"From Bibliography to Canon - Revision history

SvDijk: Removing all content from page

2009-11-07T22:20:37Z

Removing all content from page

SvDijk at 20:17, 7 November 2009

2009-11-07T20:17:13Z

←Older revision		Revision as of 20:17, 7 November 2009
Line 78:		Line 78:
	*		*
	</center>		</center>
		+	<br>
	This comparative overview of bibliographic compilations of women writers in their interaction with women’s literary history yields a dynamic model of interconnected moving parts. Such classification categories as author, woman writer, nationality, literature, and publication turn out to have been matters of debate among compilers for several hundred years. Those debates have taken place both in the selections and the paratexts of compilations, as compilers turned to colleagues for sources and created a national, transnational, and European, genre. As authors and literary historians, compilers in the past recognized similar issues that concern feminist bio-bibliographers and literary historians today and provided some provocative solutions that prefigure current projects. Yet while bio-bibliographic compilations and literary historical essays participate in national conversations, few engage in the newly rediscovered transnational dialogues that in fact have been with such texts since their debut in fourteenth-century Italy. These transnational networks offer potential extensive narratives to temper qualitative national narratives and allow many more nations to participate not as ancillary, but as essential participants in a long historiography of women’s writings. <br><br>		This comparative overview of bibliographic compilations of women writers in their interaction with women’s literary history yields a dynamic model of interconnected moving parts. Such classification categories as author, woman writer, nationality, literature, and publication turn out to have been matters of debate among compilers for several hundred years. Those debates have taken place both in the selections and the paratexts of compilations, as compilers turned to colleagues for sources and created a national, transnational, and European, genre. As authors and literary historians, compilers in the past recognized similar issues that concern feminist bio-bibliographers and literary historians today and provided some provocative solutions that prefigure current projects. Yet while bio-bibliographic compilations and literary historical essays participate in national conversations, few engage in the newly rediscovered transnational dialogues that in fact have been with such texts since their debut in fourteenth-century Italy. These transnational networks offer potential extensive narratives to temper qualitative national narratives and allow many more nations to participate not as ancillary, but as essential participants in a long historiography of women’s writings. <br><br>

SvDijk at 20:16, 7 November 2009

2009-11-07T20:16:07Z

←Older revision		Revision as of 20:16, 7 November 2009
Line 4:		Line 4:

	<br><br>		<br><br>
-	Classifying Women in France, England, Germany, and Russia from the Eighteenth Century to the Present. <br><br><br>	+	Classifying Women in France, England, Germany, and Russia <br>
		+	from the Eighteenth Century to the Present. <br><br><br>

	This essay looks at sixty-five bio-bibliographic compilations presenting women writers, over the last three centuries in the literary histories of France, England, Germany, and Russia, who were among the largest producers of such texts and represent influential transnational cultural nodes. These compilers have fostered their own national bibliographic traditions and measure their country’s enlightenment against similar compilations in other countries. I argue that compilers demonstrated their nation’s excellence in two ways: by emphasizing either the quantity of their outstanding women, or their quality. <br><br>		This essay looks at sixty-five bio-bibliographic compilations presenting women writers, over the last three centuries in the literary histories of France, England, Germany, and Russia, who were among the largest producers of such texts and represent influential transnational cultural nodes. These compilers have fostered their own national bibliographic traditions and measure their country’s enlightenment against similar compilations in other countries. I argue that compilers demonstrated their nation’s excellence in two ways: by emphasizing either the quantity of their outstanding women, or their quality. <br><br>
Line 74:		Line 75:
	'''V.''' <br>		'''V.''' <br>
	[...] <br><br><br>		[...] <br><br><br>
-		+	<center>
-	* * * * *	+	*
-		+	</center>
	This comparative overview of bibliographic compilations of women writers in their interaction with women’s literary history yields a dynamic model of interconnected moving parts. Such classification categories as author, woman writer, nationality, literature, and publication turn out to have been matters of debate among compilers for several hundred years. Those debates have taken place both in the selections and the paratexts of compilations, as compilers turned to colleagues for sources and created a national, transnational, and European, genre. As authors and literary historians, compilers in the past recognized similar issues that concern feminist bio-bibliographers and literary historians today and provided some provocative solutions that prefigure current projects. Yet while bio-bibliographic compilations and literary historical essays participate in national conversations, few engage in the newly rediscovered transnational dialogues that in fact have been with such texts since their debut in fourteenth-century Italy. These transnational networks offer potential extensive narratives to temper qualitative national narratives and allow many more nations to participate not as ancillary, but as essential participants in a long historiography of women’s writings. <br><br>		This comparative overview of bibliographic compilations of women writers in their interaction with women’s literary history yields a dynamic model of interconnected moving parts. Such classification categories as author, woman writer, nationality, literature, and publication turn out to have been matters of debate among compilers for several hundred years. Those debates have taken place both in the selections and the paratexts of compilations, as compilers turned to colleagues for sources and created a national, transnational, and European, genre. As authors and literary historians, compilers in the past recognized similar issues that concern feminist bio-bibliographers and literary historians today and provided some provocative solutions that prefigure current projects. Yet while bio-bibliographic compilations and literary historical essays participate in national conversations, few engage in the newly rediscovered transnational dialogues that in fact have been with such texts since their debut in fourteenth-century Italy. These transnational networks offer potential extensive narratives to temper qualitative national narratives and allow many more nations to participate not as ancillary, but as essential participants in a long historiography of women’s writings. <br><br>

SvDijk at 20:13, 7 November 2009

2009-11-07T20:13:34Z

←Older revision		Revision as of 20:13, 7 November 2009
Line 3:		Line 3:


-	<br><br><br>	+	<br><br>
-	From Bibliography to Canon: Classifying Women in France, England, Germany, and Russia from the Eighteenth Century to the Present. <br><br><br>	+	Classifying Women in France, England, Germany, and Russia from the Eighteenth Century to the Present. <br><br><br>

	This essay looks at sixty-five bio-bibliographic compilations presenting women writers, over the last three centuries in the literary histories of France, England, Germany, and Russia, who were among the largest producers of such texts and represent influential transnational cultural nodes. These compilers have fostered their own national bibliographic traditions and measure their country’s enlightenment against similar compilations in other countries. I argue that compilers demonstrated their nation’s excellence in two ways: by emphasizing either the quantity of their outstanding women, or their quality. <br><br>		This essay looks at sixty-five bio-bibliographic compilations presenting women writers, over the last three centuries in the literary histories of France, England, Germany, and Russia, who were among the largest producers of such texts and represent influential transnational cultural nodes. These compilers have fostered their own national bibliographic traditions and measure their country’s enlightenment against similar compilations in other countries. I argue that compilers demonstrated their nation’s excellence in two ways: by emphasizing either the quantity of their outstanding women, or their quality. <br><br>
Line 69:		Line 69:
	However, women bibliographers can represent their authorship differently from that of men. Women underscore their own professional qualifications as compilers, beginning with Christine de Pizan, who emphasizes virtue for ladies, but learning in her narrator. Likewise, Briquet’s literary introduction underscores that she writes in the tradition of learned women. Pataky wryly establishes her expertise at her male predecessor’s expense when she notes that Schindel found 550 women for the first quarter of the nineteenth century, when more recent bibliographers concurred that it was closer to 48: “Schindel listed any woman who had written any kind of unpublished occasional verse” (ix). In contrast, in his introduction, Schindel poses as an amateur who began collecting information “without any particular idea” (xiii). True to the bibliographic spirit of the continuous production of differences, these bibliographers disagreed with each other and their works offer a lively counterpoint that resist generalizations and argue for solutions to problems that remain with feminist literary history and bibliography when viewed in a larger historical and comparative context.<br><br><br>		However, women bibliographers can represent their authorship differently from that of men. Women underscore their own professional qualifications as compilers, beginning with Christine de Pizan, who emphasizes virtue for ladies, but learning in her narrator. Likewise, Briquet’s literary introduction underscores that she writes in the tradition of learned women. Pataky wryly establishes her expertise at her male predecessor’s expense when she notes that Schindel found 550 women for the first quarter of the nineteenth century, when more recent bibliographers concurred that it was closer to 48: “Schindel listed any woman who had written any kind of unpublished occasional verse” (ix). In contrast, in his introduction, Schindel poses as an amateur who began collecting information “without any particular idea” (xiii). True to the bibliographic spirit of the continuous production of differences, these bibliographers disagreed with each other and their works offer a lively counterpoint that resist generalizations and argue for solutions to problems that remain with feminist literary history and bibliography when viewed in a larger historical and comparative context.<br><br><br>

-	IV. <br>	+	'''IV.''' <br>
	[…] <br><br><br>		[…] <br><br><br>

-	V. <br>	+	'''V.''' <br>
	[...] <br><br><br>		[...] <br><br><br>

	* * * * *		* * * * *
		+
	This comparative overview of bibliographic compilations of women writers in their interaction with women’s literary history yields a dynamic model of interconnected moving parts. Such classification categories as author, woman writer, nationality, literature, and publication turn out to have been matters of debate among compilers for several hundred years. Those debates have taken place both in the selections and the paratexts of compilations, as compilers turned to colleagues for sources and created a national, transnational, and European, genre. As authors and literary historians, compilers in the past recognized similar issues that concern feminist bio-bibliographers and literary historians today and provided some provocative solutions that prefigure current projects. Yet while bio-bibliographic compilations and literary historical essays participate in national conversations, few engage in the newly rediscovered transnational dialogues that in fact have been with such texts since their debut in fourteenth-century Italy. These transnational networks offer potential extensive narratives to temper qualitative national narratives and allow many more nations to participate not as ancillary, but as essential participants in a long historiography of women’s writings. <br><br>		This comparative overview of bibliographic compilations of women writers in their interaction with women’s literary history yields a dynamic model of interconnected moving parts. Such classification categories as author, woman writer, nationality, literature, and publication turn out to have been matters of debate among compilers for several hundred years. Those debates have taken place both in the selections and the paratexts of compilations, as compilers turned to colleagues for sources and created a national, transnational, and European, genre. As authors and literary historians, compilers in the past recognized similar issues that concern feminist bio-bibliographers and literary historians today and provided some provocative solutions that prefigure current projects. Yet while bio-bibliographic compilations and literary historical essays participate in national conversations, few engage in the newly rediscovered transnational dialogues that in fact have been with such texts since their debut in fourteenth-century Italy. These transnational networks offer potential extensive narratives to temper qualitative national narratives and allow many more nations to participate not as ancillary, but as essential participants in a long historiography of women’s writings. <br><br>

Line 81:		Line 82:


		+	A complete version of this article will be available in paper form in The Hague:<br>
		+	Hilde Hoogenboom, "From Bibliography to Canon: Classifying Women in France, England, Germany, and Russia from the Eighteenth Century to the Present". The article is presently under review.

	<br><br><br>		<br><br><br>

SvDijk at 20:10, 7 November 2009

2009-11-07T20:10:19Z

(Difference between revisions)

SvDijk at 23:11, 6 November 2009

2009-11-06T23:11:51Z

←Older revision		Revision as of 23:11, 6 November 2009
Line 4:		Line 4:

	<br><br><br>		<br><br><br>
-		+	is coming

SvDijk: New page:
NOEDITSECTION == From Bibliography to Canon ==

SvD, November 2009

*Conferences > NEWW November meetings > 2009 > Hoogenboom <...

2009-11-06T22:03:02Z

New page: __NOEDITSECTION__ == From Bibliography to Canon == SvD, November 2009 <hr> *Conferences > NEWW November meetings > 2009 > Hoogenboom <...

New page

__NOEDITSECTION__
== From Bibliography to Canon ==

 

 

SvD, November 2009 

<hr>
 
*Conferences > NEWW November meetings > 2009 > Hoogenboom