Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T23:04:55.167Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

CRITICAL NAMES MATTER: “CURRER BELL,” “GEORGE ELIOT,” AND “MRS. GASKELL”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 November 2017

Daun Jung*
Affiliation:
Ewha Womans University

Extract

It is a well-known fact that many Victorian women writers such as the Brontë sisters, George Eliot, and Elizabeth Gaskell adopted pseudonyms or anonymity in publishing their literary works, but few people are aware of how such naming practices had been received by contemporary readers, especially by Victorian periodical reviewers – the very first readers and mediators that presented any major literary works to the public. Since we, as modern day scholars, have become so intimate with their present forms of author names appearing on course syllabuses, school curriculums, and academic papers, we hardly ask how such naming has become possible.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

WORKS CITED

Armstrong, Nancy. Desire and Domestic Fiction: A Political History of the Novel. Oxford UP, 1987.Google Scholar
Ashton, Rosemary. 142 Strand: A Radical Address in Victorian England. London: Chatto & Windus, 2006.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Susan D. Roomscape: Women Writers in the British Museum from George Eliot to Virginia Woolf. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 2013.Google Scholar
Bock, Carol. “Reading Brontë’s Novels: The Confessional Tradition.” Charlotte Brontë’s Jane Eyre: A Casebook. Ed. Browning Michie, Elsie. New York: Oxford UP, 2006.Google Scholar
Bodenheimer, Rosemarie. “A Woman of Many Names.” The Cambridge Companion to George Eliot. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge UP, 2001. 2037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bodenheimer, Rosemarie. The Real Life of Mary Ann Evans: George Eliot, Her Letters and Fiction. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1994.Google Scholar
Burstein, Miriam Elizabeth. “Mid-nineteenth-century Critical Responses to the Brontës.” The Brontës in Context. Ed. Thormählen, Marianne. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2012. 175–82.Google Scholar
Cecil, David. Early Victorian Novelists: Essays in Revaluation. London: Constable, 1935.Google Scholar
Chapman, John. “The Mill on the Floss.” Westminster Review (July 1860): 24–33.Google Scholar
Chapman, John. “George Eliot.” Westminster Review (July 1885): 161-208.Google Scholar
“Charlotte Brontë.” Eclectic Review (June 1857): 630–42.Google Scholar
“Charlotte Brontë.” National Magazine (June 1857): 76–78.Google Scholar
D'Albertis, Deirdre. Dissembling Fictions: Elizabeth Gaskell and the Victorian Social Text. New York: St. Martin's, 1997.Google Scholar
D'Albertis, Deirdre. “The Life and Letters of E. C. Gaskell.” The Cambridge Companion to Elizabeth Gaskell. Ed. Matus, Jill L.. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2007. 1026.Google Scholar
Davis, Deanna L.Feminist Critics and Literary Mothers: Daughters Reading Elizabeth Gaskell.” Signs 17.3 (Spring 1992): 507–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“Eminent Women Series.” British Quarterly Review (Oct. 1883): 472–73.Google Scholar
Dallas, E. S.. “Currer Bell.” Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine (July 1857): 77–94.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. “What Is an Author?Textual Strategies: Perspectives in Post-Structuralist Criticism. Ed. Harari, Josué V.. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1979. 141–60.Google Scholar
Genette, Gérard. Paratexts: Thresholds of Interpretation. Trans. Jane E. Lewin. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1997.Google Scholar
“George Eliot.” Academy (28 April 1883): 286–87.Google Scholar
“George Eliot.” Saturday Review (1 Jan. 1881): 12–13.Google Scholar
“George Eliot's Life.” Saturday Review (7 Feb. 1885): 181–82.Google Scholar
“George Eliot.” Times (24 Dec. 1880): 9.Google Scholar
“George Eliot.” Wesleyan-Methodist Magazine (April 1885): 271–79.Google Scholar
“George Eliot's Life, as related in her Letters and Journals.” Athenaeum (31 Jan. 1885): 145–46.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Sandra M., and Gubar, Susan. The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-century Literary Imagination. Yale UP, 1980.Google Scholar
Harris, Margaret. “George Eliot's Conversation with Currer Bell.” George Eliot-George Henry Lewes Studies 5051 (2006): 130–42.Google Scholar
Judd, Catherine. “Male Pseudonyms and Female Authority in Victorian England.” Literature in the Marketplace: Nineteenth-Century British Publishing and Reading Practices. Ed. Jordan, John O. and Patten, Robert L.. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1995.Google Scholar
Kripke, Saul. Naming and Necessity. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1980.Google Scholar
Langland, Elizabeth. “The Receptions of Charlotte Brontë, Charles Dickens, George Eliot,and Thomas Hardy.” A Companion to the Victorian Novel. Ed. Brantlinger, Patrick and Thesing, William B.. Oxford: Blackwell, 2002. 387405.Google Scholar
Lewes, George Henry. “Ruth and Villette.” Westminster Review (April 1853): 474-91.Google Scholar
“Literary News.” Critic (15 Dec. 1855): 627.Google Scholar
Minto, William. “Mrs. Gaskell's Novels.” Fortnightly Review (Sept. 1878): 353-69.Google Scholar
Moers, Ellen. Literary Women. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1985.Google Scholar
“Mrs. Gaskell.” Macmillan's Magazine (Dec. 1865): 153-56.Google Scholar
“Mrs. Gaskell.” Saturday Review (18 Nov. 1865): 638–39.Google Scholar
Nehamas, Alexander. “What an Author Is.” The Journal of Philosophy 83.11 (1986): 685–91.Google Scholar
“Obituary.” Examiner (3 April 1855): 215.Google Scholar
Peterson, Linda H. Becoming a Woman of Letters: Myths of Authorship and Facts of the Victorian Market. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2009.Google Scholar
Ragussis, Michael. Acts of Naming: The Family Plot in Fiction. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1986.Google Scholar
Showalter, Elaine. A Literature of Their Own: British Women Novelists from Brontë to Lessing. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1977.Google Scholar
Smith, George Barnett. “Mrs. Gaskell and Her Novels.” Cornhill (Feb. 1874): 191–212.Google Scholar