Women and the Epistemology of the Novel

  • Josephine Donovan

Abstract

It is a curious fact that although the novel emerged in the same historical era as early modern science and, therefore, was fostered in the same cultural matrix, no historian or theorist of the novel has explored possible links between the two. Revolutionary astronomical theories, which inaugurated the early modern era, such as Copernicus’s De Revolutionibus Celestium Orbium (1543), Kepler’s corrections of Copernicus (1596–1619), Galileo’s Dialogi de due massimi sistemi (1632), and Newton’s Principia Mathematica (1687) had profound metaphysical and epistemological implications, effectively dismantling medieval cosmology and requiring and promoting new paradigms and new theories of knowledge such as, most significantly, Descartes’s Discours de la méthode (1637) and Locke’s Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690). The seventeenth century was thus one of revolutionary transformations in people’s view of the world and of their place in and knowledge of the cosmos.

Keywords

Cage Mold Sine Hunt Defend 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Milan Kundera, The Art of the Novel, trans. Linda Asher (New York: Perennial Library, 1988), p. 3. Further references follow in the text.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Basil Willey, The Seventeenth-Century Background (1934; Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday Anchor, n.d.), p. 92.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    René Descartes, “Meditations on First Philosophy,” in Descartes Selections, ed. Ralph M. Eaton (New York: Scribner’s, 1927), pp. 99–103.Google Scholar
  4. 5.
    These thinkers are treated in Jacqueline Broad, Women Philosophers of the Seventeenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002). Further references follow in the text. This is not to imply that these women rejected all aspects of Cartesian thought. In particular, like Mary Astell, as discussed in chapter nine, they likely found liberating his belief that one could discover the truth oneself through commonsense reasoning and need not rely on (Latinate) authorities. Of course, this was also a central principle of the Protestant Reformation. Nor were these women the only seventeenth-century theorists to critique Cartesian dualism, but it is striking that all the major women thinkers of the dayjoined in such emphatic opposition.Google Scholar
  5. 7.
    Ian Watt, The Rise of the Novel (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1957), p. 12. Further references follow in the text.Google Scholar
  6. 8.
    Gary Saul Morson and Caryl Emerson, Mikhail Bakhtin: Creation of a Prosaics (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1990), pp. 27–28.Google Scholar
  7. 9.
    The “I-thou” concept was developed by Martin Buber, land Thou, trans. Walter Kaufmann (New York: Scribner’s, 1970).Google Scholar
  8. 13.
    The term possessive individualism was coined by C. B. Macpherson, The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962), pp. 255–56.Google Scholar
  9. See also Ruth Perry, “Mary Astell and the Feminist Critique of Possessive Individualism,” Eighteenth-Century Studies 23, no. 4 (Summer 1990): 444–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 18.
    Catherine Gallagher, “Embracing the Absolute: the Politics of the Female Subject in Seventeenth-Century England,” Genders 1 (Spring 1988): 32.Google Scholar
  11. 19.
    Bernard de Fontenelle, A Discovery of New Worlds, trans. Aphra Behn (London: Hesperus Press, 2012), p. 55. A Further reference follows in the text.Google Scholar
  12. 27.
    Josephine Donovan, “Ecofeminist Literary Criticism: Reading the Orange,” Hypatia 11, no. 2 (Spring 1996): 161–84. See also chapter one, p. 9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 28.
    Jennifer Crawford, Spiritually-Engaged Knowledge: The Attentive Heart (Aldershot, England: Ashgate, 2005), p. 13.Google Scholar
  14. 29.
    Louise Westling, “Participatory Knowledge and the World in Virginia Woolf,” in Engendering Rationalism, ed. Nancy Tuana and Sandra Morgen (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2001), p. 247. A further reference follows in the text.Google Scholar
  15. 30.
    Patricia Waugh, Practising Postmodernism/Reading Modernism (London: Edward Arnold, 1992), p. 120, as cited in Marais, “Colonialism,” p. 62.Google Scholar
  16. 31.
    In Descartes Selections, ed. Eaton, pp. 318–22. This treatise, which lays out Descartes’s mechanistic philosophy, was published in 1664 but written in 1629–33. Cavendish had some of Descartes’s work translated for her before 1664, according to Lisa T. Sarasohn, The Natural Philosophy of Margaret Cavendish: Reason and Fancy During the Scientific Revolution (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010), p. 130.Google Scholar
  17. 34.
    Edwin Arthur Burtt, The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science, rev. ed. (1931; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday Anchor, n.d.), pp. 172–73.Google Scholar
  18. 35.
    Anna Battigelli, Margaret Cavendish and the Exiles of the Mind (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1998), p. 96. Further references follow in the text.Google Scholar
  19. 36.
    Firdous Azim, The Colonial Rise of the Novel (London: Routledge, 1993), p. 37. Further references follow in the text.Google Scholar
  20. 37.
    Albert R. Jonsen and Stephen Toulim, The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), p. 276.Google Scholar
  21. 38.
    Alexander Pope, “Essay on Criticism,” 11. 88–89, in Alexander Pope: Selected Poetry and Prose, ed. William K. Wimsatt Jr. (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1961), p. 66.Google Scholar
  22. 39.
    Samuel Johnson, Rasselas, in Criticism: The Major Texts, ed. Walter Jackson Bate (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1952), p. 207.Google Scholar
  23. 40.
    Henry Fielding, Joseph Andrews, I.iii, in The Theory of the Novel, ed. Philip Stevick (New York: Free Press, 1967), p. 387.Google Scholar
  24. 41.
    George Clark, The Seventeenth Century, 2d ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1961), p. 339.Google Scholar
  25. 42.
    Laurence Sterne, The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman and A Sentimental Journey through France and Italy (New York: Modern Library, 1941), p. 4. Further references follow in the text.Google Scholar
  26. 44.
    Anna Sewell, Black Beauty (London: Jarrold & Sons, 1877).Google Scholar
  27. 45.
    Liz Bellamy, “It-Narrators and Circulation: Definning a Subgenre,” in The Secret Life of Things: Animals, Objects, and It-Narratives in Eighteenth-Century England, ed. Mark Blackwell (Lewisburg, Pa.: Bucknell University Press, 2007), p. 124. See also Deirdre Lynch, “Personal Effects and Sentimental Fictions” (63–91) and Lynn Festa, “The Moral Ends of Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Object Narratives” (309–28) in the same volume.Google Scholar
  28. 46.
    Nicholas Seager, The Rise of the Novel (Houndsmill, Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmilan, 2012), p. 164. Seager is here paraphrasing Betty A. Schel-lenberg’s analysis of these novels in The Conversational Circle: Rereading the English Novel 1740–1775 (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1996).Google Scholar
  29. 47.
    Josephine Donovan, European Local-Color Literature: National Tales, Dorfgeschichten, Romans Champêtres (New York: Bloomsbury Continuum, 2010).Google Scholar
  30. 48.
    Elizabeth A. Bohls, Women Travel Writers and the Language of Aesthetics 1716–1818 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), p. 46. Further references follow in the text.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 49.
    For a further discussion of a similar alternative to Kantian aesthetics proposed by Virginia Woolf and others, see Josephine Donovan, “Everyday Use and Moments of Being: Toward a Nondominative Aesthetic,” in Aesthetics in Feminist Perspective, ed. Hilde Hein and Carolyn Korsmeyer (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993), pp. 53–67.Google Scholar
  32. 50.
    Steven Kepnes, The Text as Thou: Martin Buber’s Dialogical Hermeneutics and Narrative Theology (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1992). See also Donovan, “Ecofeminist Literary Criticism.”Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Josephine Donovan 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Josephine Donovan

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations