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

117 Spring 2004 Vol. XXXVI, No. 2 RECENT ARTICLES* ADDISON EDGECUMBE, RODNEY STENNING. ‘‘An Allusion to Addison’s ‘Campaign’ in ‘The Rape of the Lock,’’’N&Q, 50 (June 2003), 201. Mr. Edgecumbe astutely perceives a parallel between the sun fading over the battlefield in Addison’s ‘‘Campaign’’and Sol rising over Belinda’s bed in Pope’s Rape of the Lock. However, Pope did not ‘‘loathe’’Addison, as Mr. Edgecumbe asserts , in his allusion. All textswerefodder forPope’splayfulimagination,andhedid not need to dislike the author of a famous Whig panegyric to tweak his poem. ASTELL BRYSON, CYNTHIA B. ‘‘Mary Astell: Defender of the ‘Disembodied Mind,’’’Hypatia , 13 (Fall 1998), 40–62. Astell, Ms. Bryson notes, defended the bodyless-thus-genderless cogito of Descartes —the ‘‘disembodied mind’’— against Locke’s hierarchical and (arguably ) gendered formulation of ‘‘thinking matter.’’ Ms. Bryson is right to remind readers that Astell was among Locke’s early detractors, and she does a good job *Unsigned reviews are by the editors. of summing up and augmenting older arguments about Astell’s debt to Descartes. Her insistence, however, on making Astell into a heat-’n’-serve feminist icon for the circa–1985 set leads to special pleading that her argument cannot support: A SeriousProposaltotheLadiesisa‘‘blend of primarily Cartesian and admittedly some Lockean thought’’; ‘‘Astell may have . . . purposely ignored Descartes’s Passions of the Soul, in which he clearly asserts that there is a hierarchy of souls.’’ More depressingly, Ms. Bryson allows herself to make opportunistic assertions, such as her reiterated claim that Locke regarded women in general much as he regarded the lower sort of male—this in spite of a quotation that Ms. Bryson reproduces that shows that Locke did not conflate men with women, but rather Day-Labourers and Tradesmen’’ with ‘‘Spinsters and Dairy Maids.’’ Had the author been less driven to affirm the pieties of earlier academic feminism , her knowledge of Astell and Enlightenment philosophy might have yielded more in the way of new insight. One would like to know, for example, what Astell’s selective use of Descartes and Locke—which Ms. Bryson seems to 118 regard as an inconvenience—says about her own mind, above and beyond her discipleship to one thinker and her hostility to another. For a more satisfying analysis of Astell and Locke, see E. Derek Taylor ’s essay in JHI (reviewed on p. 118). TAYLOR, E. DEREK. ‘‘Mary Astell’sIronic Assault on John Locke’s Theory of Thinking Matter,’’ JHI, 62 (July 2001), 505–522. Mr. Taylor is interested in correcting misrepresentations of Astell’s place in Enlightenment thought encouraged by partial(in severalsenses)examinationsof her textual record. His essay is thus a way station in the canonization of Astell: she is the author of much more than the comparatively sexy Serious Proposals to the Ladies (1694) and the Reflections on Marriage (1700). Of particular concern is the development of Astell’s thought from her correspondence with John Norris of Bemerton , in Letters Concerning the Love of God (1695), to the more freighted and tonally complex Christian Religion (1705). In the former, Mr. Taylor reminds us, Astell questioned Norris’s radical theocentrismintermssympathetictoLocke ’sempiricist theory of thinking matter. But Mr. Taylor takes previous critics to task for supposing thatAstell’spositioninthisdebate remained static after 1695. In The Christian Religion, Astell embraces Norris ’s anti-Lockean ‘‘occasionalism,’’ and comes down against Locke, often with acerbity. Mr. Taylor considers possible causes for this about-face, including Astell’s growing alarm at Locke’s Whiggism and Socianism and her pique at caustic references to her and Norris’s correspondence in Discourse Concerning the Love of God (1696)—a treatise by Demaris Masham that Astell wrongly attributed to Locke. Mr. Taylor’s Astell isbothanagile and protean controversialist and a fallen human being, pettish as well as brilliant. Alexander Pettit University of North Texas BEHN CAYWOOD, CYNTHIA and BONNIE A. HAIN. ‘‘Breaking the Confining Silence: Unstable Valences and Language in Aphra Behn’s The Rover,’’ RECTR, 16 (Winter 2001), 24–39. Arguing brilliantly that linguistic mastery governs Behn’s The Rover, Ms. Caywood and Ms. Hain show how Florinda and Angellica both remain within verbal enclosures imposed by patriarchal expectations . Only Hellena, who appreciates and rejoices in...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 117-161
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.