Finally, my lectures in English end with a discussion of feminist literary theory, which I try to frame
within the context of Foucauldian discourse.
I hope to be able to integrate some of Foucault's ideas with those of leading feminists and, indeed,
feminist literary theory in general. I think Foucault would describe feminist voices as a discourse
struggling to be heard against the din of male discourse, so dominant thus far in Western civilization.
So feminist theory is one of many "discourses fighting for power." And that's an important observation,
I think, because it underscores how political the feminist movement is--even feminist literary criticism.
A feminist critic might say that feminist criticism is even more political, because books teach us our
gender roles from the earliest age on up. Books can help one group in society hold onto power, or they
can help a new group gain more power or even usurp power. Feminists hope that they can gain more
power for women by a) pointing out the biases inherent in male discourse (i. e. the Great Books written
by dead white males) and b) promoting literature written by women for women. Feminists hope that, as
Foucault might say, the more a discourse is heard, the more power it gains.
To that end, feminists in literary theory are locked in something of a power struggle right now with
more staid scholars in an effort to redefine the literary canon, that body of literature (or, if you will,
"Literature" with a capital "L") which is generally accepted as the best society has produced. And,
recently, many female voices have been added to the canon; our textbook has names which would not
have been admitted a generation before. For example, we have Jack London's "To Build a Fire," a
classic of the canon, but we also have Charlotte Perkins Gilman's "The Yellow Wallpaper." So women
are being heard more; that is a victory in itself, according to the theory. But what about patriarchal
texts?
Feminist theory, at the risk of simplification, seeks to highlight and then deflate patriarchal assumptions
and patriarchal values as they are reflected in traditional texts, whether Shakespearan plays or
Dickensian novels. As a feminist critic, you need only to analyze the power structure in any text:
between male and female, white and black, rich and poor. Feminist criticism, like Marxist criticism,
turns such analysis into political fodder and social activism. To change the world, a feminist critic might
say, one must interpret the world in new ways: not through the eyes of a man--or not JUST through the
eyes of a man--but through the eyes of someone outside the dominant discourse, someone without
access to the corridors of power. Look through that person's eyes and you can change how you read a
story or how you treat your spouse. Look through that person's eyes and you can change everything.
Further Reading: _A Practical Introduction to Literary Theory and Criticism_, M. Keith Booker
(Longman, ISBN 0-8013-1765-7); _Literary Criticism_, Charles Bressler (Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-13897422-5); _A Room of One's Own_, Virginia Woolf (Harcourt Brace, 1929); _Feminisms: An
Anthology of Literary Theory and Criticism_, eds. Robyn Warhol and Diane Price Herndl (Rutgers UP,
1991).