Main Claims
In this Rhetoric Review essay, Burton begins by paying tribute to feminist scholars in our field, such as Bizzell and Glenn, who have authorized or precedented projects like hers that "'remap rhetorical territory"' by revisiting rhetorical sites in history and re-placing women within their rightful contexts (336). That site for Burton is women in early British Methodism. She first traces John Wesley's founding of Methodism before giving space to the voices of women preachers and parishoners who he authorized as both leader of the faith and editor of its many publications that sought to convert followers away from the sinful practices, arts (i.e. novels), and rationalism of the time.
Burton sites that Wesley "not only functioned as the production authority for the methodist movement as a whole, he also individually authorized, encouraged, and nurtured the writing of individual women" (344). Hester Rogers is exemplified as among the most important of these, despite her resistance to actually preaching. Rather, she was in Wesley's view, one of the few men or women to have truly experienced the "union with God," though Burton also speculates-I think correctly- that part of Wesley's fascination with Rogers may have been due to the highly erotic description of that union (345, 347).
The essay concludes with a description of the "institutional darkness" into which women of Methodism were cast after Wesley's death, citing many examples of despicable private and official communications by men in the church who condemned women's preaching, as well as the drying up of publication of women's writings. In one of the best lines of the essay, Burton sadly reports that "it has taken the women of Methodism nearly 200 years to reclaim the rhetorical space they lost when John Wesley died" (351). Here, she postulates that the reason Hester Rogers' narratives were so widely published and distributed past the time of Wesley's death is that her story was heavily edited and she was essentially repackaged as as Methodist woman who reveled in he spirituality in the most private of literacy spaces, thereby comprising the ideal model for other Methodist women who were no longer offered the stage, mic, or page.
Assumptions about Method/ologies
In the conclusion of the essay, Burton again speaks directly to the project of feminist revisionist history, citing "Tim Miller's lead into the rhetoric of traditions, expanding the boundaries of the history of rhetoric from the centers of the privileged [male] intellectual power outward to include the outposts of cultural production like religious movements, in the process bringing to light persuasive women and recovering their texts. This recovery in itself is a feminist act (see Bizzell)" (351).
Key Words
Feminism, John Wesley, Methodism, rhetoric, women, public, private
Key Texts
Bizzell, Glenn, and other primary, secondary and archival texts from the history of Methodism
Questions/Challenges
I have a couple of related issues with this essay. The first is that I wonder why Burton didn't push a little harder against the portrait she paints of Wesley as savior to women, without further questioning his motives to amass followers. It surely wouldn't be the first time that a minority group was "used" for their numbers.
Secondly, I wonder to what extent she recognized the paternalist image she casts of Wesley. She seems to so fereverently celebrate this man who she describes with words like control, edit, authority, protect, nuture, etc., in relation to his engagement with women's texts. Is paternalism in itself a bad thing? What is the ill in relation to the good in this case? In other words, is the rhetorical space and ethos he helped open up for women more important than how tangled the motives, positioning, and intentions may have been?
In this Rhetoric Review essay, Burton begins by paying tribute to feminist scholars in our field, such as Bizzell and Glenn, who have authorized or precedented projects like hers that "'remap rhetorical territory"' by revisiting rhetorical sites in history and re-placing women within their rightful contexts (336). That site for Burton is women in early British Methodism. She first traces John Wesley's founding of Methodism before giving space to the voices of women preachers and parishoners who he authorized as both leader of the faith and editor of its many publications that sought to convert followers away from the sinful practices, arts (i.e. novels), and rationalism of the time.
Burton sites that Wesley "not only functioned as the production authority for the methodist movement as a whole, he also individually authorized, encouraged, and nurtured the writing of individual women" (344). Hester Rogers is exemplified as among the most important of these, despite her resistance to actually preaching. Rather, she was in Wesley's view, one of the few men or women to have truly experienced the "union with God," though Burton also speculates-I think correctly- that part of Wesley's fascination with Rogers may have been due to the highly erotic description of that union (345, 347).
The essay concludes with a description of the "institutional darkness" into which women of Methodism were cast after Wesley's death, citing many examples of despicable private and official communications by men in the church who condemned women's preaching, as well as the drying up of publication of women's writings. In one of the best lines of the essay, Burton sadly reports that "it has taken the women of Methodism nearly 200 years to reclaim the rhetorical space they lost when John Wesley died" (351). Here, she postulates that the reason Hester Rogers' narratives were so widely published and distributed past the time of Wesley's death is that her story was heavily edited and she was essentially repackaged as as Methodist woman who reveled in he spirituality in the most private of literacy spaces, thereby comprising the ideal model for other Methodist women who were no longer offered the stage, mic, or page.
Assumptions about Method/ologies
In the conclusion of the essay, Burton again speaks directly to the project of feminist revisionist history, citing "Tim Miller's lead into the rhetoric of traditions, expanding the boundaries of the history of rhetoric from the centers of the privileged [male] intellectual power outward to include the outposts of cultural production like religious movements, in the process bringing to light persuasive women and recovering their texts. This recovery in itself is a feminist act (see Bizzell)" (351).
Key Words
Feminism, John Wesley, Methodism, rhetoric, women, public, private
Key Texts
Bizzell, Glenn, and other primary, secondary and archival texts from the history of Methodism
Questions/Challenges
I have a couple of related issues with this essay. The first is that I wonder why Burton didn't push a little harder against the portrait she paints of Wesley as savior to women, without further questioning his motives to amass followers. It surely wouldn't be the first time that a minority group was "used" for their numbers.
Secondly, I wonder to what extent she recognized the paternalist image she casts of Wesley. She seems to so fereverently celebrate this man who she describes with words like control, edit, authority, protect, nuture, etc., in relation to his engagement with women's texts. Is paternalism in itself a bad thing? What is the ill in relation to the good in this case? In other words, is the rhetorical space and ethos he helped open up for women more important than how tangled the motives, positioning, and intentions may have been?
I'm intrigued by your last comment. I wonder if Burton answers your very question by writing a book about Wesley, women, and his literacy sponsorship of them (and working class men). Yes, she notes that he is paternalistic and controlling, but also generous and supportive of many women. I think Burton's attempt here is to create a multi-faceted portrait of him from a feminist perspective. I think part of the feminist reading of Wesley is to describe him in fraught terms--to point to the possibilities and constraints of his literacy sponsorship: "He's this, but he's also this." I think a feminist rhetorical methodology makes that kind of reading necessary and accounts for some of the push-pull language embedded in her readings. Thoughts?