LITERARY FUSION

Abstract

J S Mill, Virginia Woolf and Doris Lessing, in spite of their fervent concern for feminine exigency, are highly criticized because of their respective feminist perspectives by a large number of other feminist proponents. However, this paper, within its limited scope, attempts to show the underlying relations among the aforementioned writers’ perspectives, advocates a feminist theoretical perspective in relation with their insights, compares it with other dominant feminist perspectives, and shows its possible effectiveness in fulfilling feminist dreams in true sense. This is being hoped that this study would help the feminist thinkers, when feminist endeavor is being severely criticized by different communities, scholars and schools of thought.

Introduction

The 2007 Nobel Prize Winner in Literature Doris Lessing, crowned as the ‘epicist of the female experience’ (nobelprize.org) by the Noble Awarding Committee, on August 13, 2001, in her speech at Edinburgh's Consignia Theatre said:

"I find myself increasingly shocked at the unthinking and automatic rubbishing of men which is now so part of our culture that it is hardly even noticed," she told the audience.

"The most stupid, ill-educated and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest and most intelligent man and no-one protests.

"We have many wonderful, clever, powerful women everywhere, but what is happening to men?

"Why did this have to be at the cost of men?" (news.bbc.co.uk)

Doris Lessing, thus, defended men against what she called the "unthinking and automatic rubbishing" by feminists (news.bbc.co.uk). But Doris Lessing is not only thinker who did this. A growing community of thinkers is being marked with similar concern. We see, to ‘fight back’ (news.bbc.co.uk) of which Lessing was concerned, besides feminist scholarly enterprises, male counter enterprise has already started its journey. ‘At Wagner College in New York, a new discipline named Male Studies has been launched receiving the support of many well-known scholars, including Lionel Tiger, Ph.D., Rutgers University's Charles Darwin Professor of Anthropology, and Christina Hoff Sommers, Ph.D., author of The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men’ (forbes.com). Besides all innocent grounds resulting birth of new discipline, people love to take it as a reaction against feminist scholarship. Professor Tiger explains, ''A lot of feminist argument is just irritating'' and other reasons why believers say we need this new academic discipline. The culprit, said Tiger, is feminism: “a well-meaning, highly successful, very colorful denigration of maleness as a force, as a phenomenon.” (insidehighered.com). So, Male studies’ proponents “combative tone toward feminism and women’s studies” (insidehighered.com) is very much clear to us. Now, Edward M. Stephens MD, Founder of the Foundation for Male Studies, expressed his worry regarding human race telling:

Essential to the survival of the species is the mutual success of both men and women, yet the goal of equal partnership has been lost in the longstanding battle of the sexes. The noble dream of gender equality appears to have fallen victim to an ever-expanding gender divide. (malestudies.org)

We, of course, like Edward M. Stephens, cannot want ‘ever expanding gender divide’.

Feminist Thinking Trends and ‘Ever Expanding Gender Divide’

The ‘ever expanding gender divide’ of which Stephen is worried would be observed looking at the path the caravan of feminist critical trend has already travelled. Going to observe the ‘longstanding battle of the sexes’ creating hindrances ‘to carry the human species forward as equal partners’ (malestudies.org), we would look with utter astonishment at the Lesbian/Gay Critical School. Lesbianism thought as ‘the most complete form of feminism’ opened up conflict with heterosexual feminists (Barry: 141) Adrienne Rich gave birth of the notion ‘lesbian continuum’, which “designates a wide variety of female behavior, running, for instance, informal mutual help networks set up by women…., finally, to sexual relationships” “condemning female heterosexuality as a betrayal of women and their interests, with the implication that women can only achieve integrity through lesbianism” (Barry: 142).

And, next, there comes the alarming most arena of Feminism signifying continuous wide expanding gender divide with the advent of Queer theory. “Queer theory rather than being ‘women centered’, like the lesbian feminism, rejects female separatism and instead sees an identity of political and social interests with gay men” (Barry: 143). According to Diana Fuss, as quoted by Peter Barry, this is ‘sexual safety’ and relief from ‘male domination’ (Barry: 144) which caused this affinity among believers of ‘Libertarian Lesbianism’ and gay people. So, this shows the final separation between males and females leaving all hope to live together hand to hand and making life possible on the earth. This is very much threatening to the survival of the species of which Edward M. Stephens M D is concerned. Here, surely, ‘the noble dream of gender equality appears to have fallen victim to an ever-expanding gender divide’ (malestudies.org). And, the question comes how far we can celebrate this process of creating continuous wounds in the heart of human race.

John Stuart Mill, Virginia Woolf and Doris Lessing as Feminists

Our point of dissatisfaction on ongoing feminist enterprise may already be crystal clear to all of us. However, beside the trends we observed, there remains another trend of thought which is highly ignored by the feminists. And that is related with the names J. S. Mill, Virginia Woolf and Doris Lessing. All of them desired for friendly and respectful correlation and coexistence between the opposite sexes instead of polemic practices. And, in spite of that, they were severely criticized by other feminist activists. Mill is criticized because of his liberal feminism and his Universalist view of human life (Szapuvá: 2006). Virginia Woolf is criticized by Elaine Showalter for having androgynous vantage point (Moi: 2). Doris Lessing, by Helen Wilkinson, is criticized of speaking something obsolete (news.bbc.co.uk). But, we are to rethink whether their perspectives be criticized and ignored or not. A close scrutinizing would make clear how much effective they are at the time of alarming ever widening gender divide.

Mariana Szapuva’ in her article “Mill’s Liberal Feminism: It’s Legacy and Current Criticism” explains that,

John Stuart Mill can be considered one of the very few Exceptions to the androcentric character of Western philosophy one who stands out from a long tradition that tended more to devalue and marginalize women and issues concerning relations between the sexes, or to keep silent about them, than to develop philosophical ideas and explanations regarding women’s subordination and consider gender issues based on the principle of the equality of women and men.

........

Nonetheless, it seems that it is hardly possible to name more than a few figures in the history of philosophy, from the ancient Greeks up to the present, who have contributed positively to an analysis of the issues surrounding women’s (subordinated) position in society, or who have advocated gender equality as one of the main principles of social justice.

........

It is also very important to note that he worked on this issue not only theoretically and philosophically, but also as a publicist and politician (Szapuvá: 2006).

And this is Mill’s Utilitarianism and Liberalism which has given birth of his feminist outlook completely revolutionary to the 19^th century scholarship. So, there is nothing to stand deadly against his Utilitarianism and Liberalism.

Next, Virginia Woolf in her A Room of One's Own (1929) established her views which are very similar to Mill “with a strong female sensibility and criticism” (Oppermann: 1994). Woolf, having outlook similar to Mill, was criticized by Elaine Showalter, as quoted by Toril Moi, because of maintaining ‘full balance and command of an emotional range that includes male and female elements. Again, according to Showalter, Woolf expressed feminist conflict from a transcended vantage point (Moi: 2). Woolf is criticized by Showalter because of her attempt to link feminism to pacifism (Moi: 7). Toril Moi in her book Sexual/Textual Politics did not merely mention Showalter’s position on Woolf’s approach. She criticized Showalter and credited Woolf for ‘deconstructing the death-dealing binary oppositions of masculinity and femininity (Moi: 14). So, we with our utter satisfaction mark that Woolf ‘deconstructed the death-dealing binary oppositions of masculinity and femininity (Moi: 14)’ besides ‘maintaining full balance and command of an emotional range that includes male and female elements (Moi: 2)’ from a ‘transcended vantage point (Moi: 2)’ which is very similar to Mill’s position. And, this is what we may crave for when ‘ever expanding gender divide (malestudies.org)’ is alarming us not to be able ‘to carry the human species forward as equal partners (malestudies.org)’.

Now, if we look at Doris Lessing, we see she is crowned as the ‘epicist of the female experience’ (nobelprize.org) by the Noble Awarding Committee. She is the writer whose ‘fame rests heavily on The Golden Notebook, a book that broke ground in expressing women’s dissatisfaction with the gender roles of the time’. It ‘made many men feel guilty about their gender at the same time it seemed to advocate for women’ (womensissues.about.com). Then, we would undoubtedly find her as a feminist, though, she herself disagrees with it. Lessing disagrees to call her a feminist because of her direct regret to ongoing feminist enterprises resulting ‘unthinking and automatic rubbishing of men’ (nytimes.com). So, to answer the question what type of feminist she might be called, we have to answer it following Dr. Niaz Zaman ‘she is ‘not-a-men-bashing-feminist’ (thedailystar.net). However, this ‘epicist of the female experience (nobelprize.org)’ is compared by Elaine Showalter with Virginia Woolf for merging the ‘feminine ego’ into a greater collective consciousness’ (Moi: 7). But, we know whenever we want to shun ‘ever expanding gender divide (malestudies.org)’, we have to link our ideas with a greater collective consciousness and what is done by Doris Lessing.

Now, if want to scrutinize different feminist proponents’ position against J. S. Mill, Virginia Woolf and Doris Lessing, we would find like Toril Moil found to speak on Woolf. We may read Moi’s sentence in this regard like ‘the feminist critics unwittingly puts themselves in a position from which it becomes impossible to read J. S. Mill, Virginia Wolf and Doris Lessing as the ideal feminist writers’ (Moi: 18) deadly in need of feminist intellectual arena today to turn away from the ‘ever expanding gender divide (malestudies.org)’. Toril Moi considers ‘the formal political perspective of the critic (Moi: 18)’ as something very important. And, here, in this article, we are in search of that formal political perspective of a feminist critic. And, three great icons of the feminist endeavor J. S. Mill, Virginia Wolf and Doris Lessing are directing us to find out our that position to turn away from the ‘ever expanding gender divide (malestudies.org)’ and to be able ‘to carry the human species forward as equal partners (malestudies.org)’.

The vantage point being advocated: Transcendental Vantage Point

Now, to make our desired point crystal clear we can say that formal political perspective of a feminist critic should be while exposing patriarchal practices, like J. S. Mill, Virginia Woolf and Doris Lessing, ‘maintaining full balance and command of an emotional range that includes male and female elements (Moi: 2)’ from a ‘transcended vantage point (Moi: 2)’ ‘merging the ‘feminine ego’ into a greater collective consciousness (Moi: 7)’ utilitarian and liberal in nature (Szapuvá: 2006) and, of course, which will not be ‘men-bashing (thedailystar.net)’ at all. And, in this article, this specific standpoint is being referred as Transcendental Vantage Point, as this seems that the word ‘transcendence’ is the operating word here to discuss on our standpoint. Now, as our concerned figures are highly criticized by different critics, we may think for a theoretical basis which may guide us to uphold that vantage point both as a critic and a creative writer. Personally, the researcher of this article thinks of pertaining to the insights of Transpersonal Psychology because of its concerns similar to those of this study.

Transcendental vantage point and Transpersonal Psychology

We see, according to D. H. Lajoie & S. I. Shapiro, “Transpersonal psychology is concerned with the study of humanity’s highest potential, and with the recognition, understanding, and realization of unitive, spiritual, and transcendent states of consciousness (Hartelius et al.: 2007)” of which J. S. Mill, Virginia Woolf and Doris Lessing were concerned. Again, Glenn Hartelius, Mariana Caplan, and Mary Anne Rardin, in their article Transpersonal Psychology: Defining the Past, Divining the Future wrote

As beyond-ego aspects of human experience become understood, a view emerges in which human individuals are integrally interconnected with much larger contexts. (Hartelius et al.: 2007)

So, Transpersonal Psychological insight validates here Doris Lessing’s position.

However, similar to the way the researcher in this article thinks of pertaining to Transpersonal Psychological insights, in his article ‘Unidentified Allies: Intersections of Feminist and Transpersonal Thought and Potential Contributions to Social Change’ researched regarding ‘synthesized theoretical constructs between the two disciplines (Feminism and Transpersonal Psychology) as well as distinct concepts and practices in both disciplines that may serve the other’ (Brooks: 2010). In his article, he states about the potential this probable attachment has to serve the society (Brooks: 2010). Brooks concludes his work stating:

Readers who seek to integrate the sacred, the mundane, the social, the personal, and the righteous into a holographic understanding of psychology and human consciousness, are invited to contribute their efforts in forging paths that lead to further intersections of thought and practice between transpersonal studies and feminism. (Brooks: 2010)

So, the desire to pertain to the insights of Transpersonal Psychology as a feminist critic, and, simultaneously, J. S. Mill, Virginia Woolf and Doris Lessing’s standpoint as feminist are not something unworthy at all,

Toril Moi in her book Sexual/Textual Politics invited the critics to do justice to Virginia Woolf (Moi: 2). The researcher of this article says that this is one of the crying needs of the present time to embrace the views of J. S. Mill, Virginia Woolf and Doris Lessing when, using W. B. Yeats’ phrase we can say, ‘things are fallen apart’ because of gender divides.

References:

1. Barry, Peter. Beginning theory. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1995.

2. Brooks, C. Unidentified allies: Intersections of feminist and transpersonal thought and potential contributions to social change. International Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 29 (2), pp. 33-57. 2010. Retrieved From: http://www.transpersonalstudies.org/ImagesRepository/ijts/Downloads/Interna tional%20Journal%20of%20Transpersonal%20Studies-2010- 29%282%29ENTIRE%20ISSUE.pdf. Last accessed on 11/06/2012.

3. Hartelius, G., Caplan, M., & Rardin, M. A. Transpersonal psychology: Defining the past, divining the future. Humanistic Psychologist, 35(2), 1-26. 2007. Retrieved from: http://www.realspirituality.com/pages/pdf/trans_psych.pdf. Last accessed on 11/06/2012.

4. Moi, Toril. Sexual/Textual Politics. London: Routledge, 2002.

5. Oppermann, Serpil Tunç. Feminist Literary Criticism: Expanding the Canon as Regards the Novel. 1994. Retrieved from http://warlight.tripod.com/OPPERMANN.html. Last accessed on 11/06/2012.

6. Szapuová, Mariana. Mill’sLiberal Feminism: Its Legacy and Current Criticism. Prolegomena, vol. 5, no. 2, p. 179-191. Society for the Advancement of Philosophy, Zagreb, Croatia, 2006. Retrieved from hrcak.srce.hr/file/10835. Last accessed on 11/06/2012.