepts his gifts and caresses, then she is a virgin; If he only wants to seduce her and doesn't love him, then she is a lowly prostitute, because Hamlet despised and laughed at her and cursed her to enter the monastery. ①

The patriarchal culture has always rejected women, and the traditional narrative techniques and explanatory discourse, as well as the aesthetic feelings (Yao Si Yu) that are constantly supplemented and enriched in the acceptance chain passed down from generation to generation, are all male. Female readers have unconsciously become more passive and sad in the process of crossing this male frame, and the so-called "filling the unfixed points" operation is still the behavior of the male frame. Therefore, the primary task of feminist literary criticism is to learn to look at those biased works with a critical eye. Reading should be a challenge to the existing norms. Female readers are "resistant readers" and exist in the "explanatory community" shaped by gender factors. The construction of feminist literary criticism is based on the cornerstone of "resisting reading", which is a further concretization of and an affront to the reader's acceptance theory.

In the view of Hans Robert Jauss and others, the disappearance of the facts and rules of cultural context is only beneficial for us to get a new explanation in some classic works, and the artistic features of the works cannot be immediately and completely perceived in the initial appearance. Feminist literary criticism, on the other hand, holds that most classic works can be questioned, and a reinterpretation of the classics may often mean subversion and digestion of the classics, and many "non-classic" works belonging to "sub-cultural groups" are found. Language is not a prison that separates people from reality. As a system, it always exists in history and concrete narration, and it is a place for political struggle. Language symbol system alone cannot explain why women's language is a "powerless language". The meaning of language also comes from the social existence of different speakers. The distance between fact and description is that words represent political rights, and political rights determine the right to speak.

Although the reader's acceptance theory criticizes the historical objectivism research model of "establishing a chronicle of facts" and demands "getting rid of the eternal essence of illusory works of art and the eternal foothold of observers", it still takes an evasive attitude towards the essence or value of literature, similar to positivism, new criticism, Russian formalism, structuralism, psychoanalysis and mythological archetypal criticism, which is still a male-dominated discourse. Jane, an American critic who understands reception theory? Tompkins pointed out:

Readers responded that critics boasted that their works were quite different from the principles of the new criticism. However, I think, if we carefully examine the theory and practice of these critics, we can see that they have not turned over the literary theories one by one, but just played a new turn in the old formalistic tone. ..... What's even more striking is that the reader's reaction criticism and its consanguineous-decomposition criticism have not broken away from the stereotype that critical articles fall into because formalism equates criticism with explanation. ⑤

The connection between male authority and traditional reason has become more solid and hidden by the accepted theory, thus covering up its doubts and criticisms. The political nature of feminist criticism pushes readers to a more radical position.

The most basic aspect of the reader's acceptance theory is that readers read works according to their different feelings about them, and readers' reactions often restrict the meaning of the works. However, it should be said that the reception theory actually "assumes an established reader". How to draw a clear line between emphasizing the reader's unique experience and indulging the reader, and what kind of specific cultural background and subjective identity the reader has ... The reader reception theory does not discuss these issues in depth. Most of the representatives of reception theory generally emphasize the reader's experience, and the so-called super readers, ideal readers, omniscient readers, expert readers, narrative recipients, historical readers, potential readers and good readers are still abstract and broad.

The definition of readers in feminist literary criticism further embodies the factors of political science, history, sociology, psychology and literary anthropology in the theoretical connotation of readers' acceptance. Readers themselves are the basis of understanding diversity, and each reader will bring some different understandings and expectations to the works. The so-called "forgetting daily self-reading" or "a reader with strong ideological beliefs is likely to be an unqualified reader" (Ethel) is unacceptable to feminist criticism. Since traditional literature is the product of male prejudice, isn't giving up the conscious female critical consciousness, adapting to such a "calling structure" or "filling uncertainty" and agreeing with such works just agreeing with male prejudice and willingly surrendering? Readers who accept theoretical definitions or expectations are not "neutral" or have "strong ideological beliefs". In addition, if all literacy is "misreading", what is the correctness of the criticism of masculinity caused by "reading like a woman"? How to achieve its political goal of maintaining "sisterhood" and "socialist" gender equality?

two

Easy? Showalter takes Hardy's The Mayor of Casterbridge as an example to illustrate how "the fantasy of male-dominated critics distorts the text" and how women's understanding is different from it. At the beginning of the novel, drunken Michael? Henchard sold his wife to a sailor in a small town for five guineas. A man named Owen? Howe's male critics have the following understanding of this scene:

Get rid of his wife and throw away the woman's shrinking rag, along with her silent complaints and unbearable passivity; Escaping is not surreptitiously abandoning, but openly selling your body to strangers, just like a horse sold in the market; In this way, get another chance in life-The Mayor of Casterbridge is like this fantasy about men.

This fascinating technology has begun. ⑥

Showalter believes that the above explanation is undoubtedly a great insult to women. All kinds of so-called feminine characteristics are actually endowed by men. The performance of the sold woman in the opening scene of the novel does not show that she is depressed, complaining and passive. The so-called passive feature is because she is a woman and bears the burden of supporting her children. What Hardy wants to show is that Henchard is symbolically selling all his possession of the female world, and his tragedy is born from this. Showalter's reading also shows that "reading as a woman" praises or recognizes the status and value of women:

The emotional axis of the mayor of Casterbridge is neither the relationship between Henchard and his wife, nor the relationship between Henchard and Lucitan. Temperman's general romantic history, but he gradually admired his wife's daughter Elizabeth? Jane's strength and dignity. Like other women in the novel, she was dominated by her own thoughts, and the rules made by men were not important to her. It was not until Henchard personally taught her to respect the law, patriarchy and norms that she finally rejected him. Henchard is a self-proclaimed "hater of women", and at best shows an "arrogant pity" for women. The decline of his masculinity, the shackles of the mayor, the loss of master's authority and the loss of father's power made him humble and lost his dignity. But when Henchard's so-called weakness and "femininity" broke through his fragility, Hardy actually showed us the best side of this man. ⑦

In fact, gender consciousness is mainly a cultural construction, and men's literary acceptance also has a keen gender perspective, which can also produce a tendency to sympathize with women's gender equality. A few decades ago, Qu Qiubai began his article "A Little Problem-Women's Liberation" with an ancient poem, criticizing the damage of feudal ethics to women and liquidating the disgraceful role of literature in shaping the stereotype that men are superior to women, which really reached the critical height of contemporary feminist literary criticism. In response to a friend's praise of Wu Meicun's saying that "it is smart to be used to guessing things", Qu Qiubai replied:

Good but good, aren't you afraid to see it? Doesn't it hurt? He doesn't understand. I said: this word, such poems, articles, novels and plays, are photographs in prison. ..... Such a picture of a female prisoner wearing handcuffs and shackles, why not be afraid? Why not feel bad? Pity is not pity! Alas! How can you be considered "smart" if you are not handcuffed and used to prying into other people's affairs? Many mental shackles-principles, ethics, family system, social organizations, and relative concepts between men and women-have created such a mental prison to imprison them. In the eyes of such an unfortunate woman, what is the matter in the world? Since there are so many chains to imprison them, their intelligence is useless. Fortunately, it's just "when the dance is unreasonable, the makeup just sits on the incense." Unfortunately, nature is "ignorance and silence-vanity hurts spring". Since a writer has such a delicate literary mind, why not think about it? There are many women who are used to talking to themselves, and there are also many people with calluses on their hands and feet who still don't have enough to eat. ⑧

Literature plays an important role in the construction of gender subject, and Qu Qiubai's sober and wise mind is bound to look for the makers of these "photos of female prisoners":

Since women are influenced by the old religion and society, it seems that they are all evil created by the old religion, theory and society, and writers just describe them. I don't know that literary works-poems, words, articles, novels, plays-have a little power to dominate social psychology. Writers should always bear this responsibility. ..... How strong this prison is! Isn't this what China writers described as "untitled poetry and fragrant writing style"? Isn't this a sharp weapon for them to decide the concept of men and women in society? ⑨

As a result, Qu Qiubai reached a new height of "feminist literary criticism" during the May 4th Movement, more clearly pointed out the relationship between human gender stereotypes and literature and art than Liang Qichao, Chen Duxiu and Hu Shi, and more clearly showed the critical attitude of many western feminist critics in the 1970s and Chinese feminist critics in the late 1980s to traditional literature. It is a great pity that this dimension of criticism has been interrupted in the history of world literary criticism for decades, and it has never attracted the attention of academic circles.

There is no simple direct communication channel from the author to this article and then to the readers. Even if the author's intention is to convey the message of gender equality, there is no guarantee that readers will accept it in the same way. Women don't always read as women, and a woman's reading may agree with male centralism. This recognition also includes the influence of the receiver on the dominant discourse of male roles in the works. British critic Roslin? Is Coward Feminist in Women's Novels? The authors and readers of Mills-Boone series novels are all women. However, nothing is farther away from the purpose of feminism than the illusion produced by reading such novels. Therefore, "critical reading will depend on the assumption of female characteristics she brings into this article", and women's experience and experience ensure that this kind of reading is different from the value orientation of male centralism. Different experiences lead to different understandings of literature and life. This experience is mainly political and cultural:

We don't want to prove that men and women will systematically establish different concepts based on some purely empirical facts, such as boiling water, the color of skirts, whether cats are on straw mats and so on. Only on those valuable and political issues related to reproduction or social roles of men and women can there be obvious differences. 1 1

This difference will form some formulas or conventions over time, which will affect people's reading. Gene. Kairat pointed out that the reading of any text depends on two aspects: (1) literary conventions that readers can understand at any time, including reading strategies and related fields that cause associative meanings; (2) The choice of readers outside these conventions depends on what kind of readers were at that time. Kairat used this to explain why readers of different times are interested in Charlotte. Gilman's yellow wallpaper has different understanding. The novel was first published in 1892, and then it was unknown. 1973 was published in a single book, which has almost become a well-known feminist masterpiece due to the promotion of feminism. Some feminists believe that the heroine's mental breakdown in The Yellow Wallpaper happened in the room that used to be a nursery, which symbolizes the prison. However, the symbolic significance of the nursery has been ignored by several generations of critics, and it has always been regarded as a child with Ellen? Poe's horror story. To understand this symbol, it depends on the understanding of the related fields of customs and practices, more specifically, it depends on the development of feminist thought. Only from this perspective can we understand houses, caves, mirrors, locked wardrobes, drawers, boxes and so on. What Gilbert and Geba found in Crazy Woman in the Attic is a symbol of women's restriction and imprisonment. It's like a western scholar Jane, quoting Zhang Xiaohong, a scholar from Taiwan Province Province. Jenny. Kennard's trial: "Feminism successfully overturned Yellow Wallpaper, which is effectively forming a new vocabulary for reading women's literature, which is interwoven by the four main axes of patriarchy, madness, space and pursuit, opening up a space for feminism to" fight against classics. " 12

Tony. Mowa pointed out that the understanding of female consciousness of female writers should not be overly idealized. /kloc-women writers in the 0/9th century did not live in a vacuum, but were constantly eroded by male consciousness. So how do they keep a clear and independent female consciousness? This is related to male chauvinism. The rule of patriarchal ideology itself is contradictory and full of loopholes. It is in various gaps that the author can express the real female voice, but how to recognize this voice is not a simple matter. This involves the framework of reading:

Reading in any context needs a framework, which is inevitable. This framework includes subjectivity, discourse and power: it shows the established meanings, values and power relations that we don't need to accept, and can show where they come from and whose interests they represent. 13

Female readers agree with women's concerns, and conscious female consciousness can help the majority of female readers to establish their dominant position in reading, so as to discover what their predecessors neglected, discover the uniqueness of female writers, and feel the real situation and thoughts of women. Jane? Pie? Tomkins Beecher? The interpretation of Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin is very telling. Tomkins thinks that American literature in the19th century is usually regarded as Hawthorne, Melville and Poe because of male chauvinism. Men's literature such as Emerson, Thoreau, Whitman, and women's literature are belittled and regarded as unpretentious popular family novels. She pointed out that shallowness and narrowness do not belong to women's works and the women who created them, but to those critics. From the perspective of women, she said:

Uncle Tom's Cabin is the most important book in this century in every aspect that people can think of. It is the first American novel to sell more than one million copies, and its influence is usually considered immeasurable. It not only shows its time value, but also is responsible for it. It belongs to a literary genre, that is, sentimental novels. Its main characteristics are written by women, written for women and written about women. In this respect, Uncle Tom's Cabin is a representative rather than an exception. It is a theological encyclopedia of American family religion in the19th century, and a wonderful compilation of the story of culture itself: the story of salvation through maternal love. Judging from the ideological materials they can master, sentimental novelists exaggerate a myth, which gives women the central position of power and authority in culture; Uncle Tom's Cabin is the most dazzling example of these efforts. 14

As a famous theorist who accepts theoretical criticism or new historicism criticism, tomkins does not think Moby Dick and The Scarlet Letter are not American literary classics. She pointed out that there should be another set of standards to judge Stowe's novels, which are "different from those classic works whose status has been established" and should highlight their political purposes. "The purpose of doing this is to urge the weak, that is, women, to inherit the whole world as soon as possible"100001000/06 tomkins believes that many contemporary theorists who pay attention to readers' response "do not look at the text beyond the scope of formalism" and should regard language perception as ".

Of course, it is inappropriate to overemphasize the gender orientation of reading and emphasize that every reader's reading must be related to the gender value orientation. It may stifle the richness and vividness of reading perception, lead to the transformation from literary appreciation to political reading, lead to the monotony of reading perception, and form a closed and infinite explanation circle. Obviously, women can read as women, or as workers, farmers, teenagers, the elderly, blacks or whites. The class, nationality and age of readers may also have an impact on appreciation. In addition, some feminists overemphasize the binary opposition between men and women, claiming that men will misinterpret women's works because they lack the necessary life experience to understand them. "Women" are not monolithic. The working experience of working-class women is often unfamiliar to upper-class bourgeois women, while male workers may have this experience. Many people's literary appreciation feelings are based on indirect experience, so "cross-identification" is entirely possible. Moreover, as Derrida said, "the logic of Yang-centrism is ready to turn over or subvert itself at any time", and the better the writing, the more it will shake its own boundaries or remind people of them, as well as the boundaries between Yang-centrism, all authority and' centralism' and general hegemony. ""Texts like Nietzsche, Joyce, Pengre, Ba Taye and Aalto are all extremely Yang-centered. They have the effect of deconstruction, and at the same time they happen to be anti-Yang-centered. " "Who will trust George safely? Sang and George? Eliot, or like Virginia? Woolf, Gertrude Stam or Helen? Sissos, these very great modern writers, wrote articles that simply belonged to non-Yang-centered theory or anti-Yang-centered theory. Every excellent text, its value orientation is often diverse, and the receiver can enter the room from various angles because of gender factors.

Just one of them.

Precautions:

①LisaJardin, StillHarpingonDaughters London, 1989, p. 172. (2) attending161718 Jonathan Culler, Ond Construction OntheryandCriticism Structuralism, 1985, page 53, page 137, page 49.

3 Lin Shuming: "Resist reading; Feminist Literary Criticism and Readers' Reception Theory, Shanghai Literary Theory, No.5, 199 1.

(4)13 Chris Vuitton, feminist practice and post-structuralism theory, Great Britain, 1987, p. 23, p. 174.

5 Jane? Tomkins: Readers in History: Evolution of Literary Response, Criticism of Readers' Response, Culture and Art Press, 1989, pp. 255-256.

⑦ElaineShowaLter, Towards FeministPoetics the New Feminism, new york, 1985, p. 129, P. 130.

⑧ ⑨ Qu Qiubai: A Small Problem-Women's Liberation, New Society No.7 (1920).

1 1993, hippatiya, p. 65438.

12 Zhang Xiaohong: "Is there a woman in the text? Read Yellow Wallpaper, Chinese and Foreign Literature, Volume 22,No. 10,No. 1994.

14 15 tomkins: The Power of Emotion, Selected Latest Western Literary Theories, Lijiang Publishing House, 199 1 Edition, p. 478, p. 489.

19 Robin? r？ Warhol, Pursuing Evil: The Contribution of Feminist Narratology to Cultural Studies, Dai Wei? Herman Ed. New narratology. Trans. Ma lianghai. Peking University Publishing House, p. 239.

202 1 Susan? s？ Friedman: Beyond female writer criticism and female literary criticism, selected translation of gender studies (edited by Wang Zheng and others). ), Sanlian Bookstore, 1998, page 44 1, page 450.

2223 wo? Ethel. Reading behavior. Trans. Hui Minjin et al. Translated by Hunan Literature and Art Publishing House, 199 1, p. 279, p. 28 1.

24 Harold? Bloom. Criticism, classical structure and prediction. Trans. Wu Qiong. China Social Sciences Press, 2000, p. 254. 25 Lin Shuming: Feminist Literary Criticism in Multidimensional Vision, China Social Sciences Press, 2004, p. 408-409.

26 See Jacques? Derrida Literary action. Trans. Zhao Xingguo and others. China Social Sciences Press, 1998, pp. 25-26.