Feminist Biography: A Contradiction in Terms?

Author(s): Judith P. Zinsser

Source: The Eighteenth Century, Vol. 50, No. 1, The Future of Feminist Theory in
Eighteenth-Century Studies (SPRING 2009), pp. 43-50
Published by: University of Pennsylvania Press
Stable URL: [Link]
Accessed: 25-01-2016 04:54 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
[Link]

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at [Link]
info/about/policies/[Link]

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@[Link].

University of Pennsylvania Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Eighteenth
Century.

[Link]

This content downloaded from [Link] on Mon, 25 Jan 2016 [Link] UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Feminist Biography: A Contradiction in Terms?

JudithP. Zinsser
Miami University,Ohio

Longago inthebeginnings of1970sfeminism, women'shistorians forceda new

understanding oftheconstruction all
of history. Onlythuscouldtheelimina-
tionofhalfofhumanity fromthehistorical recordbe explainedand remedied.
This ''postmodern'' enterpriseprovedso successfulthatit spawnedits own
angry"backlash"and anguishedcriesfromtraditional historiansfor"a return
to narrative."Biography,with itsbuilt-instorytellingfrom birth to death,fell
intothecenterofthesedisputesas feminist historians ofthe1980sformulated
theradicaldeconstruction ofthisgenreas well. "Auto/biography," theinter-
twiningofbiographer and subject,was butone ofthemostimportant aspects
ofthisancientarthighlighted by feminist critics.
Experiments with"lifewrit-
ing,"as manycametocallit,questionedthenatureand usesofevidence,aban-
donedtheconstruction ofanycoherent narrative,and focusedinsteadon the
self-consciousdescriptionof the processby which an individual'spastmight
be imaginedinthepresent.
even the choiceof subjectfora biographyposed questionsfor
Initially,
feminists. The eliteand educated,thosedesignatedas "womenworthies,"
had longbeenpreferred, butfeminist historiansnow hopedto go beyondthe
"exception" and to chroniclethelivesofall women,exploring of
intersections
race,class,religion, and
gender, ethnicity. However, these criticalfeministap-
proachesundermined theverydefinition and purposeofbiography, whether
feminist ornot:to use thehistorian's evidentiary authority to validatethelife,
and ofa
thoughts, accomplishments particular woman. The essaythatfollows
discussestheunfolding ofthese challenges to traditionalbiography, therange
ofresponsesby feminist historians, and someofthewayseighteenth-century
biographers ofwomenresolvedtheinherent contradictions.
In the1970s,feminist historians discoveredthatall but a fewwomenhad
been quietlyeliminatedfromthe formaland informalstoriesof our past.1
GerdaLerner, whowroteon blackand whitewomenin theUnitedStates,and
lateron feminism inWestern culture, dividedand [Link]-

TTíe ©2010
vol.50no.1Copyright
Century,
Eighteenth University Allrights
Press.
ofPennsylvania reserved.

This content downloaded from [Link] on Mon, 25 Jan 2016 [Link] UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
44 THEEIGHTEENTHCENTURY

riesofEuropeand NorthAmericaas hermodel,sheidentified "compensatory

history" as the first
step: the stories of exceptional women, like queens,the
wivesofpresidents, regents, and women exercising male [Link]
nextstep,"contribution history," told the storiesofthe reformers, suchas Flor-
enceNightingale, Josephine Butler, In
and JaneAddams. hindsight, eventhe
suffragistswouldprobablybe includedhere,as Lernerdefinedthewomenof
thistypeas thosewho affected men'shistory. Theyfunctioned withina male-
definedframework, and
choosing acting on men's not women's terms.
The vast majorityof biographiesof women,or of men forthatmatter,
whether in thelongeighteenth century oranyother, added tohistory in oneof
[Link], if not
bytradition, bydefinition, has been about the
extra-ordinary person,a particular individualwho in somemannerdid some-
thingdeemednoteworthy by theconventional canonsof significance. In the
eighteenth century, Queen Anneruledan expandingmercantile nation;Ma-
dame MarieThérèseRodetGeoffrin hostedthemenofDenis Diderot'scircle
and facilitatedthewriting oftheEncyclopédie ; and LauraBassiand MariaAg-
nesi participated in themajorintellectual conversations of theirday,Newto-
nian opticsand thenew mathematics, respectively. thosewomenwho
Even
questionedthelong-standing constraints on women'sactivities, suchas Mary
Wollstonecraft, askedfora man'seducation, fortheend ofwomen'sexclusion
fromaspectsofwhatwerein theirerasmen'sworlds.
Thefactof"men'sworlds"cannotbe changedforthosewhostudythepast.
Rather,the feminist historian'sperspectivemustbe different. As Lernerso
and
clearly emphatically phrased it in her essay"Placing Women in History,"
"thetruehistory ofwomenis thehistory oftheirongoingfunctioning in that
male-defined world[but]ontheir ownterms."2 Whatwerewomendoingwhile
men'shistory wenton itsway?Whatwas thesameand whatdifferent when
seenfromwomen'sperspectives? Women'sbiographers, evenifnotfeminists,
have participated in this"recovery history," as it is sometimescalled today.
First,theyhavebroadenedthedefinition oftheextra-ordinary. Althoughthey
mayhavechosenwomenprominent in anothertime,theyhavenotbeenwell
knownin [Link],as theEnglishhistorian CarolynSteedman
describesit,suffered "someformofhistorical neglect."3
Forexample,Nina Rattner Gelbartreconstructed thelifeand worldsofthe
eighteenth-century midwife, Marguerite Le Boursierdu Coudray,a womanof
nationalsignificance in thehistory ofFrenchmaternal [Link]
Davis gave lifeto late seventeenth-century "womenon the margins,"out-
side the mainstream of theirsocieties:Gliklof Hameln,a Jewishwifeand
businesswoman;Maria SibyllaMerian,an artistand naturalist; and Marie
de l'Incarnation, theUrsulinenun who ministered to Quebec'sAmerindian
[Link], Linda Colleyhas retoldherhistoryof Britain'seigh-
teenth-century empireas ifthrough theexperiences ofElizabethMarshCrispe,
thewifeofan enterprising, ifnotalwayssuccessful, merchant.4

This content downloaded from [Link] on Mon, 25 Jan 2016 [Link] UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ZINSSER-FEMINISTBIOGRAPHY 45

In eachinstance, thelifeofa womanand,byinference, ofwomenin similar

circumstances, has been givenformand [Link] lifeis presentedas
in someway indicativeofwomen'schoicesmoregenerally: acceptances, ac-
commodations, and
compromises, rejections. Davis sought to understand how
each dealtwiththe "genderedhierarchies of theirworlds/'hierarchies that
placedan added weighton themas females.5 As Steedmanexplains,theseare
thestoriesof "theselfformedby a historicised world/'livestoldby biogra-
phers"steering a course between these two principles ofcausation, theinternal
and theexternal." Thesewomenareall portrayed as activeagents,notpassive
victims, howeverconstraining or limiting theircircumstances. Theseare not
simplestoriesof"power"and "powerlessness," butrathercomplexexamples
ofhow thesesupposedpoles ofexperiencecan co-existin thesame moment
ofa life.6Suchstudies,eventhatoftherelatively dependentMarshalmostlost
in theglobalmercantile and military changes that Colleywishesto reinscribe,
the
give missing half ofhistoryand decenter the notion ofthehistoricalactor.
As theeditorsofan earlyanthology on feminist biography explain:"When the
particular becomesfemale,theuniversalcanno longerbe male."7
Justas thechoiceofsubjectandtherecovery offorgotten women'slivestook
historyaway frommale elitesand theirpolitics,forcing questionsaboutthe
basic definition ofwhatis considered"history," so "thelinguistic turn"chal-
lenged the construction ofthathistory whoever or whatever thesubjectmight
be.8Forbiographers, "post-structuralism" raisedmanyquestions,all ofwhich
challengetheveryessenceof"biography" as theauthoritative nar-
teleological
rativeofan individual'[Link] historians embracedthesepost-structural
sensitivitiestolanguageandidentity. Itbecametheirsecondcontribution tothe
of
making biography. Angela V. John's introduction to her biography of Eliza-
bethRobins - theactress,novelist,and feminist activistofthelatenineteenth
andearlytwentieth - describestwoofthemostimportant
centuries difficulties:
thoseofself"representation" and the"transparency" [Link]
diaries,butshe oftenwrotemultipleversionsofevents,destroyed others, and
presented herselfdifferentlyyetagaininherpublicdiscourseand appearances.
Thus,Johnsubtitles thebiography "Staginga Life"and organizeshernarrative
aroundthedifferent personaeRobins highlighted at thesuccessive"stages"of
[Link] intentional and remindsthereaderofboththetheatrical
lifeand thetheatrical thatwas ElizabethRobins.9
creation
Liz Stanley,the Englishfeminist scholar,took thisabandonmentof the
"womanworthy"and of a positivist seamlesslifestoryto itsextremein her
desireto makethewholeartofbiographytransparent: HannahCulwickand
EmilyWildingDavisoneachbecamewhatStanleycalls"a plausiblecreation,"
womenofonlyfleeting consequence:theone,thesubjectofan inconsequential
nineteenth-century Englishman's eroticlife;and theother, theyoungsuffragist
whodiedunderthehoovesoftheroyalDerbyentry in [Link] to
Stanley's desire to revealthatall "modern biography is founded upon a realist

This content downloaded from [Link] on Mon, 25 Jan 2016 [Link] UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
46 THEEIGHTEENTHCENTURY

fallacy/'Shechoseinsteadtowritewhatshecalled"accountable feminist biog-

raphy" to demonstrate the competing versions of livesand typesofevidence,
theincreasing complexity oftherelationship ofbiographer to subject,of"the
powerdivisions"usually constructed between the writerand herreaders,and
theblurredlinesbetweenfactand fiction and betweenbiographyand auto-
biography. Trueto anotherfeminist ideal,theDavisonbiography was notthe
workofa singleauthorbuta collaborative venture.10
Stanley'sfierceclarityaboutherown goalsforfeminist biography callsall
historical into
authority question. Like thepostmodern critics such as JaneFlax,
itleavesno hope that"thereis someformofinnocent knowledge be had."
to
Stanleyelaborateson thisview: "thepast is not'there'to know;knowledge
aboutit is theproductofparticular mindscreatinga symbolicaccountsup-
portedby scrapsofevidence."11 Suchcritiqueshave led feminist biographers
to focuson "sites"and on "representations," ratherthantheidentity ofan in-
dividualwoman,herchoices,heractions,oreventhecontext [Link] an
exampleofthemostextreme formofthisapproach,MaryBeard,in herlifeof
theearlytwentieth-century Cambridgeacademicand classicist, JaneHarrison,
describesanybiography shemightwriteas "myth";heraimis "nottoreplace
one mythic versionwithanother, an old storywithmyown brand-new, and
necessarily better one." Instead, she produces the biography of this woman's
archivesand how she,as an author,uses them,thusrevealingtheprocedure
bywhicha JaneHarrisonis "invented."12 Kali K. Israeltreatedall thesources
forthelifeofnineteenth-century EnglishwriterEmiliaDilke as stories,with
none"moretruthful" thanothers, onlymorepowerful. No "self"was created,
rather"a seriesofaccountsoftheproduction ofa subject"had beenpresented
thatlackedcontinuity, and wereunstableand opento interpretation fromtext
to textand readerto [Link],Israelplacedherselfcompletely outsideof
anyhistorical howeverhypothetical,
reality, and evendistancedherselffrom
whatotherswould considerhistorical [Link] she explained:"Throughout
thisbook,I writenotaboutwhatpeoplefeltor thought. ... I writeaboutsto-
In
riesaboutfeelingsand thoughts."13 thetheoretical writings on biography
inspiredby subalternstudies,suchas thoseby GayatriChakravorty Spivak,
thesubjectdisappearsevenmoredramatically inthepartial,distorted imperial
discourseon India'shistory: simply, "thereis no 'realRani' [ofSirmur]to be
found."14
If thefeminist historian's awarenessof theinterposition of self,eitherby
or
design by accident, is added to the mix, whatever of
scrap authority that
remainedis [Link]'sletters, makingselections, giving
meaning, biographers canneverbe considered [Link], class,culture,
disciplinary orientation, and a multiplicity ofotherfactors comeintoplayas
thebiographer [Link] whatmakesone imagining"truer"
thananother? In addition,withonlybitsoftextsand memories, in a veryreal
sense,anylifehas beenfragmented. The biographer rejoins these piecesin a

This content downloaded from [Link] on Mon, 25 Jan 2016 [Link] UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ZINSSER-FEMINISTBIOGRAPHY 47

waythatmayhavelittletodo withwhatthesubjectkneworexperienced. "The

framework ofinterpretation" hasbeendecidedbythebiographer andmaybear
no relationto thelifeas itwas [Link] no tellerofthestoryoutsideand
abovethiscurrent [Link] A. Nussbauminherstudyofeighteenth-cen-
turyautobiographical textsdevelopstheconceptof"thehistorian's moment,"
thisfinalmanufactured influence on thebiography - forthereis no "auton-
omousnarrator," therecan be no "fixedor transhistorical form"in whicha
subjectpresents All
itself. is influenced by an author's perception, byhow the
biographer makes thelife The
intelligible. anthropologist Ruth Behar imagines
a blendingofconsciousnesses ofthesubjectand biographer, so that"in some
sensethelifehistory mayrepresent a personalportrait oftheinvestigator as
well,"a "shadowbiography"lurkingwithinthetellingof [Link]
best,thehistorian is "mediator" betweenthepastlifeand thepresentaudience.
Steedmannotesthatanywriting aboutthepast"mustalwaysbe doneoutofa
setofcurrent preoccupations, thattheliterary
and enterprise ofhistory-writing
tellsa storyaboutthepresentusingitemsfromthepast."15
Mustitbe concludedthenthat"feminist biography" is indeeda contradic-
tionin terms,an oxymoron? For,as one writer /critic notes:"Whenwe reada
biography, we musttellourselvesthattheauthorhas us inhisorherpower:to
makeus feelnotonlythatwhatwe aregetting is true,butthatthereis no other
truthwhichmatters. And that - neithertheynorwe can know."16 However,
to be trueto thefeminist critique,thisshould be impossible and undesirable.
Thereshouldbe no focuson an exceptional individual, extra-ordinary because
ofherplacewithina male-defined thus
framework, closing off awareness ofall
otherwomen'[Link] no uncritical use ofsourcesorofrepresenta-
tionsand no assertionofone truthoveranother. In theend,it mustbe much
as thenovelistVladimirNabokovsettheconundrum: "Remember thatwhat
you are toldis always threefold:shapedby the teller, reshapedby thelistener,
concealedfrombothbythedead manofthetale."17
Needlessto say,no feminist biographer has walkedawayfromherchosen
subjectbecauseofthesecontradictory imperatives. All mustacknowledge, as
doesGelbart, thatthecontradictions aretherein "thefeminist workofretrieval
and rescue."18 In fact,biographers ofwomenbecomepartofthisprocess;for
eventhesimplest, apparently mostinconsequential life,toldin unfragmented,
monolithic terms,fuels"current preoccupations," Steedmandescribesit.19
as
Forall feminist biographers havea current purpose:tobreaktheculturaltradi-
tionsthathaveerasedwomenfromhistorical memory and tooffer evidenceof
whatwomenhaveaccomplished, whatevertheirplacein society.
Threerecentfeminist biographers ofeighteenth-century womenpresentdif-
ferent ways of dealingwiththesecontradictions. IsobelGrundy, in herbiog-
raphy,LadyMaryWortley Montagu:CometoftheEnlightenment, takesthemost
conservative [Link] acknowledgesthe not always flattering reputa-
tionsofhersubjectand then,withmagisterial use ofa vastwealthofsources,

This content downloaded from [Link] on Mon, 25 Jan 2016 [Link] UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
48 THE EIGHTEENTH
CENTURY

provesthatthisdaringBritish womanwas a versatile and skillful [Link],

Grundy revisitsa "woman worthy" and forcesreaders to remember and appre-
ciateMontagu'[Link] fameshedesired
in life.20
In thisway,feminist biographers destablizethecategories previously
attachedtothesewell-known womenandthememories ofthemprimarily con-
structed aroundtheirrelationships [Link]-
vocativein thattheyarguewiththedistortions and apparentmanipulations of
women'spast.
Emiliede Breteuil, marquiseDu Châtelet, is a classicexampleofa "woman
worthy" in need of this feminist to
approach biography. In myprologueto
EmilieDu Châtelet: DaringGeniusoftheEnlightenment , I createa dialoguewith
readersaboutthepreviousaccountsof themarquise'slife,thoseportraying
theFrenchtranslator ofIsaac Newton'sPrincipia as thedelightful mistress of
thegreatVoltaireand littleelse. I presentthreealternative beginnings to the
biography and thusshowthealternative waysin whichthiswoman'shistory
couldbe createdand theeffects ofeachsuchcreation, fromappreciation ofher
intellectual accomplishments and the rangeofheractivities to a smilewhen
she becomesa subjectforVoltaire's witand contemporary ridicule.21 As with
Grundy's biography ofMontagu,I amclaiming Du Châtelet's placeintheintel-
lectualdevelopments ofherday,establishing thatthisunorthodox marquisein
herFrenchcontext was a philosophe.
In thisway,likeGrundy, I showwhatNuss-
baum identifies as "thegaps in thepatriarchy," how thesewomen,whilefar
fromfeminists themselves, resisted"hegemonic ideas offemalecharacter."22
Similarly, Gelbart writes of du Coudrayin orderto gainforhertherecog-
nitionthatwas accordedherby contemporaries despitenumerousobstacles,
such as herlowlyoriginsand lackof [Link] thisway,Gelbart
demonstrates "theoriginalityofthestrategies [women]designedto overcome
thoseobstacles,theway theyscrambledculturalexpectations regarding gen-
der,class,and age."23 Gelbartdoes nothidetheprocessofcreating thisbiogra-
[Link],sheacceptsitas oneofherprimary goals,andwantsreaderstosee
"thatmanyofthepiecesaremissing, thatthepuzzlewillbe fullofholes."24 Like
Johninherbiography ofRobins,Gelbartuses theorganization ofthelifestory
tohighlight thisauthorialdecision:sectionsrelatetothedifferent stagesofher
subject'scareer, buteachchapterwithinthesectionis determined bya partof
du Coudray'srecordedlife,a siteatwhichsheappearsinthecontemporary re-
[Link] thereaderis continually reminded oftheliteralpiecing
together ofthisstoryand ofthemanywaysinwhichthetimesanddu Coudray
herselfpresented heractivities,
fromthescantinformation ofbaptismalrecords
ofinfants whosebirthsshesupervisedtothetextbooks shewrote,richwiththe
soundofherchosenvoiceand thefictions shecreated,"fashioning as shewent
alongwhatreallifefailedtoprovide."25
The firstdraftof mybiographyof Du Châteletincludedmanyinterposi-
tionsaboutmyown life,waysin whichtwentieth-century realitiesseemedto

This content downloaded from [Link] on Mon, 25 Jan 2016 [Link] UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ZINSSER-FEMINISTBIOGRAPHY 49

echo thoseof theeighteenth, or to influencedecisionsabouttheframing of

[Link] of"auto/biography/'
described byStanley,I madeexplicittheseshiftsbackandforth betweenmyex-
periencesand thoseoftheeighteenth-century marquise.A wiseeditorinsisted
thattheybe eliminated. Theyhamperedtheflowofthenarrative, she argued,
and obscuredDu Cháteleťsstorywiththeirabruptchangesinplace,time,and
voice.A friendwho readmostofthemanuscript thoughtthattheydestroyed
anyauthority otherwise claimed by me as [Link] thefinalversion,
thesemusingsappearonlyin theprologueand [Link] Cháte-
leťs storyhad beenbetterknown,ifsuchextensive rewriting ofherintellectual
reputation had notbeen needed,thenthisfeminist-inspired honestywould
havebeena moreappealingand appropriate [Link],eachfeminist bi-
ographer makes choices about which of the feministhistorian'simperatives
in theeighteenth-
to followand to [Link] is choice,all is "fictive,"
century meaningoftheword:createdwitha [Link],thatpur-
pose is personaland political,mirroringfeministchoicesin all endeavors,not
justourwriting and scholarship.

NOTES
1. Formoreontheevolution oftheseideasandtheir context,seeJudith [Link],
History andFeminism: A GlassHalfFull(NewYork, 1993).
[Link], "PlacingWomen inHistory: Definitions andChallenges/' TheMajority
Finds ItsPast:PlacingWomen inHistory (NewYork, 1979),145-59, 148,seealso145-47.
[Link] Steedman, Childhood, CultureandClassinBritain: MargaretMcMillan 1860-
1931(London, 1990),6.
4. SeeNinaRattner Gelbart,TheKing's Midwife: A History andMystery ofMadame du
Coudray (Berkeley,1998);NatalieZemonDavis,Women ontheMargins: Three Seventeenth-
Century Lives
(Cambridge, Mass.,1995);andLindaColley, TheOrdeal ofElizabethMarsh: A
Woman inWorld History (NewYork, 2007).NotethatLauraThatcher Ulrich's AMidwifes
Tale:TheLifeofMartha BallardBased onHerDiary , 1785-1812 (NewYork, 1991)wouldalso
fallintothiscategory ofwomen's biography, [Link]'s CultivatingWomen ,
CultivatingScience:Flora'sDaughters andBotany inEngland 1760to1860(Baltimore, 1995),
tonameonlytwobetter-known worksthatfocus, as Shteirexplainsit,"onthewomen
andtheir individualstories/'despite theoretical critiquesofsuchsimple purposes (7).
[Link],1-4, 203,212.
6. Steedman, 247;seealsoLizStanley, "Biography as Microscope orKaleidoscope?
TheCaseof'Power'inHannahCullwick's Relationship withArthur Munby," Women's
Studies International
Forum 10,no.1 (1987):19-31, 22.
[Link], Joyce Antler,Elisabeth IsraelsPerry, andIngrid Winther Scobie, eds.,
"Introduction," TheChallenge ofFeminist Biography: WritingtheLivesofModern American
Women (Urbana,1992), 1-15,[Link] Narratives Group, eds.,"Origins,"Inter-
preting Women's Lives:FeministTheory andPersonal Narratives(Bloomington,1989),3-15.
[Link] isfrom Kathleen Canning's article,"Feminist after
History theLinguis-
ticTurn: HistoricizingDiscourse andExperience," originally publishedinSigns19,no.2
(1994):368-404. Forexcellent studies ofthisphenomenon inhistoricalwriting generally,
seeElizabeth [Link], , Theory
History , Text:
Historians andtheLinguisticTurn (Cambridge,
Mass.,2004);andtheforthcoming A Handbook ofHistoricalTheory,ed. SarahFootand
Nancy Partner (London, 2010).

This content downloaded from [Link] on Mon, 25 Jan 2016 [Link] UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
50 THEEIGHTEENTHCENTURY
[Link] [Link], ElizabethRobins: Staging a Life,[Link].(1995; Stroud,
repr., 2007),1-13
[Link] contemporary biographers whooffer similarimaginative introduc-
tionsandcomments through theirtexts, seeHermione Lee,Virginia Woolf,[Link].(New
York, 1999.);andNancyMilford, Savage Beauty: TheLife [Link] Millay(New
York, 2001).Moreconventional biographers areawareofthecreative aspectsoftheir
craft;see,forexample, thecollection TheTroubled FaceofBiography, [Link]
andJohn Charmley (NewYork, 1988), inwhich selections byVictoriaGlendenning, "Lies
andSilences" (49-62), andHilarySpurling, "Neither Morbid NorOrdinary" (113-22),
discuss thesesameproblems andoffer similar, iflessdaring solutions.
[Link], "Biography as Microscope," 19-22, 30-31;Stanley, TheAuto/Biographi-
calI: TheTheory andPractice ofFeminist Auto/Biography (New York, 1992), 7-10,86;and
Stanley andAnnMorley, TheLife andDeath ofEmily Wilding Davison:ABiographical Detec-
tiveStory (London, 1988).
[Link] Flax,"TheEndofInnocence," Feminists Theorize thePolitical,
[Link] Butler
andJoan [Link](NewYork, 1992), 445-63, 447;Stanley, Auto/BiographicalI,86.
[Link], TheInvention ofJane Harrison (Cambridge, Mass.,2000), 8-11.
[Link], "Introduction," Names andStories: Emilia DilkeandVictorian Culture
(NewYork, 1999), 3-18,esp.8,[Link], theanthropologist, whowrites:
"There isnotrue version ofa life,after [Link] areonlystories toldaboutandaround a
life"(Translated Woman: Crossing theBorder with Esperanza's Story[Boston, 1993],235).
[Link] Chakravorty Spivak, "TheRaniofSirmur: AnEssayinReading theAr-
chives," History andTheory: Studies inthePhilosophy ofHistory 24,no.3 (1985):247-72,
271.
[Link] inthisparagraph arefreely combined from thefollowing sources:Per-
sonalNarratives Group, 201;Stanley, Auto/Biographical I,211;[Link], The
Autobiographical Subject: Gender andIdeology in Eighteenth-Century England (Baltimore,
1989),xii,17;Behar, 320;andSteedman, 245.
[Link] Worthen, "TheNecessary Ignorance ofa Biographer," TheArtofLiterary Biog-
raphy, [Link] Batchelor (Oxford, 1995), 227-44, 241.
[Link] Nabokov, TheRealLife ofSebastian Knight, [Link].(1941;repr., Norfolk,
Conn., 1959), 52.
[Link], 12.
[Link], 245.
[Link], Lady MaryWortley Montagu: Comet oftheEnlightenment (NewYork,
1999).
[Link], LaDameďEsprit: ABiography oftheMarquise DuChâtelet (NewYork, 2006),
retitledEmilie Du Châtelet: Daring Genius oftheEnlightenment forPenguin, [Link]
approach is similar tothe"dialogic" writing described byDominic LaCaprainhisRe-
thinking IntellectualHistory: Texts, Contexts, Language (Ithaca, 1983).Seethedescription
ofLaCapra'sapproach inPhilippe Carrard, Poetics oftheNewHistory: French Historical
Discourse from Braudel toChartier (Baltimore, 1992),[Link] inan-
other wayinherprologue, asa literalconversation between thebiographer andherthree
subjects (1-4).Gelbart, inherprologue andepilogue, describes thesenseofduCoudray's
presence, evencontestation, as shewrote ofher.
[Link], xviii.
[Link], 280.
[Link], 11.
[Link], 14.

This content downloaded from [Link] on Mon, 25 Jan 2016 [Link] UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions