Feminism Regained: Exposing the Objectification of Eve in John Milton’s Paradise Lost

References

• Belsey, Catherine. John Milton: Language, Gender, Power. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Carr, Erika R., Lauren B. Moffitt, and Dawn M. Syzmanski. “Sexual Objectification of Women: Advances to Theory and Research.” The Counselling Psychologist 39, no. 1 (2011): 6–38. doi: 10.1177/0011000010378449
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colebrook, Claire. “Gender Contrariety.” In Milton, Evil, and Literary History. London: Continuum, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Daly, Mary. The Church and the Second Sex. New York: Harper and Row, 1975.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, J. M. Paradise Lost and the Genesis Tradition. Oxford: Clarendon, 1968.
   Google Scholar
• Fallon, Stephen M. Milton’s Peculiar Grace: Self-Representation and Authority. London: Cornell University Press, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Fenton, Mary C., and Louis Schwartz. Their Maker’s Image: New Essays on John Milton, Selinsgrove, PA: Susquehanna University Press, 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Ferry, Anne. “Milton’s Creation of Eve.” Studies in English Literature, 1500–1900 28, no. 1 (1988): 113–32. doi: 10.2307/450718
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forsyth, Neil. The Satanic Epic. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Froula, Christine. “When Eve Reads Milton: Undoing the Canonical Economy.” Critical Inquiry 10, no. 2 (1983): 321–47. doi: 10.1086/448249
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, Mandy. “The Virgin in the Garden: Milton’s Ovidian Eve.” The Modern Language Review 100, no. 4 (2005): 903–22.
   Google Scholar
• Interdonato, Deborah A. “‘Render Me More Equal’: Gender Inequality and the Fall in Paradise Lost.” Milton Quarterly 29, no. 4 (1995): 95–106. doi: 10.1111/j.1094-348X.1995.tb00587.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kilgour, Maggie. “Satan’s Envy and Poetic Emulation.” In Their Maker’s Image: New Essays on John Milton, edited by Mary C. Fenton and Louis Schwartz. Selinsgrove, PA: Susquehanna University Press, 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Lenhof, Kent Russell. “Paradise Lost and the Concept of Creation.” South Central Review 21, no. 2 (2004): 15–41. doi: 10.1353/scr.2004.0021
   Google Scholar
• Lewalski, Barbara K. “Milton and Women—Yet Once More.” Milton Studies 6 (1974): 3–20.
   Google Scholar
• Liebert, Elisabeth. “Rendering ‘More Equal’: Eve’s Changing Discourse in Paradise Lost.” Milton Quarterly 37, no. 3 (2003): 152–65. doi: 10.1111/j.1094-348X.2003.00056.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacKinnon, Catharine A. “Feminism, Marxism, Method, and the State: An Agenda for Theory.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 7, no. 3 (1982): 515–44. doi: 10.1086/493898
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McColley, Diane K. Milton’s Eve. London: University of Illinois Press, 1983.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, Shannon. “Serpentine Eve: Milton and the Seventeenth-Century Debate over Women.” Milton Quarterly 42, no. 1 (2008): 44–68. doi: 10.1111/j.1094-348X.2008.00182.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milton, John. Paradise Lost. Edited by Gordon Teskey. New York: Norton, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Nussbaum, Martha. “Objectification.” Philosophy and Public Affairs 24 (1995): 249–91. doi: 10.1111/j.1088-4963.1995.tb00032.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nyquist, Mary. “The Genesis of Gendered Subjectivity in the Divorce Tracts and in Paradise Lost.” 1987. Quoted from John Milton: Bloom’s Modern Critical Views. Broomall, PA: Chelsea House Publications, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Pagels, Elain H. “What Became of God the Mother? Conflicting Images of God in Early Christianity.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 2, no. 2 (1976): 293–303. doi: 10.1086/493357
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polydorou, Desma. “Gender and Spiritual Equality in Marriage: A Dialogic Reading of Rachel Speght and John Milton.” Milton Quarterly 35, no. 1 (2001): 22–32. doi: 10.1111/1094-348X.00003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poole, Kristen. “Naming, Paradise Lost, and the Gendered Discourse of Perfect Language Schemes.” English Literary Renaissance 38, no. 3 (2008): 535–60. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6757.2008.00135.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pruitt, Kristin A. Gender and the Power of Relationship. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Rudat, Wolfgang E. H. ““Back to the Thicket Slunk”: Another Look at Milton’s Serpent.” American Notes and Queries 22, no. 1 (1983): 7–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spender, Dale. Man Made Language. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz, Regina. “Rethinking Voyeurism and Patriarchy: The Case of Paradise Lost.” Representations 34 (1991): 85–103. doi: 10.1525/rep.1991.34.1.99p0048w
   Google Scholar
• Shakespeare, William. “Venus and Adonis.” In The Norton Shakespeare, edited by Stephen Greenblatt et al. New York: Norton, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Silver, Victoria. “Milton’s Eden.” In Imperfect Sense: The Predicament of Milton’s Irony. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Sumers, Alinda J. “Milton’s Mat(t)erology: Paradise Lost and the Seventeenth-Century Querelle des Femmes.” Milton Quarterly 38, no. 4 (2004): 200–25. doi: 10.1111/j.1094-348X.2004.00079.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swan, Jess G. “Author-Functions and the Interpretations of Eve in Paradise Lost.” Milton Quarterly 26, no. 3 (1992): 58–69. doi: 10.1111/j.1094-348X.1992.tb00793.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner, James Grantham. One Flesh: Paradisal Marriage and Sexual Relations in the Age of Milton. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987.
   Google Scholar
• UN Women. “ UN Women Speech by Executive Director Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka.” 20 September 2014. [cited 7 October 2014] Available from www.unwomen.org/en/news/stories/2014/9/20-september-heforshe-ed-speech
   Google Scholar