A Room Of One's Own By Virginia Woolf
Genius, Instead of Gender
Written as a response to the prompt “women and fiction”, Virginia’s Woolf’s essay A Room of One’s Own (Harcourt edition) presents the thesis “a woman must have money and a room of her own if she is to write fiction”. Woolf begins her essay by introducing the obvious difference in the treatment between men and women when she is shown being kicked off the grass and kicked out the library for her gender, and then suffering a lackluster dinner at the women’s college in comparison to the grand lunch she had at the men’s college. This prompts her to research the reasons for the difference in treatment between the sexes, and how that affected the writing of women. Bringing the reader on a historical journey, she shows how …show more content…
My first reason for thinking this: she cares not about the writer’s gender, but only whether they had genius. Woolf says outright that she wants more good books: “My motives [...] are partly selfish. I like reading, [and] lately my diet has become monotonous,” and I’m willing to believe her desire for good books outweighed her desire to see more women writing (108). Though the essay appears to be very feminist, and thus, would be expected to be sympathetic to women writers, Woolf is unafraid to criticize Brontë, saying that though “[Brontë] had more genius in her than Jane Austen”, her anger led her to “write foolishly where she should write wisely” (69). On the other hand, Woolf is unafraid to praise Shakespeare, throwing around “Shakespeare’s genius” this, “the genius of Shakespeare” that, three times in one paragraph (48). Indeed, the true similarity between Woolf’s discussions about both of these writers is the presence of commentary on their genius. Woolf can’t help but talk about genius-- even when talking about Mary Carmichael, she says that “she was no ‘genius’-- that was evident” (92). This leads me to believe that Woolf doesn’t actually care about the gender of writers; she only cares if they have genius. Which makes sense-- I mean, if a book is good, who cares if the author was a man or a woman? This desire for more …show more content…
After all, if the good books she wants come from geniuses, it would be in her interest that those geniuses get what they need to write. Though her purpose extends farther than getting more women to write, it should be no surprise why Woolf focuses so much on women in her essay. Women historically have had next to no opportunity to create: in the past, they were “all but absent from history, [...] could hardly read, could scarcely spell, and [were] the property of [their] husband,” (44). In fact, because the real, non-fictional details about the lives of women are nonexistent in history, Woolf was forced to invent Judith Shakespeare to illustrate how tragic genius unnutured is. Because she never had the opportunity to express her gifts, Judith commits suicide. Of course Woolf would be upset by the fact that women of genius had historically been discouraged from writing; think about all the good works that could have been! So, Woolf focuses on material things-- because it’s what she believes a writer needs to create. Once a genius is free of wondering how to get by, they are able to focus their talents towards creating great works. Of course, there is the whole “a woman must have money and a room of her own” bit, but men aren’t exempt from this requiring of money, either. Woolf quotes Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch when he talks about how most of
Written as a response to the prompt “women and fiction”, Virginia’s Woolf’s essay A Room of One’s Own (Harcourt edition) presents the thesis “a woman must have money and a room of her own if she is to write fiction”. Woolf begins her essay by introducing the obvious difference in the treatment between men and women when she is shown being kicked off the grass and kicked out the library for her gender, and then suffering a lackluster dinner at the women’s college in comparison to the grand lunch she had at the men’s college. This prompts her to research the reasons for the difference in treatment between the sexes, and how that affected the writing of women. Bringing the reader on a historical journey, she shows how …show more content…
My first reason for thinking this: she cares not about the writer’s gender, but only whether they had genius. Woolf says outright that she wants more good books: “My motives [...] are partly selfish. I like reading, [and] lately my diet has become monotonous,” and I’m willing to believe her desire for good books outweighed her desire to see more women writing (108). Though the essay appears to be very feminist, and thus, would be expected to be sympathetic to women writers, Woolf is unafraid to criticize Brontë, saying that though “[Brontë] had more genius in her than Jane Austen”, her anger led her to “write foolishly where she should write wisely” (69). On the other hand, Woolf is unafraid to praise Shakespeare, throwing around “Shakespeare’s genius” this, “the genius of Shakespeare” that, three times in one paragraph (48). Indeed, the true similarity between Woolf’s discussions about both of these writers is the presence of commentary on their genius. Woolf can’t help but talk about genius-- even when talking about Mary Carmichael, she says that “she was no ‘genius’-- that was evident” (92). This leads me to believe that Woolf doesn’t actually care about the gender of writers; she only cares if they have genius. Which makes sense-- I mean, if a book is good, who cares if the author was a man or a woman? This desire for more …show more content…
After all, if the good books she wants come from geniuses, it would be in her interest that those geniuses get what they need to write. Though her purpose extends farther than getting more women to write, it should be no surprise why Woolf focuses so much on women in her essay. Women historically have had next to no opportunity to create: in the past, they were “all but absent from history, [...] could hardly read, could scarcely spell, and [were] the property of [their] husband,” (44). In fact, because the real, non-fictional details about the lives of women are nonexistent in history, Woolf was forced to invent Judith Shakespeare to illustrate how tragic genius unnutured is. Because she never had the opportunity to express her gifts, Judith commits suicide. Of course Woolf would be upset by the fact that women of genius had historically been discouraged from writing; think about all the good works that could have been! So, Woolf focuses on material things-- because it’s what she believes a writer needs to create. Once a genius is free of wondering how to get by, they are able to focus their talents towards creating great works. Of course, there is the whole “a woman must have money and a room of her own” bit, but men aren’t exempt from this requiring of money, either. Woolf quotes Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch when he talks about how most of