In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

L ’E spr it C réa te u r poses a theoretical practice that underlies the onto-theology of the sign, to go beyond deconstruction to de-conception (121). The semio-hiero-genetic model proposed by Bucher is a theory of the ontology of death and its rites and a general epistemology that can unify the theorizations of Girard and Derrida. Much of the latter part of the book deals with the phenomena of the double model under which we live: the heritage of Greek and Judaeo-Christian thought, both of which profoundly reflect the semio-hiero-genetic origin. For Bucher (209), this twin path has pro­ duced the world’s great cultural events, and the author devotes many pages to readings of Plato, the Biblical tradition, and especially the Passion. Bucher’s reading of the Passion (316) as a continuation of the original equation of death contrasts with Girard’s vision of the Passion as the end of sacrifice. Though it is impossible to decide here, the difference in perspective underlines the strength of both theorists as readers of our cultural heritage and we can only be the richer for it. If there is one outstanding blind spot in Bucher’s book it is his Occidento-centrism and it is a male Occident of which it always seems to be a question. Certainly, for the early postarchaic period, he has numerous insightful pages on the Egypt of the Pharaohs; he also marshals much anthropological evidence from various cultures. But, with exception made for a few promising pages on Buddhism (234-36), there is little attention paid to nonEuropean , non-Christian, and non-male cultures. And with 5,000 continuous years of Chinese history, for example, it seems a grave omission. This is all the more unfortunate, for the onto-theology of death in Chinese society could have been the test of Bucher’s theory. Reading Derrida, we realize that each cultural statement and institution has a repressed partner and, specifically, in each phallocentric institution, the female and her culture are repressed. Would Bucher’s theory stand the tests of female and Oriental cultures? The reader can only hope that Bucher will take on these challenges at some future date. L a w r e n c e R . Sc h e h r University o f South Alabama W r it in g t h e F e m a l e Vo ic e : E ss a y s o n E p is t o l a r y L it e r a t u r e . Ed. Elizabeth C. Gold­ smith. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1989. Pp. xiii + 296. The place of women in literature, both as authors and as figures in literary works, seems more central than, say, in 1975 when the periodical Signs had just been founded and when feminist criticism was described by Elaine Showalter as being “ in the wilderness.” This volume of 15 essays shows the maturity and the sophistication of the literary works written about and especially by women, and o f the criticism dedicated to understanding the role of women in western literature. This volume is extremely strong and valuable on all levels. It is broad in its historical scope, covering literature from the 16th century to the 20th century, and in geographical scope, including authors from Italy (1), France (7), England (3), North and South America (3), Germany (1); the greater emphasis is on authors of the 17th and 18th centuries, and scholars working in that period will find the volume most valuable. Male authors of fiction with women as central figures include Montesquieu, Richardson, Cleland, Richardson, Laclos, Manuel Puig, and women authors include Veronica Franco, Madame de Sevigne, Madame de Graffigny, Sophie La Roche, Alice Walker, Margaret Atwood, among others. Authors of real letters are included as well, in essays analyzing the correspondence between the marquis de Sade and his two female correspondents and George Sand’s letters to her mother. A clear and cogent introduction by the editor E. C. Goldsmith reinforces the 92 F a l l 1991 B o o k R ev iew s strength of the volume by setting out the...

pdf

Share