Best female writers

[Thom Holliday]

It pains me to say that out of all my favourite writers, only one is female: Iris Murdoch. I haven't read a whole lot by any other female writers though, and I would like to be pointed in the way of the very best female writers. I know that I shouldn't distinguish between male and female writers too much, however I feel that I need to read more works by female writers to grasp more rounded ideas about literature!

So who're the best?

[kelby_lake]

Austen's good :)

[L.M. The Third]

Or George Eliot.

[The Comedian]

I like Willa Cather, Rachel Carson, and Gretel Ehrlich. . . and several others.

[dfloyd]

Some good ones are -

Jane Austen
George Eliot
Charlotte Bronte
Emily Bronte
Daphne du Maurier

Some bad ones are-

Ann Rice
Ayn Rand
Virginia Woolf

[Dark Muse]

Margaret Atwood is becoming one of my favorite authors.

I also really like Edith Wharton, Charlotte Brontë, Jane Austen, Elizabeth Bowen, I love Morgan Llewellyn but she writes primary Historical Fiction revolving around Irish Lore, so to enjoy her writing it would help to have some interest in that subject matter. I also perosnally love Anne Rice, but she is not for everyone.

[minstrelbard]

Some bad ones are-

Ann Rice
Ayn Rand
Virginia Woolf

I've never read Woolf, so I can't comment. Rice, I agree, is bad. Interview With The Vampire disappointed me greatly, because I'd heard so much good about it.

Ayn Rand was actually a pretty good writer. She was WRONG, philosophically, but Atlas Shrugged is a heck of a read - very enjoyable. I read it about ten times when I was young. I skipped the big radio speech after the first time, though, because there's only so much objectivism one can take without one's head imploding.

[janesmith]

I rate:

Angela Carter
George Egerton
Elizabeth Gaskell
Margaret Attwood

[Brad Coelho]

Big fan of Marilynne Robinson. The last American winner of the Nobel, Toni Morrison, aint too bad either.

[giventofly]

My fav female author is Amy Hempel. She's a short story writer and a minimalist. Not only is she my fav female author, but from a stylistic-standpoint, she's probably my fav author, period. Here's a link to one of my fav pieces from her.

http://www.pifmagazine.com/1998/09/the-harvest/

[ktr]

Or George Eliot.

truth


Virginia Woolf

that's silly.


people seem to like alice munro, lorrie moore, lydia davis...

[_Shannon_]

I don't care for Austen much...technically she's great, but her characters and stories bore me. She is important to read though, I think. As is Edith Wharton, who I don't like. Same with Gertrude Stein. And I suppose it's probably important to read Toni Morrison--but I really---really- don't like her.

Willa Cather, Eudora Welty, Flannery O'Connor (short stories--her novels suck), Shirley Jackson, Elizabeth Gaskell, George Elliot, Baroness Orczy, Katherine Anne Porter, Carson McCullers, Bobbie Anne Mason, Dorothy Allison, AS Byatt, Peal S.Buck, Isak Dinesen, Daphne DuMaurier, The Brontes, Margret Mitchell, Harper Lee. Ooh--I just thought of Sigrid Undset, too.

Lousia May Alcott, LM Montgomery are fine fun to read also--especially on a rainy day or when you need just an absolutely super fun read which is also not too intellectually demanding-but still good.

[punk sheep]

Emily Dickinson: genius.

[_Shannon_]

Emily Dickinson: genius.

Oh---did you want poets, too? I just did fiction writers.

[stlukesguild]

Accck! I always hate these sub-categories: Women Writers, Jewish Writers, Lesbian Writers, French Writers, Black Writers, Native American Writers, One-Legged, German/Italian, Albino, Transvestite, Jehovah Witness Writers. The term always smacks a bit of suggesting something less. Well... she's good... for a woman writer.

Having said this much, I find Emily Dickinson, Jane Austen, Marianne Moore, Marina Tsvetaeva, Anne Carson, Flannery O'Connor, Virginia Woolf, the Bronte Sisters, and Marguerite Yourcenar to be among the strongest writers I have yet encountered... and if Harold Bloom is right, we'll have to add the "J" writer, responsible for a good portion of the Hebrew Bible.

[punk sheep]

Oh---did you want poets, too? I just did fiction writers.

Ohh fiction.. Anna Gavalda. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Gavalda)

http://medias.fluctuat.net/medias-factory/m/mediabox/media/6/6/1/91166/91166.jpg

[_Shannon_]

The term always smacks a bit of suggesting something less. Well... she's good... for a woman writer.

. I just thought of writers I really like who happen to be women.
:)

[Thom Holliday]

My fav female author is Amy Hempel. She's a short story writer and a minimalist. Not only is she my fav female author, but from a stylistic-standpoint, she's probably my fav author, period. Here's a link to one of my fav pieces from her.

http://www.pifmagazine.com/1998/09/the-harvest/

That story is great. I will definitely read some more of her works. :)


Accck! I always hate these sub-categories: Women Writers, Jewish Writers, Lesbian Writers, French Writers, Black Writers, Native American Writers, One-Legged, German/Italian, Albino, Transvestite, Jehovah Witness Writers. The term always smacks a bit of suggesting something less. Well... she's good... for a woman writer.

Having said this much, I find Emily Dickinson, Jane Austen, Marianne Moore, Marina Tsvetaeva, Anne Carson, Flannery O'Connor, Virginia Woolf, the Bronte Sisters, and Marguerite Yourcenar to be among the strongest writers I have yet encountered... and if Harold Bloom is right, we'll have to add the "J" writer, responsible for a good portion of the Hebrew Bible.

I'm not sub-categorising by any means, as I explained. I am definitely not suggesting something less. I merely wanted to find some women writers as I became aware that literally all of my favourite writers are male!

[stlukesguild]

I'm just remembering a friend from art school who happened to be a woman... and black. She adamantly refused to show in any exhibition of "women-artists" or "black-artists" because she felt these virtually suggested that the work of women or black artists was somehow of lesser merit and not worthy of inclusion in a show simply of "artists".

[TheFifthElement]

Angela Carter and Simone de Beauvoir. Both excellent writers.

[minstrelbard]

Has anybody mentioned Joan Didion? I haven't read any of her fiction, but she's a terrific essayist.

[JBI]

I'm just remembering a friend from art school who happened to be a woman... and black. She adamantly refused to show in any exhibition of "women-artists" or "black-artists" because she felt these virtually suggested that the work of women or black artists was somehow of lesser merit and not worthy of inclusion in a show simply of "artists".

Those are probably both mainstream for the publications - She wouldn't make it into my Columbia Anthology of Transgender Verse.

Seriously, it just gets more farcical. Luckily, it is also a very American thing. Probably because certain groups generally get mistreated in the US until they fight for the right to be treated normally.

Women are a different issue though - there was some idea that one could unearth female writers they way one can unearth Ancient Mesopotamia, by digging in archives.

This then expands to a "tradition" of women writing, apart from "male" writing. I doubt that holds, but some have made arguments, and there are many great instances where authors who were female took things from other authors of the same gender. However, there are just as many contrary examples, and examples of women being critical of other women's work as well as being inspired by "male" work.

Generally, the best arguments were, if you study literature, you can exchange Austen in place of Scott, Wharton in place of James, Cather in place of Fitzgerlad, Eliot in place of Dickens, and Dickinson in place of Whitman. Generally that is a pretty sound argument - all the authors mentioned are noteworthy and excellent, and one would not be "suffering" from looking at the other ones.

But the other camp can look at the situation and say, "yes, but weren't we misogynist, and didn't we not allow women a place? how then, if we go back more, can we compare the privaledged, education writing of Shakespeare to...?"

That argument seems to hold in most places. In other instances, you could go to Canadian literature and realize the bulk of the "greats" tend to be women (perhaps an isolated example. Also, you can look at genres, and see that the novel has a strong tradition of female writing, whereas drama until recently (and drama has been a dying form recently) has been essentially male.

You can also go further, and say, "The canon is just an idea, and who wants to fight over who makes the list anyway. Lets just do research and forget about "reshaping the canon" and just get writing on what we find meaningful and artistically relevant published."

The last camp seems to do good things - but of course, feminist theory has in itself been limited, limiting, and lacking.

Still, there have been, and still are fantastic female authors. It really doesn't take singling out based on gender though to realize that.

The discourse has been swallowing itself up recently, and Gender Studies has begun to replace it I guess, so this talk of gender will eventually die out, I wager, as people realize women are reading and writing more than men these days, and there is a dominance in popular form of women writing for women anyway.


In truth, I wrote an essay comparing the treatment of women as an essentialist separate category to other "race-art" and racial history. Generally the remedy for the whole thing is to think of yourself as reading "literature" rather than "women's literature," the same way when one reads Dante they are reading Dante, not "that Florentine literature". I don't see the Norton anthology of Men's verse anyway. Things will get better when someone can read a poem by Li Qingzhao side by side one by Ben Jonson, and compare them without only calling them different.

[Kyriakos]

http://ellas2.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/1bis5b.jpg

Only woman author i liked reading is Penelope Delta, and of her just a collection of stories. But one of those stories i regard as a masterpiece :)

[Esoteric_Muse]

Generally the remedy for the whole thing is to think of yourself as reading "literature" rather than "women's literature," the same way when one reads Dante they are reading Dante, not "that Florentine literature". I don't see the Norton anthology of Men's verse anyway. Things will get better when someone can read a poem by Li Qingzhao side by side one by Ben Jonson, and compare them without only calling them different.

Well said!

[Thom Holliday]

Angela Carter and Simone de Beauvoir. Both excellent writers.

Angela Carter's short fiction sounds really good. Will definitely be ordering a couple of books.


I'm just remembering a friend from art school who happened to be a woman... and black. She adamantly refused to show in any exhibition of "women-artists" or "black-artists" because she felt these virtually suggested that the work of women or black artists was somehow of lesser merit and not worthy of inclusion in a show simply of "artists".

I would agree with your friend though. I agree that exhibitions that are gender specific (without good reason) are merely a mix of arts and gender - and a separation of male/female - where it is not needed.

I do not want to read female writers because I'm looking for feminist ideas or whatever, I am merely asking for good female writers since I have read so little of them - nearly all of my favourite books are written by males.

I just want to broaden my view away from male writers, and read some great works by females artists. I know that may sound slightly fuzzy and contradictory, but I guess I know what I'm on about.

[Genocide]

You're not on another book site are you? I swear I've answered this question earlier last week... :)

Well as for Virginia Woolf I remember reading her when I was in middle school and I didn't want to shoot my brains out so she's fine in my book. So there's Harriet Beecher Stowe, Charlotte Bronte (didn't really like her sister...), Mary Shelley, George Eliot, Margaret Atwood, Maya Angelou, Kate Chopin, Shirley Jackson (really liked "The Lottery"), Ursula LeGuin, Bobbie Ann Mason (who doesn't love dogs?), and Alice Walker. Most are repeats from previous posts but I thought I'd show how good they are.

I'm pretty sure I've left some out, but that's all I remember. I hope you find a few you like.

[janesmith]

Oops! Forgot to include A.S.Byatt. Unforgivable.

[Scheherazade]

Accck! I always hate these sub-categories: Women Writers, Jewish Writers, Lesbian Writers, French Writers, Black Writers, Native American Writers, One-Legged, German/Italian, Albino, Transvestite, Jehovah Witness Writers. The term always smacks a bit of suggesting something less. Well... she's good... for a woman writer.
I don't understand this.

If I asked for suggestions or your thoughts on the best, say, 19th century or science fiction writers, would that mean I would be implying that I thought less of 19th century writers or science fiction writers?

[JBI]

I don't understand this.

If I asked for suggestions or your thoughts on the best, say, 19th century or science fiction writers, would that mean I would be implying that I thought less of 19th century writers or science fiction writers?

That brings up another question - what makes a writer female. To compare the two, it would seem you would need to consider writing by females as fundamentally different, in the sense that science fiction, or speculative fiction is, from that stance, considered a category based on a selective set of features.

My question would be, how is women's writing different from men's writing. Ironically on the original runs of the Bronte sisters, the reviewers assumed they were male authors, which seems to suggest a sort of lacking in intrinsic quality of "female".

I don't mean to spit on a tradition, but ultimately, that view is so 1970s and 80s - now I think the whole idea of "Women's" writing is looked at suspiciously, as all essentialist categories are looked at skeptically, at least by modern theorists/critics.

Ecriture Feminine had more detractors amongst women than men anyway - it seems that a great deal of the backlash doesn't come from a Patriarchal rejection of women's writing, but rather, a feminist and post-feminist rejection of the labeling woman, as somehow intrinsically different, and inherent in the work. The late poet P. K. Page, for instance, was known as referring to herself as a "feminist but not feminist poet." This, as an action denies the categorical in interpretation, and lends a degree of freedom and liberty to the work as not being chained down to a set of tropes/a tradition.

[Scheherazade]

That brings up another question - what makes a writer female. To compare the two, it would seem you would need to consider writing by females as fundamentally different, in the sense that science fiction, or speculative fiction is, from that stance, considered a category based on a selective set of features.Not at all. We can simply acknowledge the fact that an author is female by gender; that does not mean we assume their writing is different from that of male writers.

We are not discussing feminist literature here but simply an author being female.


My question would be, how is women's writing different from men's writing. Ironically on the original runs of the Bronte sisters, the reviewers assumed they were male authors, which seems to suggest a sort of lacking in intrinsic quality of "female".I think that assumption based on the fact that there were more male (successful and established) authors at the time.
Ecriture Feminine had more detractors amongst women than men anyway - it seems that a great deal of the backlash doesn't come from a Patriarchal rejection of women's writing, but rather, a feminist and post-feminist rejection of the labeling woman, as somehow intrinsically different, and inherent in the work. The late poet P. K. Page, for instance, was known as referring to herself as a "feminist but not feminist poet." This, as an action denies the categorical in interpretation, and lends a degree of freedom and liberty to the work as not being chained down to a set of tropes/a tradition.Care to explain this in simpler terms for those of us who are not as academically well-endowed as you are?

I could barely stop myself from saying "Say what?"

[StreetStyleCat]

Ecriture Feminine had more detractors amongst women than men anyway - it seems that a great deal of the backlash doesn't come from a Patriarchal rejection of women's writing, but rather, a feminist and post-feminist rejection of the labeling woman, as somehow intrinsically different, and inherent in the work.

Quite ridiculous how some feminists have labeled women as different and special id est even enlarged the space of misunderstanding between two genders. Somebody (was it Irigaray?) even said that women spoke another language.
This is probably the reason why women themselves have detracted the feminists. Fundamentalism's never the right way.

But female authors... my favourites are Jeanette Winterson and Amelie Nothomb. If you try Winterson, don't start with her first and most famous book "Oranges are not the only fruit", it is not as good as her later works and you get a wrong idea!

[Sancho]

StreetStyleCat, I dig that kitty pic in your avatar.

Also I'll add Alice Munro to this list. I just finished her short story collection, Too Much Happiness and absolutely loved it.

[Thom Holliday]

You're not on another book site are you? I swear I've answered this question earlier last week... :)


Haha, nope, this is the only book site I'm a member of. It must be a pretty standard question.

[JuniperWoolf]

Margaret Atwood is becoming one of my favorite authors.

Hear hear.

Haha, you can tell that she'd be really mean if you met her in real life, though.


I'm just remembering a friend from art school who happened to be a woman... and black. She adamantly refused to show in any exhibition of "women-artists" or "black-artists" because she felt these virtually suggested that the work of women or black artists was somehow of lesser merit and not worthy of inclusion in a show simply of "artists".

Yeah, good point. Margaret Atwood said something similar in Cat's Eye when the reviews of her protagonist's art show constantly mentioned the fact that she was "one of Canada's trailblazing female artists."

[JBI]

Hear hear.

Haha, you can tell that she'd be really mean if you met her in real life, though.



Yeah, good point. Margaret Atwood said something similar in Cat's Eye when the reviews of her protagonist's art show constantly mentioned the fact that she was "one of Canada's trailblazing female artists."

She supposedly has a reputation for being an arrogant B**** (according to someone who was her secretary for a while), and for yelling at everyone, thinking herself somehow more important.

I don't know her though - there is the bit of hypocrisy how she writes about suffering, delimitation, abusiveness, and violence meanwhile enjoys a nice wealthy life, after a rich upbringing and a first-class education. But I guess that is all part of the adopted hysteria.

That being said, I don't know her - the author is dead as they say, so we can just critique the work, and see how it exemplifies a sort of feigned hysteria.

[stlukesguild]

If I asked for suggestions or your thoughts on the best, say, 19th century or science fiction writers, would that mean I would be implying that I thought less of 19th century writers or science fiction writers?

Perhaps such a question would not so stigmatize the writers in question... but then again is there not surely a qualitative difference between "the best 19th century science fiction writers" and "the best 19th century writers"? Indeed, I would suspect that if one were to ask for a list of "the best 19th century writers" few science fiction writers would come to mind. What I am suggesting is that it is something of a shame that many cannot approach Jane Austen or Emily Dickinson or Anne Carson as brilliant writers, period. Just as, to use JBI's analogy, Dante is a brilliant writer, period... not a brilliant Florentine writer or a brilliant heterosexual male writer, etc... This is why my artist friend refused to exhibit in shows limited to "Women Artists" or "Black Artists" because she felt to do so placed her in an artistic ghetto, as it were... outside of the larger dialog. Of course I'm not going to push the issue. I have little use for such politically correct obsessions with what amounts to mere semantics... but as JBI also suggested (amazing! We actually agree at times) it would be nice to discuss Blake alongside of Tu Fu or Emily Dickinson or Firdowsi without the latter artists only popping up when the dialog is geared specifically to Asian or Chinese writers, women writers, Non-Western/Middle-Eastern writers, etc...

...there is the bit of hypocrisy how she writes about suffering, delimitation, abusiveness, and violence meanwhile enjoys a nice wealthy life, after a rich upbringing and a first-class education.

I don't imagine that such is all that uncommon. I have an artist friend who is very well off (a rich wife) and lives in a nice big house on a hill... not far from NYC... with a spectacular view of the Hudson River Valley spreading out beneath him. He continually goes on ranting about Communism, Socialism and the duty of the artist to promote the Revolution and challenge the government, rather than offering pretty baubles and intellectual diversions for the Bourgeois... yet I somehow doubt that for all his talk, he'd be willing to surrender his home and comfortable lifestyle for the good of the Proletariat.:rolleyes::lol:

[sixsmith]

That brings up another question - what makes a writer female. To compare the two, it would seem you would need to consider writing by females as fundamentally different, in the sense that science fiction, or speculative fiction is, from that stance, considered a category based on a selective set of features.

My question would be, how is women's writing different from men's writing. Ironically on the original runs of the Bronte sisters, the reviewers assumed they were male authors, which seems to suggest a sort of lacking in intrinsic quality of "female".

I don't mean to spit on a tradition, but ultimately, that view is so 1970s and 80s - now I think the whole idea of "Women's" writing is looked at suspiciously, as all essentialist categories are looked at skeptically, at least by modern theorists/critics.

Ecriture Feminine had more detractors amongst women than men anyway - it seems that a great deal of the backlash doesn't come from a Patriarchal rejection of women's writing, but rather, a feminist and post-feminist rejection of the labeling woman, as somehow intrinsically different, and inherent in the work. The late poet P. K. Page, for instance, was known as referring to herself as a "feminist but not feminist poet." This, as an action denies the categorical in interpretation, and lends a degree of freedom and liberty to the work as not being chained down to a set of tropes/a tradition.

A discussion about the 'best female writers' is not necessarily 'categorically essentialist'. Indeed, the OP and other posters likely did not need to free themselves of trope or tradition. They simply proceeded to ask, employing the notion that women write fiction of varying quality, who the best female writers are. The concept of better and best is, of course, profoundly flawed but so too is the suggestion that the idea of women writers is 'inherently essentialist'. That is, of course, save for the essential quality of being a woman, a quality which, in the context of this discussion, is pretty straightforward . Cultural theory has its uses, but it also has the capacity distort and complicate the simplest of questions.

[JuniperWoolf]

I don't know her though - there is the bit of hypocrisy how she writes about suffering, delimitation, abusiveness, and violence meanwhile enjoys a nice wealthy life, after a rich upbringing and a first-class education. But I guess that is all part of the adopted hysteria.

Does her economic status really necessarily pertain to her writing, though? I mean, does a person really have to be poor in order to experience or be aware of sexual abuse, assault or gender discrimination?

Besides, if every writer who was born into money avoided subjects such as poverty or suffering we'd be short more than a few great novels.

[Bastable]

I'm surprised no one's mentioned Katherine Mansfield.

[JBI]

Does her economic status really necessarily pertain to her writing, though? I mean, does a person really have to be poor in order to experience or be aware of sexual abuse, assault or gender discrimination?

Besides, if every writer who was born into money avoided subjects such as poverty or suffering we'd be short more than a few great novels.

It's not that; it's just she churns out book after book of Hysterical, or Quasi-hysterical women suffering as "unloved artists" in a cold, impoverished world of sexual abuse, and delimitation.

I wouldn't mind if she did it sometime - but that is really all she does. Despite this, she is the exact opposite. Why then can she not write about anything happy? It's not as if she has had anything particularly impoverished in her life, judging from her upper-middle-class upbringing, seemingly successful career, marriage, and reputation.

Yet half her novels are just long rants against things.

Her politics to me seem to suggest a sort of solidarity of women as "the abused" when I find it rather rude that she is neither the abused, nor are many women. I'm looking for, to be honest, a stronger narrative of more than just the hysterical, or quasi-hysterical female being abused - something which, if it is going to gender things so severely, at least offer a little more nuance.

[WildWildEast]

Try Rose Tremain. She is amazing. She won several prizes for her books.
The Colour
The Way I Found Her
The Road Home.

Margaret Atwood is my favourite female writer.

[mona amon]

It's not that; it's just she churns out book after book of Hysterical, or Quasi-hysterical women suffering as "unloved artists" in a cold, impoverished world of sexual abuse, and delimitation.

I wouldn't mind if she did it sometime - but that is really all she does. Despite this, she is the exact opposite. Why then can she not write about anything happy? It's not as if she has had anything particularly impoverished in her life, judging from her upper-middle-class upbringing, seemingly successful career, marriage, and reputation.

Yet half her novels are just long rants against things.

Her politics to me seem to suggest a sort of solidarity of women as "the abused" when I find it rather rude that she is neither the abused, nor are many women. I'm looking for, to be honest, a stronger narrative of more than just the hysterical, or quasi-hysterical female being abused - something which, if it is going to gender things so severely, at least offer a little more nuance.

I agree. I love some of her books, but they are riddled with these abuse cliches that make me want to roll my eyes and say "Tell me something new".

I don't know if her background necessarily disqualifies her from writing about abused women etc. if she has the skill and the empathy to enter into their feelings, but I guess she does not, and that's why these parts of her novels lack authenticity.

[stlukesguild]

It's not that; it's just she churns out book after book of Hysterical, or Quasi-hysterical women suffering as "unloved artists" in a cold, impoverished world of sexual abuse, and delimitation.

I wouldn't mind if she did it sometime - but that is really all she does. Despite this, she is the exact opposite. Why then can she not write about anything happy? It's not as if she has had anything particularly impoverished in her life, judging from her upper-middle-class upbringing, seemingly successful career, marriage, and reputation.

But I question whether we should confuse the artist and the art... or expect that the art is merely a mirror of the artist. This is a rather Freudian interpretation that often falls quite short of the mark.

I studied under an artist who had what many might presume to have been a rather traumatic and tragic life. He grew up in Poland and was a budding young musician... a cellist... before the war. When the war began, he was in in the section of Poland seized by the Russians and as a young intellectual he was sent to one of the Soviet Gulags at age 15. Caught drawing caricatures of Stalin, the guards broke his arm in several places. Following the German invasion of Russian all the Polish prisoners were set free as a per demands of Allied forces before any British or American assistance was to be forthcoming. Of course there was no chance of returning home... and the British and Americans weren't about to take these Polish citizens and so they were largely left to fend for themselves. He wound his way through Kazakhstan into the Middle-East and eventually Africa where he was stricken with Malaria. The disease so infected his arm that it became useless and he was forced to learn to develop his left arm. He eventually made his way to South Africa, then Britain, and finally the United States where he changed artistic directions and majored in art. His paintings were/are purely abstract... dealing with the magic of light and color... and are intended as spiritual expressions. In person, they are indeed quite transcendent. He used to ponder, however, why it was that so many of his students... myself included at that time... who were hale and healthy Americans born and raised in the most prosperous nation on the planet... seemed so driven to create dark, brooding, angst-laden images while he, who had lived through so much, was driven to paint images of transcendent beauty... joy... and ecstasy.

In his last last years, Pierre Renoir was racked with the continual pain of arthritis. It so ravaged him that he could not even hold his brushes, but needed to have them taped to his hands. In spite of this, his images never changed; his paintings remained as they had always been: a celebration of sensuality, beauty, and Eros.

The Romantics blurred the line between art and the artist... so that the work of art became... and still is seen by many... as a sort of diary... a biography. In many ways the biography is more valued by the audience than the art. Van Gogh and Picasso are the two highest priced artists at auction largely as a result of their biographies. This is not to say that their art is not "great"... but rather that the biography... the "cult of personality" is valued by many more than the actual art.

At the same time... I do understand and agree with you, JBI, with regard to what may smack of a certain hypocrisy. I can think of any number of artists in any field of art who seem to remain focused upon themes of tragedy... brooding... darkness... ugliness... themes in a minor key, as it were, is spite of having every conceivable advantage in their own private and professional lives. But again... do we assume that art is a mirror of the artist... or are some artist simply drawn to... and perhaps more competent at darker themes? Again... I think of the misunderstanding of certain listeners who imagine that Mozart is somehow shallow in comparison to Beethoven because he generally avoids the use of the minor key... and as a result, his music generally feels more joyful or uplifting... and then I wonder... is it as simple as that? All one needs to do to be thought of as "deep" and "profound" is to compose in a minor key... paint with an excess of black, gray, and blue... or simply select tragic themes to paint or write about?

Just some rambling thoughts late at night.:crazy:

[Eric Vornoff]

I daresay Lyudmila_Petrushevskaya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyudmila_Petrushevskaya). If the question of eligibility for Nobel Prize makes much meaning to me, she would be the first in my list of eligible modern Russian authors. Splendid personality.

May be I would add to this list Bella Akhmadulina (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akhmadulina) who is also a great poet.

[bouquin]

She supposedly has a reputation for being an arrogant B**** (according to someone who was her secretary for a while), and for yelling at everyone, thinking herself somehow more important.

I don't know her though - there is the bit of hypocrisy how she writes about suffering, delimitation, abusiveness, and violence meanwhile enjoys a nice wealthy life, after a rich upbringing and a first-class education. But I guess that is all part of the adopted hysteria.

That being said, I don't know her - the author is dead as they say, so we can just critique the work, and see how it exemplifies a sort of feigned hysteria.




I've read Cat's Eye - didn't like it much. My favorites are Jane Austen, George Eliot, Charlotte Bronte, Edith Wharton, Mary Shelley, Flannery O'Connor, Alice Walker, Katherine Mansfield, Harper Lee, Carson McCullers.

[Thom Holliday]

I tried to read The Handmaid's Tale and found it so, so, so boring. Which was a shame, since I heard so many good things about the novel, however it really did nothing for me. Her style of writing didn't strike me as particularly awe inspiring - I couldn't properly visualise the dystopian society - and the story moved far too slow for my liking.

[Jassy Melson]

For what it's worth, my list of great female writers:

Jane Austen
George Eliot
Emily Dickinson
Virginia Woolfe
Emily Bronte
Mary Shelley
Colette
Charlotte Bronte
Flannery O'Connor
Katherine Anne Porter
Eudora Welty
Harper Lee
Margaret Mitchell
Edna St. Vincent Millay
Denise Levertov

[JuniperWoolf]

I tried to read The Handmaid's Tale and found it so, so, so boring. Which was a shame, since I heard so many good things about the novel, however it really did nothing for me. Her style of writing didn't strike me as particularly awe inspiring - I couldn't properly visualise the dystopian society - and the story moved far too slow for my liking.

Wooow, really? You didn't find it distressingly creepy?

[NeiljFraser]

Virginia Woolf is incredible - The Lighthouse is a great book!

[Heteronym]

Here are some female writers I've enjoyed over the years: Carson McCullers, Emily Brönte, Toni Morrison, Angela Carter, Selma Lagerlöf, Charlotte Brönte, Pearl S. Buck, Elizabeth Browning. It's when I make these lists that I realise how poorly read I am regarding women.

[simply_chaotic]

Jane Austen, the Bronte sisters (even Anne, something about the women in that family just makes them incredible writers.), Mary Shelley, Emily Dickinson. I occasionally like Ayn Rand, even though sometimes she kinda loses me.

[tonywalt]

Lorrie Moore is good, just read her short stories.

[Desolation]

I'm quite fond of Virginia Woolf, Gertrude Stein, Sylia Plath, and Djuna Barnes.

For my American Literature class, we're only reading novels written by female authors. We're going to be reading books by Susanna Rowson, Catharine Sedgwick, Maria S. Cummins, Harriet Beecher Stowe, and Harriet Jacobs. If any of them strike me as incredible, I'll make a note of it.

[Motherof8]

George Eliot and

Maria Edgeworth.

[Kafka's Crow]

I am partial to George Elliot and Djuna Barnes. Austen is exceptional and the Bronte sisters are good as well. Gertrude Stein was very important. I have no time for Ayn Rand though.

[The Truth]

Sadly I have not read many woman authors, I'll have to remedy that. Austen's P&P is pretty good though.

[Heteronym]

A couple of other names I should add, two poets: Wislawa Szymborska and Sophia de Mello Breyner Andresen.

[Darcy88]

Anais Nin, Martha Nussbaum, Emily Bronte. Probably my favourite three female writers.

[crusoe]

The Bronte Sisters

[anisha9037]

We have an equal number of good female writers. To start with Jane Austen (Pride and Prejudice, Emma, Sense and Sensibility, Persuasion, Northanger Abbey), Charlotte Bronte (Jane Eyre), Emily Bronte(Wuthering Heights), Anne Bronte(Agnes Grey), George Eliot(The Mill on the Floss, Adam Bede) and Agatha Christie. There are many other famous and good female writers.

[crusoe]

There are many other famous and good female writers.

Of course. Radcliffe and Gaskell come to mind. Not to forget Colette or even
Simone de Beauvoir...One could find many in the gothic genre alone.
(19th century and present) Anne Rice, Edith Nesbit....boooo shivers.
I love it.

[RicMisc]

My favorite female writer would be Jane Austen but I like the Bronte sisters too although I prefer Emily a bit more. I also really liked Harper Lee.

[mgv1208]

im shocked that Zadie Smith wasn't mentioned. I think she's brilliant.

[Scheherazade]

im shocked that Zadie Smith wasn't mentioned. I think she's brilliant.I have always wanted to read her books but never got round to it.

Which one would you recommend?

[mgv1208]

White Teeth and On Beauty are both great. She also has a new novel coming out in a few months titled NW

[Scheherazade]

White Teeth and On Beauty are both great. She also has a new novel coming out in a few months titled NWThank you. I will check one of them out when I go to the library next.

Welcome to the Forum :)

[peggynevers]

The best female writers are

1- George Eliot
2- Jane Austen
3- Charlotte Bronte
4- Emily Bronte

[louisgeorge]

Emily Bronte <3

[Snowqueen]

I like Jane Austen and Bronte sisters. I haven’t come across much of Harper Lee’s work but I enjoyed reading To Kill a Mocking Bird.

[crusoe]

Nearly ev'rybody passes by Anne Bronte. Why ? Her "Agnes Grey" is a Template.

[tonywalt]

Zadie Smith
Lorrie Moore (Best Short Story writer there is today).
Doris Lessing

[kelby_lake]

I think it's interesting how prominent female writers were in the nineteenth-century. When someone asks you what the best writers of that century were, a Bronte or Austen would come to mind immediately. If you asked who the best writers of the 20th century were, would you immediately think of a female writer? (maybe Virginia Woolf)

[Oof]

I don't like most female authors. That typed ... J.K. Rowling's first four books were okay. Joan Didion is good. Virginia Woolf. Robin Hobb. Shirley Jackson. Daphne du Maurier. Sylvia Plath. There are a few more.

[Motherof8]

I like George Eliot.

[The Kid]

When I am reading a book and discover that the author is a woman, I often put the book down.

I have no idea why this is; I simply find myself repelled by female writers. This isn't always the case but most of the time it is.

I have to consciously try to stop this because I know I'm missing out on a lot of great work, but somehow it is really difficult. I'm not sexist regarding other things but somehow it is really hard for me in in literature. I suppose it's easier to read poetry written by a woman, but when it comes to prose I struggle. This must end!

[The Kid]

Oh actually there is one that I have read and really love: Anne Frank.

I don't usually read women's writings and I especially never enjoy Holocaust literature, but the Diary of Anne Frank, along with the play by the same name, are truly brilliant. I cannot stress how much I love Anne Frank. This is really unusual for me because again, women and the Holocaust are two genres of writing that I never touch. Perhaps Anne is so good because it was written by a youth much like myself.

[kelby_lake]

Women and the Holocaust are two genres of writing that I never touch.

Women are not a genre!

[Shea]

By far, I love Jane Austen. If my hubby and I ever have a girl, we would name her Jane. (Our boys are William and Charles for Shakespeare and Dickens).

But I also love the Bronte Sisters, Charlotte in particular. :)

There are several great female writers, but those are my favorites.

[OrphanPip]

Women writers I like:

Prose:
Jane Austen
Frances Burney
Alice Munro
Willa Cather
Flannery O'Connor
Margaret Atwood
Ursula LeGuin

Poetry:
Marianne Moore
Gertrude Stein
Elizabeth Bishop
Dorothy Livesay
Anne Carson

Drama:
Aphra Behn

[AlysonofBathe]

Jumping on the Margaret Atwood bandwagon - I adore that woman!