Abstract
This article draws on my experience both as a medievalist and as a feminist working in a UK university today to discuss the challenges facing feminist academia more widely. Using Medieval Studies as a case study, this article argues that in times of austerity the pressure on young feminist academics to conform is greater as it is increasingly important to get one's work published in order to stay competitive. This pressure to publish limits intellectual curiosity and forces research down more conventional paths. This article lays out how this functions in Medieval Studies and attempts to suggest some ways in which it could be overcome. One strategy of resistance I suggest entails what I call an ‘ethics of source study’; a way of looking at and responding to both medieval and modern texts with an awareness of their potential effect on the world. I begin by discussing the pressing need to publish work forced upon us by the Research Excellence Framework, and how this drive towards publication can make our work less radical. I then illustrate this with examples from my own discipline. In Medieval Studies, the publication of more articles means that the production of editions is neglected, and this forces scholars to use out-of-date and misogynist editions. Finally, I suggest some ideas of how we can create alternative networks in which feminist academia can survive and flourish, including an outline of what an ethics of source study might look like.
Notes
1. For more information on the relationship between Hope Emily Allen and Sanford Brown Meech, see Hirsh's monograph, Hope Emily Allen: Medieval Scholarship and Feminism.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Kathryn Maude
Kathryn Maude is studying for her PhD in English at King's College London, under the supervision of Professor Clare Lees. She focuses on issues of gender and ethics in the early medieval period. Her thesis investigates a group of texts in Old English, Latin and Anglo-Norman directly addressed to women in the period 960–1160.