TEXT E Is the literary critic
like the poet, responding creatively, intuitively, subjectively to the written
word as the poet responds to human experience Or is the critic more like a
scientist following a series of demonstrable, verifiable steps, using an
objective method of analysis For the woman who is a
practitioner of feminist literary criticism, the subjectivity versus objectivity
or critic-as-artist-or-scientist debate has special significance. For her the
question is not only academic but political as well, and her definition will
court special risks whichever side of the issue it favors. If she defines
feminist criticism as objective and scientific—a valid, verifiable, intellectual
method that anyone, whether man or woman, can perform—the definition not only
precludes the critic-as-artist approach, but may also impede accomplishment of
the utilitarian political objectives of those who seek to change the academic
establishment and its thinking, especially about sex roles. If she defines
feminist criticism as creative and intuitive, privileged as art, then her work
becomes vulnerable to the prejudice of stereotypic ideas about the ways in which
women think, and will be dismissed by much of the academic establishment.
Because of these prejudices, women who use an intuitive approach in their
criticism may find themselves charged with inability to be analytical, to be
objective or to think critically. Whereas men may be free to claim the
role of critic as artist, women run different professional risks when they
choose intuition and private experience as critical method and
defense. These questions are political in the sense that the
debate over them will inevitably be less an exploration of abstract matters in a
spirit of disinterested inquiry than an academic power struggle in which the
careers and professional fortunes of many women scholars only now entering
the academic profession in substantial numbers will be at stake, and with
them the chances for a distinctive contribution to humanistic understanding, a
contribution that might be an important influence against sexism in our
society. As long as the academic establishment continues to
regard objective analysis as "masculine" and an intuitive approach as "feminine"
the theoretician must steer a delicate philosophical course between the two. If
she wishes to construct a theory of feminist criticism, she would be well
advised to place it within the framework of a general theory of the critical
process that is neither purely objective nor purely intuitive. Her theory is
then more likely to be compared and contrasted with other theories of criticism
with some degree of dispassionate distance. For which of the following reasons have the debate mentioned in the passage special significance for the woman who is a theoretician of feminist literary criticism according to the author
A.There are large numbers of capable women working within the academic establishment. B.There are a few powerful feminist critics who have been recognized by the academic establishment. C.Like other critics, most women who are literary critics define criticism as either scientific or artistic. D.Women who are literary critics face professional risks different from those faced by men who are literary critics.