relevance to the history of literature. (See the introductions to the two pre- 1980
editions of her works.) No other Soviet scholarship about Pavlova appeared be-
fore the 1980 s, with the exception of a few mentions of her as a translator (Russkie
pisateli o perevode[Leningrad: Sovetskii pisatel’, 1960 ], 321 , 422 ; I. S. Alekseeva,
“Perevodcheskii stil’ Karoliny Pavlovoi,” Vestnik Leningradskogo universiteta, no.
8 ( 1981 ), Istoriia literaturnogo iazyka,no. 2 , 55–59); and one reference to her as the
author of a lyric for Liszt (B. Smirenskii, “Zabytyi romans Lista,” Smenano. 13
[ 1957 ]: 24 ).
33 .For example, John Guillory writes, “Aesthetics and political economy...
between them divide the world of cultural products into works of art and com-
modities” (Cultural Capital, 337 ). “When aesthetic artifacts are certified as ‘works
of art’ they become bearers of cultural capital and as such are unequally distrib-
uted” ( 281 ). “Aesthetic judgement is the recognition of cultural capital” ( 336 ).
34 .In the field of American literature, where feminist scholars started work-
ing earlier than in Russian, the recovery of many nineteenth-century women
writers generally has not led to their reevaluation, as Judith Fetterley shows.
“Commentary: Nineteenth-Century American Women Writers and the Politics
of Recovery,” American Literary History 6 : 3 (fall 1994 ): 600–611. Fetterley dis-
cusses the factors that have prevented the development of the interpretive strate-
gies necessary for such a reevaluation.
35 .The following is based on Donovan, “Toward a Women’s Poetics,” 98–109;
and Modleski, Loving with a Vengeance.See also Elaine Showalter, “Piecing and
Writing,” inThe Poetics of Gender,ed. Nancy Miller (New York: Columbia Uni-
versity Press, 1986 ), 222–47.
36 .Interestingly, Aleksandra Fuks, who lost three daughters and a son, never
alludes to their deaths in her poetry, except perhaps obliquely in “Poslanie
Dmitriiu Petrovichu Oznobishinu” (Epistle to Dmitrii Petrovich Oznobishin,
1834 ), which begins “Sredi semeinykh ogorchenii” (Amidst family grief). On
the death of Fuks’s children, see K.V. Larskii and P. A. Ponomarev, “Karl Fe-
dorovich Fuks i ego vremia,” in Kazanskii literaturnyi sbornik(Kazan: Tip. M. A.
Gladyshevoi, 1878 ), 499.
37 .One also thinks of Poe’s theory that the best writing can be read at one
sitting and produces one single effect (“unity of effect or impression”) (“Twice-
Told Tales” [ 1842 ], in Essays and Reviews,by Edgar Allan Poe [New York: Liter-
ary Classics of the United States, 1984 ], 571 ).
38 .Shari Benstock quoted by Sonia Hofkosh, in “Sexual Politics and Liter-
ary History,” 136.
39 .While during this period both men and women in society were very self-
aware, I would distinguish women’s self-consciousness under the perpetually
sexualizing male gaze—even the self-consciousness of the coquette who ex-
ploited that gaze—from the performative self-consciousness of the dandy who
freely chose his role (see chapter 4 , note 20 ). On the portrayal of women in West-
ern art as the sexualized object of the male gaze, see Berger et al., Ways of See-
ing,45–64. On women and the male gaze in film, see Laura Mulvey, “Visual Plea-
sure and Narrative Cinema,” in Feminist Film Theory: A Reader,ed. Sue Thornham
(New York: New York University Press, 1999 ), 58–69. On Teplova, see Rosneck,
“Nadezhda Teplova,” 1 : 121–32.
Notes to Pages 13–16 225