Hesse, “Reading Signatures: Female Authorship and Revolutionary Law in
France, 1750–1850,” Eighteenth-Century Studies 22 , no. 3 (spring 1989 ): 469–87, for
a discussion of French women writers’ signatures in relation to their legal sta-
tus and right to the proceeds of their published works. Nancy K. Miller and Joan
DeJean discuss women writers’ signatures in relation to their anxiety about be-
ing reduced to a sexualized body (“The Text’s Heroine: A Feminist Critic and
Her Fictions,” Diacritics 12 [summer 1982 ]: 48–53; Joan DeJean, “Lafayette’s El-
lipses: The Privileges of Anonymity,” PMLA 99 , no. 5 [ 1984 ]: 884–902).
18 .On marked and unmarked endings, see Jane Taubman, “Women Poets
of the Silver Age,” 172–73.
19 .Pavlova signed two poems “Novootkrytyi poèt” (A newly discovered
poet) (Polnoe sobranie stikhotvorenii, 563 ). Rostopchina used G. E. R. and A.; Mor-
dovtseva variously signed herself B-z, A. B-i, and A. B-ts, and Bakunina signed
one poem (“Dva dnia”) P. B. (Masanov,Slovar’ psevdonimov;Smirnov-Sokol’skii,
Russkie literaturnye al’manakhi i sborniki XVIII–XIX vv.). On Bakunina’s use of
marked and unmarked signatures, see my “Praskov’ia Bakunina and the Poet-
ess’s Dilemma,” 48.
20 .On Khvoshchinskaia as a prose writer, see chapter 5 , note 1.
21 .Parker and Willhardt, “The Cross-Gendered Poem,” 198. Wayne Booth’s
discussion of “implied authors” in fiction can be extended to the speakers of
poems (Rhetoric of Fiction,151–53).
22 .See V.A. Blagovo’s extended comparison of the liricheskie geroiniof
Shakhova, Pavlova, Rostopchina, and Zhadovskaia. While he implies that each
poem by a man poet can have its own liricheskii geroi,when he turns to the
women poets his focus shifts to defining the one liricheskaia geroiniahe attributes
to each (Poeziia i lichnost’ Iu. V. Zhadovskoi,73–115). Homans discusses the per-
sonae, masks, and fictiveness that have been imposed on women but also argues
their importance for twentieth-century women poets (Women Writers and Poetic
Identity,38–39, 216–17).
23 .V.G. Belinskii, “Stikhotvoreniia grafini E. Rostopchinoi,” in Polnoe so-
branie sochinenii, 5 : 457–58. First appeared in Otechestvennye zapiski 18 , no. 9
( 1841 ): 5–8.
24 .Kn. Viazemskii, “Otryvok iz pis’ma A. I. G-oi,” Dennitsa( 1830 ): 122–23
(also in S. D. Sheremetev, ed.,Polnoe sobranie sochinenii Kniazia P. A. Viazemskogo,
[Sankt-Peterburg: M. M. Staiulevich, 1978 ], 2 : 139–40).
25 .On Khvoshchinskaia and Pavlova, see chapters 5 and 6. See also Faddei
Bulgarin’s sarcastic, unsigned review of Aleksandra Fuks’s Stikhotvoreniia ( 1834 ),
which appeared in Severnaia pchela,no. 194 (Aug. 29 , 1834 ): 773–74: “Don’t think,
however, that Mrs. Fuks’s Poems are philosophical; they also are not anthologi-
cal, nor anacreonic, by no means ideological, nor psychological, and certainly
not political” ( 775 ) (review is attributed to Bulgarin in Bobrov, “A. A. Fuks
i kazanskie literatory 30–40-kh godov,” 27 ).
26 .Cross-gendered poems by women include Bakunina’s “Dva dnia” (Two
days, 1841 ). Here a male-voiced speaker describes two days—one of “amorous
dreams fulfilled,” the other of disappointment and despair—that showed him
life’s inconstancy and the need to rely on God. Gotovtseva’s “Odinochestvo” (a
translation of Lamartine’s “L’Isolement” [ 1820 ], [Bartenev Archive, f. 46 , op. 2 ,
Notes to Pages 44–46 237