Returning to Manderley (Alison Light) / Romance and the Work of Fantasy (Janice Radway)

Returning to Manderley : Romance Fiction, Female Sexuality, and class (Alison Light)

In this article the author focuses on Daphne du Maurier’s Rebecca which is the late 1930s story of an orphan girl who marries an aristocratic widower and has got everthing a romance needs and more. First, Light presents the Left political view that romance novels reinforce the role of the submissive woman only to criticise it by arguing that women aren’t so easily manipulated and that readers are more complex than that. She argues that we should not be afraid of pleasure that comes from reading such literatures and she sees fictions as « restatements of realities. » I too, once thought that romance readers were desperate housewives who were trying to fill a void in their lives. I thought of romance novels as cheesy and simply degrading women by promoting the idea of an eroticized woman being swept off her feet or even "rescued" by a strong, tall, dark and handsome man. Although I do not want to generalize, we have to be honest with ourselves by saying that at some point we have imagined such a fantasy, searching for that self that could possibly experience this "romance". Here is the problem though: romance novels (that I know of) are usually aimed at heterosexual women. However, Light does specify that the « self » that comes of reading romance equals the norms of female heterosexuality. So in a subtle way, she acknowledges that these texts are not representative of homosexual experience. In her conclusion, Light makes the point that women who read romance fictions are, « as much a measure of their deep dissatisfaction with heterosexual options as of any desire to be fully identified with the submissive versions of femininity the texts endorse » and urges feminists to analyse romance and its reception as symptomatic instead of reflective.




Romance and the Work of Fantasy – Struggles over Feminine Sexuality and Subjectivity at Century’s End (Janice Radway)

I liked the fact that she was critical of her own work right at the beginning of the article. She criticised because it reinforced sexist assumptions about romance novels and its readers. while she wanted to claim romance for feminism instead and takeromances and its readers seriously. To be completely honest, I have probably never read a romance novel. My first thought was always that they are cheesy and irrealistic. I was never one for fantasy in that kind of sense.

Janice Radway seeks to « review the nature of the struggles that have been conducted at this site (that of the struggle for feminine subjectivity and sexuality) and to show that just as feminist discourse about the romance has changed dramatically in a short time, so too has the romance changed as writers have resisted the efforts of the publishing industry to fix the form in the hope of generating predictable profits. » (396) She praises the accomplishments of romance writers by stating that they have showed an increased confidence in claiming female sexuality and have imagined a female subjectivity to support it.

Radway offers an overview of romance of the early 1960s and presents two critical views of them: 1) romances as a threat to patriarchal culture due to the sexual revolution and, 2)romance seen as a backlash against the women’s movement. Her response to this is that « policing was the real work enacted by leftists and early feminists critiques of romances and their readers. »(397) She thinks that by criticizing women they were reinforcing their authority on them and dictating what they « ought » to be doing instead of reading romance novels. I completely agree with this. It seems as though, still today, men or women who are still embedded within the patriarchal views of « woman » are often threatened by women stepping out of normative female identities. God forbid, a woman should think about sexual pleasure or go off in a world of fantasy. It seems that men are the only ones allowed to do this with pornography. For men to do this is often seen an natural, like an innate behaviour or desire. In fact, one could think that a man who does not engage in such activities or dreams does not fall into the heterosexual male norm.

Radway reinforces the idea that the fantasy of the romance is closely connected with the social and material conditions of women’s lives in a patriarchal culture. Later in the piece she offers a brief history of the evolution of romance novels and publishing companies while arguing that feminism made its way into romances through the career aspirations of the middle-class writers of the genre. What we are left to consider is that fantasies are offerings of different versions of female sexuality and different subject positions for readers to experience and try. I now see it as perhaps a safe place for women to experience their sexuality before thinking or actually engaging in certain situations in their reality. Some of them may or may not or probably never experience these outside of the romance novel but can certainly take full advantage of this place to explore their inner self.

Eating the Other (hooks) / Soft-soaping empire (McClintock)/ Devouring theory (Kenway & Buller)

Theme of the week: Cultural commodities

LOOKING INTO THE MIRROR, THE BLACK WOMAN ASKED, "MIRROR, MIRROR ON THE WALL, WHO'S THE FINEST OF THEM ALL?" THE MIRROR SAYS, "SNOW WHITE, YOU BLACK BITCH, AND DON'T YOU FORGET IT!!!"
Fig. 3 Carrie Mae Weems, ‘Mirror/Mirror’

Eating the Other - Desire and Resistance (bell hooks)

hooks' Eating the Other argues that that difference and imperial nostalgia of the White Western male (for the most part) for dominance over the Other is enacted through cultural appropriation. This idea entails that the White supremacist male has a desire and attraction towards what is considered exotic and different because it presents an opportunity to step out of conventional white mainstream culture. Like hooks says in the first paragraph of her article she states that "within commodity culture, ethnicity becomes spice, seasoning that can liven up the dull dish that is mainstream white culture."(21)More importantly, only white males are permitted to express this fascination. So bodies become a terrain of neo-imperialism we could say and white supremacists take from those bodies to claim that they are no longer racists, so the Other is commodified in other words. We are using the "Other" for our own redemption and benefit. She uses the idea of cultural commodities to demonstrate the importance of space and place in identity and cultural politics. This whole process is then amplified through media to the point that it becomes acceptable to buy into it.

I do not know if I was shocked by the ideas hooks presented because I was unaware of this phenomenon if you want to call it so, of if I had just never chosen to look at it that way. I would like to think that I was unaware of it but the fact that I am highly exposed to consumer media suggests that I chose not to see through it. It's interesting to think that although we are very aware of the existence of racism, our society still chooses to propagate in more "subtle" way through media ads and consumerism and this for its own benefit most of the time. One of the ideas that I recognized was when hooks writes about the American Dream and that "the acknowledge Other must assume recognizable forms."(26) It made me reflect on the fact that the Other's cultural identity is perhaps not their own but something that mainstream white culture has created. For example, let's think about the identities we associate with certain races and ethnicities: docility, oversexualised, violent, submissive, pure, evil. hooks criticised Torgovnick's work because of "her refusal to recognize how deeply the idea of the "primitive" is entrenched in the psyches of everyday people, shaping contemporary racist stereotypes, perpetuating racism."(32) One that that came to mind immediately was this idea that I had before I moved to a major city where cultural diversity was so prominent. It was the idea that I had to beware of Black men walking on the street late at night, to fear that they might attack or rape me. How did this idea became part of me? I knew and I know I am not a racist yet this idea was one that had been part of my upbringing and exposure to ads, movies and television shows. Is it possible to completely erase those ideas?

Another important point of interest that I could relate with was when hooks describes fashion catalogue ads that exoticise the Other. It reminded of a trend that has developped in the last few years. It seems going to Africa has become trendy within the dominant culture. Personnally, I have many friends who have partaken into this trend. Some for school purposes and work but many for the simple fact that it has become a hot spot for travels. Why is that? Is it because it's different, seen as exotic or because we want to have a bit of the Other as hooks says. Take people that go down south during the winter and come back with braided/beaded hair. I never understood that. Those people wouldn't normally do that to their hair here in Canada so is it that being in an "exotic" country that allows to express your desire or your "taste" for the Other?

Overall, hooks article advises us that acknowledging and exploring "racial diffrence can be pleasurable (and) represents a breaktrough and a challenge to white supremacy, to various systems of domination."(39) However, I think that we have a very long way to go. There needs to be a complete overhaul of consumer culture and an awareness of how we have created a neo-imperialist society in consuming the Other.

Soft-soaping empire: commodity racism and imperial advertising (Anne McClintock)

In this article, McClintock presents a social history of soap in Victorian Britain and how it relates to capitalism, imperialism and advertising. She uses the example of Pears soap ads because it presented imperialism as existing through the idea of domesticity. This soap campaign became part of Britain’s civilizing mission. The success of imperialism was translated into racist advertising and promotion. Commodity racism became a marketing and production tool of racism and imperial power to an outrageous degree. The Victorian invention of domesticity also took shape around colonialism and ideas of race and vice versa. This new economy created new signs of cultural representation, which would result into a dominant form of representation…advertising reinvented racial differences and also became a sign of racial hygiene (portable domestic commodity)

The article was a good historical overview of how those who have been "othered" have been used as commodities during imperial times and have perpetuated what is going on today.
I was completely shocked at the nature of packaging and advertisements for the soap, how racist and obvious they were. It made me think of how powerful advertisement was and is even more so today in creating this idea of the other and how it encourages the furthering of racism and sexism.
Interesting also is the link that was made between racial commodities and domestic commodities. As the video "Advertising and the end of the world" portrayed advertising has colonised culture. Although today it might not look or seem as explicit as what the soap advertisement were racism and female objectification are still propagated through these means of communication. What they were doing during the 19th century was to colonise the other which were Blacks and women, today they are colonizing all members of society the same way, through fantasy which is what is desired at that moment in time. Through technology it has become easier to do.

Devouring Theory (Jane Kenway & Elizabeth Buller)

This chapter argues that the market and information and communication media together hold powerful and privileged position in today’s culture, society and economy which I think has been facilitated by the wide array of technoology. Consumption is now recognised as defining characteristic of the lifestyle of the western world and as a result we could even say that consumer culture is now inside our identities.

The chapter is about historical and theory background to book. It begins with an overview of key moments in consumer media-culture history and then offers an outline of different ways in which social and cultural commentators have theorised consumer media culture. The purpose of the first part is to identify key changes over time in consumer media culture in the so-called developed countries of West.

They also speak of the strong tendency in consumer culture to erase history. I think that as a society we find it so easy to dismiss the pass, especially younger generations. They do not see the importance of holding on to the past, even the future seems too distant and irrelevant unless it has to do with tomorrow, a week or two from now. Consumerism and its products are changing so often that I think it becomes trivial to hold on to anything other than the present. The authors argue that consumer-media culture changes constantly and is becoming more complex to sustain itself and that we need to "make use of newer foundations and theories in order to actually understand the changes and complexities." ( )They identify three main points in literature on consumer culture:

1)production of consumption approach
2) the modes of consumption approach
3) apparoach that emphasizes the consumption of dreams, images and pleasures

I also appreciated their definition of the central features of consumer culture as "the availability of an extensive range of commodities, goods and experience which are to be consumed, maintained, planned and dreamt about by the general population."( )Just like the video Advertising and the End of the World explains, advertising portrays how people are dreaming, not acting. So what are we really doing? Are we wasting our time dreaming about what could be or of what would make us happy. It is interesting to think of how much time and money we are wasting away in being "consumed" by the desire to gain material goods that we think will make us better and creat a respectable identity within society. When I was watching the video, all I could think about was how much money we waste on making those advertisements and consuming as a result of those advertisements. While we are doing this, there are people that are living without any possession or living below the poverty mark. It's unbelievable to think that we choose to spend money on useless promotion.

Feminism and Cultural Studies (Shiach)

This article presents an overview and introduction to what cultural studies entail. I found this to be a great starting point for me personally because I had not really explored cultural studies before. I took at Women in the Media course in my undegrad but it sort of skimmed through the basics of current issues. It was not strong in theory nor on how to apply what was learned in class. What I found interesting in Shiach's defintion of cultural studies is when she says that it (cultural studies) would not benefit from being 'disciplined' and that it is not based on a unique story but rather is defined through times, social and national contexts and history. The first idea that came to mind is how Women Studies and the "women's movement" falls into that same category (in my view of women studies and feminism.) Women's Studies does not come from one source, one story, one key definining historical movement I think. It does not mean the same thing in different parts of the world and changes through times and as political situations or cultural events take place. I have a hard time labelling Women Studies as a "discipline"; it feels like it is going against its grassroots. By disciplining itself I think it is trying to "fit in" within the academic world.

She also describes cultural studies as a source of change which can sometimes be threatening. In a sense, Women's Studies is also a place where change comes from and which is very often seen as threatening to those adhering to conservative views. Thus it makes complete sense that Shiach speaks of cultural studies in relations to feminism. In fact her main purpose in writing this introduction and chapters that make up the book is to recognize the force and variety of work that has been done by feminist critics working in the realm of cultural studies in the last twenty years.

She believes that the lack of recognition is that feminist foundations have never been strong enough to really engage with the theoritical models that cultural studies draws upon. (4) I am unsure if this is true however. I am not familiar enough (yet) with the relationship of feminism with cultural studies nor have a strong background in cultural studies to engage in this debate. My initial response would be that feminism is in fact strong enough but does not feel that it is. Because it more often than not has to prove itself in some way or another, feminism might have an inferiority complex and as a result does not feel that its foundation is strong enough. I think that as I go along with the readings, this discussion will be elaborated on in future posts.

Feminism, Postmodernism and the "Real Me" (McRobbie)

This article presents the three way split that exists around postmodernism which include 1) a denial that postmodernism engages with anything that modernism isn't able to explain; 2)the postcolonialists and 3) those that display the excesses of postmodernism. McRobbie explores the meaning of this split for women and how feminism identifies itself in an intellectual world that has constant border, boundary and identitiy shiftings.

To answer her main question the author explores the split agenda of postmodernism and postcolonialism in understanding contemporary society. She also asks us as intellectuals and feminists to question our intellectual place in postmodernity and postcolonialism and in feminist politics. The ideas of living with and embracing difference, and the construction of the social self through postmodernism are explored. McRobbie also recognizes that strength of feminism to go across and negotiate boundaries is what is needed to redefine the term "woman". When she speaks of this, I really enjoyed what she said about exploring boundaries by going back to them.


"How might the continual process of putting oneself together be transformed to produce the empowerement of subordinate and social categories...inventing the self rather than endlessly searching for the self (...)" (72) This quote was by far my favorite in this article. My first thought was of the saying that so many people speak,."I'm trying to find myself". It is like our "self" is suppose to be out there somewhere for us to find when in reality we should be creating ourselves. Why conform to the norms and be influenced by mainstream culture when you can create your own individual self? On a more personal note, up until a few years ago, I felt that I could never be truly happy because there was always something new coming out that meant that I wasn't up to par with what society expected of a twenty something year old. I just gave up at some point; I could not keep up. I could not "find myself" through conformity so I decided to "create" myself and will continue to do so as my life progresses. There is no one true self, life experiences will shape it and bring me to change and reflexion.
The same thing is implied for feminism and Women's Studies. There is no one true or unique identity. Like the author mentions it is an "amalgam of fragemented identities" and we should not try to label or give it a specific definition for it is ever changing. I am convinced that feminism needs to constantly question itself about whom it is speaking to, of, or for.