Vittra fruntimmer : Författarroll och retorik hos frihetstidens kvinnliga författare

This dissertation deals with Swedish women writers during the so called Age of Liberty (1720–1772). A total of 141 female authors of printed texts are presented, the majority unmentioned in earlier research. The study is focused on two forms of literature: occasional poetry (poems that were written forspecial occasions such as weddings and funerals) and political texts (general political texts as well as texts discussing women’s issues). A number of authors are discussed more thoroughly, for example the occasional poets Charlotta Frölich, Hedvig Paqvalin and Charlotta Löfgren, and a group of political authors, such as Sweden’s first female journalist, Anna Margareta von Bragner and two female members of the Gyllenborg family, that was part of the Swedish elite. Two chapters are devoted to Hedvig Charlotta Nordenflycht, one of Sweden’s most successful authors during the Age of Liberty. The dissertation is based on gender theory. A double approach is used: a sociological perspective is combined with rhetorical analysis. The sociological perspective reveals that women writers often played an active role in the public sphere, but they also met with great difficulties. Apart from legal and political restrictions, women were denied higher education. One important factor which favoured women writers’ activities was the old ideal of the noble woman, still present in Sweden in the Age of Liberty, whereby women from the upper classes should be active in a variety of ways, including participating in representative contexts. The social position of the writers is of utmost importance to explain why women writers could act the way they did. One major result in the investigation is that female political authors as well as occasional poets acted on behalf of their households and networks. The term “social obligation” is introduced for literature that was written mainly out of social purpose. Using a distinction between power and authority one also can point out that although women writers had no formal or legal authority during this period, they could gain social authority and they did have power. The rhetorical analyses of texts show that women writers were skilled in the art of rhetoric and also reveals that there are no significant differences between texts written by female authors if one compare with texts written by male authors. One explanation to this is the paradoxical nature of classical rhetoric: it had its roots in public life, to which women were denied access, nevertheless it was possible to learn rhetorical methods and techniques without higher education, for example by imitation. Few women writers challenge existing gender-ideals in their texts. But on the other hand, only a handful of the texts written by female authors show signs of humility, and in these rare examples it is brought on by genre or social inferiority. Women writers did not apologize for their literary activity. And just by going public, they crossed the narrow boundaries that (on a symbolic and normative level)were commonly set for women