While ornament during the period of modernism was much maligned as inessential, superficial, deceptive and irrational, it has been rehabilitated by a number of feminist theorists in recent times such as Norma Broude and Naomi Schor. In their defence of ornament, these theorists have exposed the derogation of the feminine implicit in the devaluation of ornament, which has traditionally been conceived as a feminine domain. Yet this feminist espousal of ornament largely fails to challenge the modernist conception of ornament as (...) decorative embellishment devoid of meaning, differing from it only by giving ornament a positive rather than a negative valuation. Consequently, its defence of ornament as a re-assertion of the legitimacy of the feminine ultimately perpetuates rather than undermines stereotypical associations of the feminine with the sensuous, the superficial and the irrational. A more thoroughgoing challenge would question the way in which ornament was defined during the period of modernism, recognizing its role as a carrier of meaning. (shrink)

This article brings together feminist literary theory and law by approaching a number of U.S. Federal cases on sex equality in light of the work of the renowned feminist literary critic Naomi Schor, and shows that literary theory constitutes an under-explored resource for feminist legal critique. Schor’s writings constitute a sustained rumination on the relationship between reading and feminism. Drawing on writings on language and the body by key French feminist theorists, Schor advances a method of interpretation which she terms, (...) provocatively, ‘clitoral reading’, and which focuses on the place of details relating to women’s bodies and desires within literary and cultural discourses. In the course of her career, she analysed texts from domains as diverse as literature, philosophy, visual art, the history of fashion, and photography. I will demonstrate that her work can make a valuable contribution to legal studies by using it as an interpretative lens to re-examine U.S. Federal court judgments. (shrink)

This is a critique of the idea of universality in art and science that considers the examples of Georgia O'Keeffe's work as an artist and Barbara McClintock's work as a scientist. A consideration of their lives and work brings out their differences in the inherently male fields of art and science. Their underlying commonality is found in a shared view of nature involving fluidity, concern for detail, and caring and feeling, traits often characterized as "female". This enables each of them (...) to assert her own identity in her work and contributes to its remarkable success. (shrink)