The Politics of Canonisation Among Women Poets of the Romantic Era

Authors

  • Bazla Um E Hani Research Scholar, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, National Institute of Technology Patna, India Author
  • Ali Zeeshan Assistant Professor, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, National Institute of Technology, Patna, India Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56294/sctconf20251786

Keywords:

Romanticism, canonization, women poets, gender studies, feminist literary criticism, literary history, Romantic canon, Anna Laetitia Barbauld, Charlotte Smith, Mary Robinson, literary exclusion

Abstract

The Romantic period (late 18th to mid-19th century) is traditionally defined by the works of male poets such as William Wordsworth, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, and Lord Byron, while the contributions of women poets were marginalized or erased through the canonization process. This paper examines the socio-political and cultural factors that influenced the exclusion of women poets from the Romantic canon, focusing on the roles played by male-dominated literary societies, critics, and editors. By scrutinizing the works prominent women poets like Anna Laetitia Barbauld, Charlotte Smith, and Mary Robinson, the analysis highlights the gendered assumptions about literary value that led to the devaluation of their works. Feminist literary criticism and modern re-evaluations of Romanticism have led to the recovery of these poets, expanding the understanding of the Romantic period. Despite these efforts, challenges remain in fully integrating women poets into the established canon. The research paper concludes with recommendations for further investigation into the politics of canon formation, advocating for a more inclusive approach to literary history.

References

1. Guillory J. Cultural capital: The problem of literary canon formation. University of Chicago Press; 2023.

2. Mellor AK. Romanticism and gender. Routledge; 2013.

3. Abrams MH. The mirror and the lamp: Romantic theory and the critical tradition. Vol. 360. New York: Oxford University Press; 1971.

4. Ross TT. The Making of the English Literary Canon: From the Middle Ages to the Late Eighteenth Century. McGill-Queen’s Press-MQUP; 1998.

5. Loos RJF, Lindgren CM, Li S, Wheeler E, Zhao JH, Prokopenko I, et al. Common variants near MC4R are associated with fat mass, weight and risk of obesity. Nat Genet. 2008;40(6):768–75.

6. Labbe JM. Charlotte Smith: Romanticism, Poetry, and the Culture of Gender. Manchester University Press; 2003.

7. MASON E, CLARK S, PERRY S, MARTIN P, NATTRASS L, GILROY A, et al. XII The Nineteenth Century: The Romantic Period. 2001;

8. Wu D. Romantic women poets: an anthology. (No Title). 1997;

9. Lokke K. 6 Poetry as Self-Consumption: Women Writers and Their Audiences in British and German Romanticism. In: Romantic Poetry. John Benjamins Publishing Company; 2008. p. 91–111.

10. Nelson MJ. Francis Turner Palgrave and The Golden Treasury. University of British Columbia; 1985.

11. Blain CR. Destination branding in destination marketing organizations. 2001.

12. Gilbert SM, Gubar S. Shakespeare’s sisters: Feminist essays on women poets. Vol. 263. Indiana University Press; 1979.

13. Pascoe S. Bycatch management and the economics of discarding. Food & Agriculture Org.; 1997.

Downloads

Published

2025-03-20

How to Cite

1.
E Hani BU, Zeeshan A. The Politics of Canonisation Among Women Poets of the Romantic Era. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología - Serie de Conferencias [Internet]. 2025 Mar. 20 [cited 2025 Apr. 3];4:1786. Available from: https://conferencias.ageditor.ar/index.php/sctconf/article/view/1786