Introduction: Gender, Genre and Attribution in Early Modern Women’s Sonnet Sequences and Collections

  • Rosalind Smith
Part of the Early Modern Literature in History book series (EMLH)

Abstract

Virginia Woolf’s influential construction of the Renaissance woman writer as silent, isolated and embattled has undergone significant revision in feminist literary scholarship. The historical sources of such assumptions have been exposed in analyses of canon formation, and a new set of texts, genres and modes of writing has been introduced to accommodate early modern women’s diverse contributions to the literary field.2 However, in the process of redrawing the boundaries of early modern textuality, the ‘perennial puzzle’ that Woolf identifies has remained unexamined: Why did women contribute to some of the vernacular lyric traditions of the English Renaissance in such small numbers? This book reconsiders this question in one of the period’s primary lyric genres, the sonnet sequence. Structured around the detailed local histories of each text’s production and circulation, it seeks to construct a generic history that accommodates rupture and hiatus without recourse to assumed absence, invented tradition or uncritical reinforcement of the male-authored tradition as normative. The scarcity of English women sonneteers at the height of the male-authored genre presents a problem, or puzzle, for examination rather than a straightforward example of feminine limitation in the period.

Keywords

Europe Prose 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 1.
    Virginia Woolf, A Room of One’s Own (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1945), 36.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    See Margaret Ezell, Writing Women’s Literary History (Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993), 39–65.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A[nne] L[ock], Sermons of John Caluin, vpon the Songe that Ezechias Made after He had bene Sicke, and Afflicted by the Hand of God, Conteyned in the 38. Chapiter of Esay (London, 1560);Google Scholar
  4. George Buchanan, Ane Detectiovn of the duinges of Marie Quene of Scottes (London, 1571).Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    John Soowthern, Pandora, the Musyque of the Beautie, of His Mistresse Diana (London, 1584);Google Scholar
  6. Lady Mary Wroth, The Countess of Mountgomeries Urania (London, 1621).Google Scholar
  7. 5.
    See Michael R.G. Spiller, The Development of the Sonnet: An Introduction (London and New York: Routledge, 1992).Google Scholar
  8. 6.
    Rinaldina Russell, ed., Italian Women Writers: A Bio-Bibliographical Sourcebook (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1994), xix;Google Scholar
  9. Laura Anna Stortoni, ed., Women Poets of the Italian Renaissance: Courtly Ladies and Courtesans, trans. Laura Anna Stortoni and Mary Prentice Lillie (New York: Italica Press, 1997), xxvi–xxvii.Google Scholar
  10. 7.
    Vittoria Colonna, Rime de la Divina Vittoria Colonna Marchesa di Pescara, nuo-vamente stampate (Parma, 1538); Rime della diva Vittoria Colonna da Pescara (Venice, 1544);Google Scholar
  11. Girolamo Ruscelli, Tutte le Rime della Illustriss. Et Eccellentiss. Signora Vittoria Colonna. Marchesana di Pescara (Venice, 1558);Google Scholar
  12. Ludovico Dolce, Rime della S. Vittoria Colonna, Marchesana Illust. Di Pescara (Vinegia, 1559).Google Scholar
  13. See Joseph Gibaldi, ‘Vittoria Colonna: Child, Woman, Poet’, in Women Writers of the Renaissance and Reformation, ed. Katharina M. Wilson (Athens and London: University of Georgia Press, 1987), 22–46;Google Scholar
  14. Margaret L. King, Women of the Renaissance (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991), 142–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 8.
    Veronica Gambara, Le Rime, ed. Alan Bullock (Firenze: Olschki, 1995). The first printed collection of Gambara’s poetry appeared in 1553 in Girolamo Ruscelli, Rime di Diversi eccelenti Autori Brescianti Nuovamente Racolte, et Mandate in luce da Girolamo Ruscelli (Venice, 1553).Google Scholar
  16. 9.
    Gaspara Stampa, Selected Poems, ed. and trans. Laura Anna Stortoni and Mary Prentice Lillie (New York: Italica Press, 1994).Google Scholar
  17. Ann Rosalind Jones, ‘Feminine Pastoral as Heroic Martyrdom: Gaspara Stampa and Mary Wroth’, The Currency of Eros: Women’s Love Lyric in Europe, 1540–1620 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990), 118–154;Google Scholar
  18. Mary B. Moore, Desiring Voices: Women Sonneteers and Petrarchism (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2000), 58–93;Google Scholar
  19. Gordon Braden, ‘Gaspara Stampa and the Gender of Petrarchism’, Texas Studies in Literature and Language 38:2 (1996), 115–139.Google Scholar
  20. 10.
    See Giovanna Rabitti, ‘Lyric Poetry, 1500–1650’, trans. Abigail Brundin, in A History of Women’s Writing in Italy, ed. Letizia Panizza and Sharon Wood (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 37–51, and ‘Vittoria Colonna as Role Model for Cinquecento Women Poets’, in Women in Italian Renaissance Culture and Society, ed. Letizia Panizza (Oxford: Legenda, 2000), 478–497;Google Scholar
  21. Diana Robin, ‘Courtesans, Celebrity, and Print Culture in Renaissance Venice: Tullia d’Aragona, Gaspara Stampa and Veronica Franco’, in Italian Women and the City: Essays, ed. Janet Levarie Smarr and Daria Valentini (Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 2003), 35–59; Stortoni and Lillie, Women Poets, 77–127, 221–249.Google Scholar
  22. 13.
    However, the example of Elisabetta Gonzaga at the court of Urbino, upon which Castiglione based The Book of the Courtier, indicates a cultural anxiety surrounding women’s new participation in literary culture: their engagement is characterized by their passive reception of male courtier’s verse rather than the agency practised by women such as Gambara and Colonna. See the definition of the male courtier as writer: ‘He should be very well acquainted with the poets, and no less with the orators and historians, and also skilled at writing both verse and prose, especially in our own language; for in addition to the satisfaction this will give him personally, it will enable him to provide constant entertainment for the ladies, who are usually very fond of such things.’ Baldesar Castiglione, The Book of the Courtier, trans. George Bull (London: Penguin, 1967), 90.Google Scholar
  23. 14.
    Louise Labé, Euvres deLouizeLabé lionnize (Lyon, 1555);Google Scholar
  24. 15.
    Frank J. Warnke, trans., Three Women Poets: Renaissance and Baroque (Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press, 1987), 25.Google Scholar
  25. 16.
    Françoise Charpentier, ed., Louise Labé, Oeuvres poétiques, et Pernette du Guillet, Rymes (Paris: Gallimard, 1983). The lyric experiments in Du Guillet’s Rymes do not include sonnets.Google Scholar
  26. 17.
    It is also worth noting that in seventeenth-century Mexico, the lyrics of Sor Juana Ines de la Cruz included 67 Petrarchan sonnets as well as indigenous Spanish forms. For a Spanish context in which study of early modern women’s contribution to vernacular poetry is only beginning, see Joan F. Cammarata, ed., Women in the Discourse of Early Modern Spain (Gainesville, FL: Florida University Press, 2003);Google Scholar
  27. Marta V. Vicente and Luis R. Corteguera, eds, Women, Texts and Authority in the Early Modern Spanish World (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2003);Google Scholar
  28. and Magdalena Sanchez and Alain Saint-Saëns, eds, Spanish Women in the Golden Age: Images and Realities (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1996).Google Scholar
  29. 18.
    Gary Waller, English Poetry of the Sixteenth Century, 2nd Edition (London and New York: Longman, 1993), 239, and ‘Struggling into Discourse: The Emergence of Renaissance Women’s Writing’, in Silent But for the Word: Tudor Women as Patrons, Translators, and Writers of Religious Works, ed. Margaret Patterson Hannay (Kent: Kent State University Press, 1985), 238–256.Google Scholar
  30. 19.
    John Freccero, ‘The Fig Tree and the Laurel: Petrarch’s Poetics’, Diacritics 5 (1975): 34–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 20.
    Ann Rosalind Jones, ‘Assimilation with a Difference: Renaissance Women Poets and Literary Influence’, Yale French Studies 62 (1981): 135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 21.
    Gary Waller, The Sidney Family Romance: Mary Wroth, William Herbert, and the Early Modern Construction of Gender (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1993), 196.Google Scholar
  33. 22.
    See Arthur Marotti, ‘ “Love is not love”: Elizabethan Sonnet Sequences and the Social Order’, ELH 49 (1982): 396–428;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. and Louis Adrian Montrose, ‘Of Gentlemen and Shepherds: The Politics of Elizabethan Pastoral Form’, ELH 50 (1983): 415–459. Even Barbara Lewalski, in a text which seeks to ‘move beyond deterministic formulas of containment and control’ in analyzing Jacobean women’s writing, argues that in ‘claiming the Petrarchan love sequence for the female lover-poet, Wroth did not use it as male courtiers often did, for overt political purposes’.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Barbara Kiefer Lewalski, Writing Women in Jacobean England (Cambridge, Mass, and London: Harvard University Press, 1993), 263, 315.Google Scholar
  36. 23.
    Heather DuBrow, Echoes of Desire: English Petrarchism and Its Counterdiscourses (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1995), 23.Google Scholar
  37. 25.
    Barbara Estrin, Laura: Uncovering Gender and Genre in Wyatt, Donne and Marvell (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1994), 9, 14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 26.
    For examples of this approach, see the essays in Danielle Clarke and Elizabeth Clarke, eds, ‘This Double Voice’: Gendered Writing in Early Modern England (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 2000).Google Scholar
  39. 27.
    See Danielle Clarke, The Politics of Early Modern Women’s Writing (Harlow: Longman, 2001);Google Scholar
  40. Mary B. Moore, Desiring Voices: Women Sonneteers and Petrarchism (Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press, 2000);Google Scholar
  41. and Kim Walker, Women Writers of the English Renaissance (New York: Twayne, 1996).Google Scholar
  42. 28.
    For the origins of this theory, see Margaret Patterson Hannay, ed., Silent But for the Word: Tudor Women as Patrons, Translators and Writers of Religious Works (Ohio: Kent State University Press, 1985);Google Scholar
  43. Elaine Hobby, Virtue of Necessity: English Women’s Writing, 1649–1688 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1988);Google Scholar
  44. Tina Krontiris, Oppositional Voices: Women as Writers and Translators of Literature in the English Renaissance (London and New York: Routledge, 1992); and Lewalski, Writing Women.Google Scholar
  45. 29.
    For a detailed discussion of the male-authored Renaissance tradition of the Song of Songs, see Noam Flinker, The Song of Songs in English Renaissance Literature: Kisses of Their Mouths (Cambridge: D.S. Brewer, 2000).Google Scholar
  46. 30.
    Josephine Roberts, ‘The Phallacies of Authorship: Reconstructing the Texts of Early Modern Women Writers’, in Attending to Early Modern Women, ed. Susan D. Amussen and Adele Seef (Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1998), 49.Google Scholar
  47. 31.
    For a related reconsideration of current critical orthodoxies surrounding early modern gender and silence, especially those uncritically coupling speech and agency, see Christina Luckyj, ‘A moving Rhetorike’: Gender and Silence in Early Modern England (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2002). However, as Jennifer Summit points out, writing and speech are distinct modes of articulation; this study investigates textual absence rather than silence.Google Scholar
  48. Jennifer Summit, Lost Property: The Woman Writer and English Literary History, 1380–1589 (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 8.Google Scholar
  49. 32.
    See Wendy Wall, The Imprint of Gender: Authorship and Publication in the English Renaissance (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1993);Google Scholar
  50. Arthur Marotti, Manuscript, Print and the English Renaissance Lyric (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995);Google Scholar
  51. Jeffrey Masten, Textual Intercourse: Collaboration, Authorship, and Sexualities in Renaissance Drama (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997);Google Scholar
  52. and Harold Love, Attributing Authorship: An Introduction (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 33.
    Recent exceptions include Jonathon Goldberg, Desiring Women Writing: English Renaissance Examples (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997); and Summit, Lost Property.Google Scholar
  54. 34.
    Rosalie Colie, The Resources of Kind: Genre Theory in the Renaissance, ed. Barbara K. Lewalski (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973), 8–9: ‘confusion underlay all Renaissance genre-theory, even the simplest’.Google Scholar
  55. Jean-François Lyotard, The Differend: Phrases in Dispute, trans. G. Van den Abeele (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988), 70. See Estrin, Laura, for a more extensive analysis of Lyotard’s theories of genre in a Renaissance context.Google Scholar
  56. 35.
    Joan Kelly, ‘Did Women Have a Renaissance?’ Women, History and Theory: The Essays of Joan Kelly (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984), 19–50.Google Scholar
  57. 36.
    For related texts in this new field of attribution studies, see Robert Griffin, ed., The Paces of Anonymity: Anonymous and Pseudonymous Publication from the Sixteenth to the Twentieth Century (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003);Google Scholar
  58. and Elizabeth Heale, Autobiography and Authorship in Renaissance Verse (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Rosalind Smith 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rosalind Smith

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations