Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorJohns, Alessa
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-10T12:58:18Z
dc.date.issued2014-08-27
dc.date.submitted2018-03-01 23:55:55
dc.date.submitted2020-03-12 03:00:31
dc.date.submitted2020-04-01T12:49:26Z
dc.identifier648334
dc.identifierOCN: 891286596
dc.identifierhttp://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/30244
dc.identifier.urihttps://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/39481
dc.description.abstractBluestocking Feminism and British-German Cultural Transfer, 1750–1837 examines the processes of cultural transfer between Britain and Germany during the Personal Union, the period from 1714 to 1837 when the kings of England were simultaneously Electors of Hanover. While scholars have generally focused on the political and diplomatic implications of the Personal Union, Alessa Johns offers a new perspective by tracing sociocultural repercussions and investigating how, in the period of the American and French Revolutions, Britain and Germany generated distinct discourses of liberty even though they were nonrevolutionary countries. British and German reformists—feminists in particular—used the period’s expanded pathways of cultural transfer to generate new discourses as well as to articulate new views of what personal freedom, national character, and international interaction might be.
dc.languageEnglish
dc.rightsopen access
dc.subject.otherLiterature
dc.subject.otherFeminism
dc.subject.otherFredric Jameson
dc.subject.otherGermany
dc.subject.otherMary Wollstonecraft
dc.titleBluestocking Feminism and British-German Cultural Transfer, 1750-1837
dc.typebook
oapen.identifier.doi10.3998/mpub.6536705
oapen.relation.isPublishedByb7359529-e5f7-4510-a59f-d7dafa1d4d17
oapen.relation.isFundedByb818ba9d-2dd9-4fd7-a364-7f305aef7ee9
oapen.relation.isFundedBy969f21b5-ac00-4517-9de2-44973eec6874
oapen.relation.isbn9780472120475
oapen.collectionKnowledge Unlatched (KU)
oapen.place.publicationAnn Arbor
oapen.grant.number100881
oapen.grant.programKU Select 2017: Backlist Collection
oapen.review.commentsThe proposal was selected by the acquisitions editor who invited a full manuscript. The full manuscript was reviewed by two external readers using a double-blind process. Based on the acquisitions editor recommendation, the external reviews, and their own analysis, the Executive Committee (Editorial Board) of U-M Press approved the project for publication.en_US
peerreview.review.decisionYes
peerreview.review.typeFull text
peerreview.anonymityDouble-anonymised
peerreview.reviewer.typeExternal peer reviewer
peerreview.review.stagePre-publication
peerreview.open.reviewNo
peerreview.publish.responsibilityScientific or Editorial Board
peerreview.idd98bf225-990a-4ac4-acf4-fd7bf0dfb00c
dc.number100881
dc.relationisFundedByb818ba9d-2dd9-4fd7-a364-7f305aef7ee9


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

open access
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as open access