Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 09:18:00 -0500

From: "Emerson, Jessie J" jjemerso[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]INGR.COM

Subject: Re: "womanist" vs. "feminist" cite



I agree that there are probably other occasions when it might be

appropriate. I can foresee it being used, say, for a male author whose

writing is distinctly "female" (possessing characteristics of women's

writing) rather than feminist (which implies a political agenda). You

wouldn't call him a "female" writer (because that implies a distinct

gender), or a "feminist" writer (because there is no political agenda),

but you might call him a "womanist" writer. (Unless, of course,

"womanist" has become associated definitively with politics via Walker

and hooks.)



I am thinking of a specific author (whose name I can't remember,

unfortunately) that is discussed in these terms in literary theory,

although I can't remember if the term "womanist" is ever used.



Is anyone familiar with such a usage?



Jessie Emerson



----------

From: Larry Horn[SMTP:LHORN[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]yalevm.ycc.yale.edu]

Sent: Monday, 13 October, 1997 9:39 PM

To: ADS-L[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]UGA.CC.UGA.EDU

Subject: Re: "womanist" vs. "feminist" cite



I wasn't sure this one really fit the pattern myself. In the context

of the

novel I cited, "womanist" seems to correspond to what others have

called

"difference feminism". But maybe "womanist" is used in both these

occasions--

and others--where "feminist", for whatever reason, is inappropriate.



Larry