|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IN POETIC JUSTICE: The Literary Imagination and Public Life, Martha Nussbaum posits that reading literature represents more than just a pleasurable experience. The novel in particular is a morally controversial form, expressing in its very shape and style, in its modes of interaction with its readers, a normative sense of life.” Novels “present persistent forms of human need and desire realized in specific social situations” that differ from those of the reader. As such, novels (and, I would add, other forms of narrative) cultivate the literary imagination and hone the emotions, especially compassion and pity, leading the reader to identify and empathize with fictional characters despite their differing social circumstances. Because Nussbaum believes that the literary imagination is fundamental to citizenship, she concludes that the experience of reading narrative can and should be part of “the construction of an adequate moral and political theory” and “that it develops moral capacities without which citizens will not succeed in making reality out of the normative conclusions of any moral or political theory, however excellent” (12).
Teaching advanced French majors at Saint Olaf College, of course, requires a different approach from that of a law professor in a law and literature course at the University of Chicago. Yet Nussbaum’s book provided the philosophical base of my most recent advanced literature seminar. I combined traditional literary analysis—of character, setting, narrative voice, theme, style—with an exploration of what it means ethically to write fiction and autobiography. Ultimately, I wanted my students to learn that reading literature, pleasurable as it is, is also a moral activity that broadens our experience of human life; develops our cognitive, emotional, analytic, and ethical capacities; and enables us to live as wise and compassionate citizens of the world.
With this essay, I encourage readers to consider the possibilities afforded by interdisciplinary connections and extradepartmental curricular structures at their own postsecondary institutions when creating advanced courses in language, culture, and literature. Although these efforts may require rethinking of long-held pedagogical convictions, they enrich our advanced courses and create curricular coherence for students. Through them, we provide connections between institutional and departmental missions, and we create a curriculum that is uniquely suited to our own institutional ethos.
Saint Olaf College, enrolling just under three thousand students annually, identifies in its mission statement three defining components of a Saint Olaf College education:
St. Olaf College, a four-year college of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, provides an education committed to the liberal arts, rooted in the Christian Gospel, and incorporating a global perspective. In the conviction that life is more than a livelihood, it focuses on what is ultimately worthwhile and fosters the development of the whole person in mind, body, and spirit. (Saint Olaf College: The Academic Catalog)
The college’s curriculum responds to this three-pronged mission statement through a combination of general education requirements and a major. The general education requirements, representing the college’s approach to the liberal arts, divide into three categories. The first, foundation studies, “focus on the development of basic verbal, mathematical, and physical skills.” Core studies “introduce the different fields of knowledge and diverse ways of knowing that are at the heart of the liberal arts.” Finally, an integrative ethics course “offers upper-division students an opportunity to apply a variety of normative perspectives to the analysis of a range of personal and social issues” (Academic Catalog).
Among the foundation studies, the curriculum includes foreign language study; all students at the college are required to complete the equivalent of three to four semesters of one of the nine languages offered at the college. A large percentage of Saint Olaf College students, more than three-fourths, participate, additionally, in some sort of off-campus study program during their four years, and some take advantage, as well, of courses in foreign languages across the curriculum (Academic Catalog). The nearly universal experience of studying a foreign language, plus the off-campus term that most students take, forms the center of the college’s commitment to a global perspective.
The college’s mission to “root” students’ education in the “Christian Gospel” is realized through a combination of two required courses in biblical and theological studies and is supplemented by the required upper-division integrative ethics course, offered, ideally, in a student’s major field of study. To meet the requirements for EIN (Ethical Issues and Normative Perspectives) credit, a prospective EIN faculty member must include “issues of contemporary ethical concern and of relevance to students’ study at Saint Olaf College,” “integrate the disciplinary content and approach with the consideration of ethical issues and the analysis of normative perspectives,” include both practical and theoretical ethical analysis, and show that “there are alternative normative frameworks for critical and constructive ethical reasoning.” Finally, in some combination of historical and contemporary traditions, at least part of the course must include normative perspectives drawn from the Christian theological tradition ("General Education Guidelines"). To prepare faculty members from all disciplines to teach such an ambitious course, the director of EIN regularly offers rigorous workshops designed to create “competent amateurs,” that is, faculty members who have read and discussed the classics of Western ethics beginning with Plato and Aristotle and moving forward to most recent ethical theories. In addition, the workshops provide the opportunity for faculty members to discuss pedagogical quandaries associated with teaching ethics across the curriculum.
Within this larger context, the French section of the Department of Romance Languages offers a French major designed to support the three-pronged mission of the college while perfecting students’ linguistic abilities, honing their analytic skills, and familiarizing them with the diverse perspectives of the French-speaking world. The major divides into three levels, as delineated in the catalog:
In 250-level courses, students practice and refine their emerging language skills while developing the ability to do close textual analysis. In 270-level courses, students explore the diverse cultures and literatures of the Francophone world. Level III courses build upon students’ interpretive skills and their knowledge of the Francophone world. Students examine the notions of a particular topic or genre through the analysis of representative works. (Saint Olaf College French Department)
Most students complete part of their major while spending a January term (Interim), an Interim plus a semester, or a full year studying in France or elsewhere in the French-speaking world.
In redesigning the French curriculum in the mid-1990s, the faculty endeavored to connect students’ study of French to their liberal arts education as a whole by creating courses that fulfilled specific general education requirements. Hence, for example, students in our fourth-semester course now routinely earn credit toward the Multicultural Studies Credit—General requirement (one of the core studies, designed to acquaint students with global diversity) while studying language primarily through the cultures of French-speaking Africa and the Caribbean. Or, to take another example, French 253: Introduction to Literary Analysis admirably fulfills the criteria for credit in Artistic and Literary Studies—Literature, another of the core studies. The French major course offerings include a capstone course, French 399: Seminar in Francophone Studies, which students typically take as one of their last French courses before graduating. The liberty afforded by this course description in terms of format and choice of topic makes it possible for a faculty member to create an EIN course in French. (With this credit attached, the course number becomes 397 for administrative purposes.) After having participated in the EIN training seminar during the summers of 1997 and 1998 as well as in the intervening academic year, I taught French 397: L’univers moral de Gabrielle Roy in the spring term of 2000–01; at this time, it is the only EIN course taught in a language other than English.
The unlimited freedom to choose a course topic made for some difficult decisions at the outset. I considered examining the Enlightenment, my longtime specialization and a logical choice for the richness of discussion of ethical issues it would permit. I also considered a focus on a particular genre. In both cases, developing a complex topic and integrating the ethics readings seemed an overwhelming task for a thirteen-week semester. Inspired by a colleague in Norwegian who was planning to teach, in English translation, an EIN-designated course on Ibsen, I realized that focusing on a single author would narrow the scope of the course topic sufficiently to make manageable the addition of the required material in ethics. The in-depth study of one author is also particularly appropriate for the seminar format of the course. From then, the decision was easy. I had long hoped to teach a course on Gabrielle Roy (1909–83), the French Canadian author of short stories, novellas, novels, and autobiographical works whose childhood and young adulthood in Saint-Boniface, Winnipeg, Manitoba, inspired much of her writing. The relative geographic proximity (five hundred miles) of Roy’s childhood home in Saint-Boniface to Northfield, Minnesota, would lend a certain immediacy to the topic, since my students, at least those from the Midwest, would be able to identify with the physical setting of some of her works. Having already incorporated selected stories of Roy into other courses, I knew that students responded to her writing with enthusiasm, partly because of her exquisite style, but also because certain themes—family, the process of growing up, the beauty of the natural world—resonated with the students. Finally, I saw the course as an opportunity to explore the author by means of a lens—ethical reflection—that simultaneously illuminated important aspects of the works and uniquely fit the mission of Saint Olaf College.
To align my course goals with the EIN guidelines and the departmental goals for our seminar, I balanced three variables: first, historical background (a brief introduction to French Canada, particularly the French in Manitoba, the life of Roy herself, a brief history of ethical thought); second, literary and aesthetic considerations in Roy’s work; and, third, ethical issues raised in her corpus. I wanted my students to understand and appreciate Roy’s writing on several levels: historical, sociological, literary, and moral. Concerning the ethical dimension of her writing, I focused on issues involving dilemmas of human relationships, the conflict between obligations to family and to one’s own vocation, and the connections between humans and nature that recur throughout Roy’s writing, from the earliest newspaper articles to the final autobiographical texts. Other issues I explored with my students proceeded from an analysis of the act of writing itself—for example, the role of the author in society and the ethics of writing autobiography. The issue that became the core of the course, the choice of one’s vocation, is at once dear to the Lutheran theology that undergirds Saint Olaf College’s mission, central to Roy’s literary corpus, and pressing to students preparing to graduate from college and embark on professional training, career, and family life. To explore these ethical issues with my students, I focused on a few selected ethical traditions and perspectives, all relevant to Roy’s background and experience, as the basis for analyzing her works: the Christian tradition, existentialism, and feminine-feminist ethics. I added, as well, insights from narrative ethics and virtue ethics (Cisar).
My first task was to determine the best way to treat the two threads that would make up the course: the ethics content and the literary readings. Thinking back to my training to teach an EIN course, I began by sketching out a plan for introducing the ethics readings in a way that had made sense to me when I myself was learning ethics terminology and the distinctions among the various theoretical approaches to ethics, beginning with the fundamental distinction between utilitarianism and deontology and followed by a more in-depth introduction to existentialism, one form of deontological ethics. Next, I placed the third traditional current of ethical reflection, virtue ethics, followed by a sampling of the different forms of Christian ethics, both Catholic and Protestant. Linked to the Christian tradition was the notion of religious and secular vocation, which I included in order to prepare for later discussions of the writer’s vocation. I finished with various forms of feminine and feminist ethics. As a frame for this theoretical progression, I added the concept of narrative ethics, in order to begin the course with reflection on what it means from an ethical standpoint to write literature and to end the course with a more focused inquiry into the ethics of writing autobiography.1
I plotted out selected works by Roy, assuming for the most part one week for the shorter literary selections and two weeks for each of the longer novels. Beginning with two articles from her series Peuples du Canada, written for Le Bulletin des Agriculteurs (1942), this list included, in order of publication dates, Bonheur d’occasion (1945), Alexandre Chenevert (1954), Rue Deschambault (1955), La montagne secrète (1961), La route d’Altamont (1966), the short story “Un jardin au bout du monde” from the collection of the same name (1975), excerpts from La détresse et l’enchantement (1984), and, finally, Le temps qui m’a manqué (1997). I maintained the chronological organization of the Roy corpus; it was important to me to enclose the primary literary readings within an easily comprehensible structure, since I intended to complicate that structure by weaving the ethics readings into it.
As the course got under way and my two organizational structures merged in practice, I found to my surprise and delight that they complemented each other even better than I had hoped. The frame of reflection I had created accompanied a general introduction to Roy and the social and historical context of her work. I used the chapter in Nussbaum’s Poetic Justice with which I opened the present essay to prepare students to understand the ethical implications of reading literature. Discussion of the ethics of literary production accompanied examination of the early newspaper articles, where Roy already blurs fact and fiction. The distinction between deontology and utilitarianism, along with the introduction to existentialism, complemented Bonheur d’occasion, which itself demonstrates Roy’s debt to the French existentialism of the period in which it was written. Virtue ethics allowed us to probe in depth the character of Alexandre Chenevert, a task that required us also to return to the existentialist perspective. Christian ethics and the notion of vocation prepared us for Rue Deschambault, La montagne secrète, and La route d’Altamont, all of whose main theme is the vocation of the author or artist. Finally, feminine and feminist ethics led to fascinating discussions of Martha, the main character of “Un jardin au bout du monde,” and of Gabrielle (her mother) and other characters in the autobiographical works. Also in conjunction with the late autobiographical writings, we discussed the ethical implications of autobiography as a genre, such as the inevitability of including intimate details about others’ lives in an autobiographical text. As we worked our way through the Roy corpus, we were able to refer to earlier works of literature as points of comparison with those we were studying at the time, using the new ethical lens. By the end of the course, students were not only completely comfortable reading Roy’s works, they were also capable of sophisticated application of the vocabulary and perspectives of ethical reflection to the literary texts.
The thorniest problem I faced during the planning process was to choose the appropriate mechanism for preparing my students to discuss ethics in French, especially since all my own theoretical preparation to teach the course had been delivered in English. Because I did not want to spend class time lecturing, my first impulse was to find a basic manual on ethics in French and require students to read appropriate portions. However, the options available were simply too linguistically challenging, the sentence structures too convoluted. At that point, I resolved to do something I rarely do in my classes: I opted to have students complete the background readings on ethics in English. Having settled on this method, I used the first week to prepare students to move from English into French, the language of all our class discussions and all the students’ written work. An excellent article from the Univers documentaire Hachette: Dictionnaire encyclopédique allowed me to achieve this goal ("Morale"). With the help of this short, clearly written resource available in the library, students became comfortable with the necessary ethics terms from the first week. Throughout the course, I remained satisfied with my decision to include readings in both French and English. With the help of the vocabulary acquired early on (which included many French-English cognates), students converted ideas with ease and accuracy from English to French, and they were able to complete the English readings more quickly than they would have been able to digest French ones. This left more time to complete the heavy reading load of novels, short stories, novellas, and autobiographies.
Because the course was designed as a seminar, I wanted to draw on students’ insights as the basis for class discussion while simultaneously ensuring mastery of the subject matter of the course. With only ten students (one sophomore, three juniors, and six seniors), most of whom had already studied in France and all of whom were quite advanced in French, I could rely on a high level of comprehension of the French texts. In addition to the readings for each class period, I proposed short (one- to two-page) daily response papers that allowed me to keep close tabs on students’ writing and to give regular feedback. I left the topic open, requiring only that students link the readings in ethics to the literary readings. The response papers in turn became the basis for most of the small- and large-group class discussions. In addition to providing samples of students’ writing and encouraging reflection on the texts, the response papers allowed me to tailor future discussions to meet the students’ needs for clarification or to see what topics particularly gripped them on a given day. However, there was a time lag between the submission of the assignments and the discussions. If I teach the course again, I will use a chatroom feature to make these response papers available to the other students and to me a few hours before the class period when they are due; doing this will enable me to respond more quickly to misunderstandings and reactions to the texts.
Together, the response papers and the class discussion made up forty percent of the grade for the course. Three larger assignments accounted for the remainder of the course grade. The first, due at about midterm, was a four- to six-page comparative essay on a topic of each student’s own choosing related to Bonheur d’occasion and Alexandre Chenevert in the context of the ethics readings completed to that point. This paper allowed me to see whether students had understood the basic categories of ethical reflection (utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics). Students generally wrote comparative character analyses, but some focused on the social context of the characters and its impact on their ethical choices.
The second substantial assignment was a key one for me. One of the goals of the course and of the EIN requirement was to give students the opportunity to apply ethical theory to their own situation, and this assignment required students to consider the personal implications of what they had learned in the course. I required a four- to six-page essay on vocation, in which students had to demonstrate familiarity with the course readings (both the ethics readings and Roy’s works) in the context of an exploration of their own sense of vocation. The thoughtfulness of these papers, their sincerity, and, for the seniors especially, their urgency made the papers particularly interesting to read. I felt, as well, that this assignment was a fitting way for my students to relate their French study to their education as a whole at a Lutheran college.
The final course assignment, really the final examination of the course, was a group project that required students to synthesize in a more traditional way what they had learned throughout the course. Working in groups of three or four, students decided together on an ethical issue that they felt was central to Roy’s corpus but that we had not completely elucidated in class. They then analyzed that topic in the light of the ethics readings they had completed and presented their findings to the rest of the class. On the day when students would normally have taken their final examination, each group presented its contribution to the minicolloquium. The colloquium allowed me a final insight into students’ knowledge of the course material, gave students a chance to perform orally, and carried a very practical advantage for me: I did not have to read ten lengthy seminar papers right at the end of the course. (At Saint Olaf College, spring-term senior grades are due to the registrar’s office twenty-four hours after the end of the final exam period for the course, a schedule that makes it very difficult to evaluate fairly and thoroughly a lengthy piece of final work.)
All students who take EIN courses at Saint Olaf College complete a set of questionnaires designed to assess the impact of the EIN requirement on their attitudes and thinking. At the beginning of the course, students complete a questionnaire intended to determine their ethical stance and degree of rigidity or relativism. They complete the same survey at the end of the course. These surveys are used for institutional assessment by the director of the EIN requirement. At the end of the course, students in all EIN classes also complete a questionnaire that measures how the course has influenced their ability to identify the moral dimension of important issues, to analyze those issues and engage in discussions about them, to deal with differing normative perspectives, and to formulate and understand their own normative perspective. My students also completed the college’s generic course evaluation instrument.
The generic questionnaires revealed that the course was rigorous; students reported spending more time on this class than on others they were taking that semester. In fact, not surprisingly, the main complaint that students voiced was that the course required too much work. The positive comments divided into three categories: the knowledge, enthusiasm, and organizational ability of the instructor; the creativity of the course topic and the challenging and synthetic subject matter, which linked the ethics readings and the literary readings; and, finally, the fact that the assignments allowed, indeed required, students to apply what they were learning to their own lives.
The EIN questionnaire revealed other telling reactions of the students to the course. Most of the students agreed that the class had helped them understand a variety of normative perspectives, identify the moral dimensions of issues, respect differing viewpoints, and develop and understand their own normative perspective. Two students specifically indicated that they appreciated the opportunity to study literature through the lens of ethical reflection. Only two students criticized the combination of literary analysis and ethics credit. One expressed the opinion that the EIN credit seemed “to be a stretch” and was “too forced.” The other put it this way: “While it was interesting to tie in the ethical aspects with the books we read, I felt sometimes like I was in two separate courses.” Despite these comments, I felt that most of my students had taken seriously Nussbaum’s challenge to read literature through the lens of ethical reflection.
Two surprises convinced me that the course had touched their lives in ways that I could not have planned or foreseen. By coincidence, students were assigned to read La route d’Altamont during the week of spring break. The first in this collection of four novellas, “Ma grand-mère toute puissante,” concerns the relationship between a young girl, Christine, and her grandmother, who one day, to Christine’s delight, magically makes a doll out of scraps and other miscellaneous items she has collected over the years. The story is a moving tribute to the grandmother’s creativity—Christine at one point cries out, “Tu es Dieu le Père. Tu es Dieu le Père. Toi aussi, tu sais faire tout de rien” (Route d’Altamont 28)—and by extension, to the creativity of the artist and the writer, vocations that Christine will choose for herself by the end of the fourth novella of the collection. The response papers of two students to this text revealed that while visiting their grandparents for break, they had shared the story in detail with their grandmothers and that the readings had thus sparked especially memorable conversations.
The second surprise occurred at the end of the minicolloquium, which became the occasion for some lighthearted fun and, for me, a glimpse of Roy in an entirely new light. The students in one group had chosen to consider the ethical repercussions of gender issues present in several of the Roy texts. They preceded their oral presentation with a dramatic rendering of a portion of Roy’s autobiography, La détresse et l’enchantement, that deals with Gabrielle’s relationship in England with Stephen, a mysterious figure who was, unknown to her, a Russian informant. The product, complete with appropriate musical selections and extensive props and costumes, was a melodramatic tour de force. It was so well received that the students repeated the performance the following day at our annual luncheon for senior French majors and the whole French faculty.
There were many benefits from this course. First, I as instructor learned a great deal about Gabrielle Roy, including several insights that have not been examined in the critical literature on the author. I also gained greater expertise in preparing a cross-disciplinary course, expertise that will serve me well in the future. And I was able to draw on a variety of professional experiences of the last ten years, including lessons learned from teaching other courses and from attending the EIN faculty seminar and an earlier faculty seminar, funded by the Mellon Foundation, called Work and Vocation. As important, I learned much about my students, who were encouraged (even forced) to engage with the material on a personal level. From a purely practical standpoint, what I learned about some of those students’ sense of vocation continues to serve me in writing letters of recommendation for graduate school and job applications. Second, students benefited from examining works of literature from multiple perspectives. By ferreting out motivations and explanations for actions that seemed otherwise selfish or mean-spirited, they grew in their ability to empathize with various characters and situations. Finally, I believe that the French section and the college as a whole benefited from the addition of a course that clearly responded to the ethical imperative of the mission statement, and I think that my students will leave Saint Olaf College with a sense of the relation between studying French language, culture, and literature and living ethical lives.
In her 1998 article published in the ADFL Bulletin, Ann Bugliani advocates that faculty members in departments of languages and literatures “take part in the mainstream intellectual life of our university communities by teaching literature in translation” through interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary initiatives on campus. This practice, she argues, will “strengthen our position” in the overall curriculum, especially if we teach at an institution that has abandoned its language requirement (33). I agree with Bugliani and have myself taught in several of Saint Olaf College’s many interdisciplinary programs. I encourage readers, though, to look, as well, to their own course offerings and to discover ways to integrate college- or universitywide requirements into the language and literature programs. Such a venture may require, as it did for us, rethinking the curriculum for the French major and finding ways to make course offerings more flexible and more open to new initiatives. It may also require us to add some readings in English to our courses within the major. The result, however, will be well worth the effort for faculty members, for students, and for the institution as a whole.
1 The ethics readings for the course come from the following sources: Boulton; Hardwig; Hardy; Murray; Nussbaum; Pojman; Singer; Tong.
A brief explanation of the major ethical systems we explored may be of use here. Utilitarians, such as John Stuart Mill, believe that a morally right act is the one that produces the most good; given the choice, reasonable people will always choose a higher amount of good over a lower amount of good (Tong 15–16). Some utilitarians think that reasonable people will also choose a higher quality of good over a lower quality. Unlike utilitarians, for whom the moral worth of an action depends on its practical consequences, deontologists believe that the proof of moral reasoning is inherent in the moral reasoning and corresponding acts themselves; what is important is that action is motivated by one’s intention to perform one’s duty (Tong 19). One group of “act-deontological” theorists are existentialists, such as Jean-Paul Sartre, who “believe that there is no morally right answer until we choose for ourselves what is right and what is wrong” (Pojman 134).
Unlike these two schools of ethical thought, proponents of virtue ethics, following Aristotle, emphasize not the actions that proceed from moral reasoning but the quality of a person’s character. Ethical theory that proceeds from a religious base places ethical reflection within the context of human beings’ relationship to the divine and places notions of justice within a larger than human context (Pojman 244–46).
Feminist ethics challenge a variety of tenets of utilitarian and deontological ethical theory. Feminists challenge the preeminence of the autonomous individual by emphasizing the importance of relationships to the elaboration of moral reasoning. Feminist ethics counters the tendency toward the abstract by focusing on the particularities of a real situation. Finally, feminist ethicists challenge the ideal of impartiality through attention to emotion as well as reason (Tong).
Boulton, Wayne G., et al., eds. From Christ to the World: Introductory Readings in Christian Ethics. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994.
Bugliani, Ann. “Why Foreign Language Faculty Members Should Teach Literature in Translation.” ADFL Bulletin 29.2 (1998): 32–35. [Show Article]
Cisar, Mary. French 397: L’univers moral de Gabrielle Roy. 5 Nov. 2001 http://www.stolaf.edu/courses/2000sem2/French/397/index.htm.
“General Education Guidelines, Ethical Issues and Normative Perspectives (Integrative Studies).” [Northfield] Nov. 1994. Saint Olaf College.
Hardwig, John. “Autobiography, Biography, and Narrative Ethics.” Nelson 50–64.
Hardy, Lee. “Our Work, God’s Providence: The Christian Concept of Vocation.” The Fabric of This World: Inquiries into Calling, Career Choice, and the Design of Human Work. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990. 44–54.
“Morale.” Axis: L’univers documentaire Hachette: Dictionnaire encyclopédique, dossiers. Vol. 7. Paris: Hachette, 1997.
Murray, Thomas A. “What Do We Mean by 'Narrative Ethics’?” Nelson 3–17.
Nelson, Hilde Lindemann, ed. Stories and Their Limits: Narrative Approaches to Bioethics. New York: Routledge, 1997.
Nussbaum, Martha C. “The Literary Imagination.” Introduction. Poetic Justice: The Literary Imagination and Public Life. Boston: Beacon, 1995. 1–12.
Pojman, Louis P. Ethics: Discovering Right and Wrong. 2nd ed. Belmont: Wadsworth, 1995.
Roy, Gabrielle. La route d’Altamont. Montréal: HMH, 1969. Boréal Compact 47. Montréal: Boréal, 1993.
Saint Olaf College: The Academic Catalog for 2000–02. 5 Nov. 2001 http://www.stolaf.edu/catalog/.
Saint Olaf College French Department. 5 Nov. 2001 http://www.stolaf.edu/catalog/academicprogram/french.html.
Singer, Peter, ed. A Companion to Ethics. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 1993.
Tong, Rosemarie. Feminine and Feminist Ethics. Belmont: Wadsworth, 1993.
© 2002 by the Association of Departments of Foreign Languages. All Rights Reserved.
|
|---|
|
|
|
