Harvard Civil Rights: Civil Liberties Law Review
Harvard Civil Rights: Civil Liberties Law Review
复制标题
哈佛民权：公民自由法评论
DOI：
10.1016/0191-6599(89)90178-2
复制
发表时间：
1993
影响因子：
0.3
通讯作者：
R. Alday
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Alday
回想起来，琼·凯利的作品可能被看作是一个平台的标志。凯利将女权主义运动对女性身份的关注和对女性经验的描绘相提并论，强调了意识的重要性。她动情地描述了，当她第一次被要求为妇女研究教学做出贡献时，她拒绝了，因为作为文艺复兴时期的历史学家，她认为自己没什么可说的。但是，她开始意识到，她对文艺复兴的整体看法是“片面的、扭曲的、有限的，而且受到这些限制的严重缺陷”。（十二）因为没有提出关于妇女和两性关系的问题。她后期的大部分作品都集中在探索早期现代女性作家的意识发展，以及她们对与她们的经历无关的男性世界图景的反驳。凯利在马克思主义传统下工作，但最让人记住的是她对马克思主义和激进女权主义理论家之间关于性别与阶级的激烈辩论的清晰处理。凯利坚持认为，两者都不应该被视为因果关系，而是性别/性别系统和生产关系同时运作，父权制将自己完美地融入资本主义的社会经济、政治和文化结构。凯利的“双重视野”开启了一种方式，让我们看到社会世界的各个方面——公共和私人——是如何被性别化的，同时保留了对唯物主义分析的承诺。凯特利的工作对女权主义理论做出了重大贡献，但这并没有导致女性被写入历史。虽然KeBy可能再也无法以完全相同的方式看待文艺复兴时期的历史了，但她自己的原创作品仍然专注于重新发现女性作家，而不是通过优先考虑性别来重写文艺复兴时期的历史。正如琼·斯科特所说，不幸的是，它仍然有可能
In retrospect, Joan Kelly’s work may be seen to mark something of a plateau. Paralleling the feminist movement’s concern with female identity and with the charting of female experience, Kelly emphasised the importance of consciousness. She movingly describes the way in which, when she was first asked to contribute to women’s studies teaching, she refused, because, as a historian of the Renaissance, she considered that she had nothing to talk about. But, she came to realise that the way in which the whole picture she held of the Renaissance was “partial, distorted, limited and deeply flawed by those limitations’(p. xii) because of the questions that had not been asked about women and the relations between the sexes. Much of her later work focussed on exploring the development of consciousness among early modern women writers and their refutation of the male picture of the world which bore no relation to their experience. Kelly worked within a marxist tradition, but is best remembered for her lucid treatment of the vexed debate between marxist and radical feminist theorists about sex versus class. Kelly insisted that neither should be seen as causal, but rather that the sex/gender system and that of productive relations operate simultaneously, with patriarchy assimilating itself perfectly to the socio-economic, political and cultural structures of capitalism. Kelly’s ‘doubled vision’opened the way to seeing how all aspects of the social world-the public and the private-are gendered, while retaining a commitment to a materialist analysis.Ketly’s work represented a substantiai contribution to feminist theory, but it did not result in women being written into history. Whife KeBy may never have been able to see Renaissance history in quite the same way again, her own original work continued to focus on rediscovering female writers, rather than on rewriting Renaissance history by prioritising gender. As Joan Scott, remarks, it has unfortunately remained possible for