Women write science syl.htm

HC 421H, Honors College colloquium: Women Write Science

Bishop, Fall '04 | 308 Chapman | (541) 346-0733 | lmbishop@uoregon.edu
Office hours:

Tuesday, 2:00 to 4:00 pm (except Nov. 16)

Thursday, 2:00 to 4:00 pm

and by appointment

Class hours: Tues, Thurs. noon to 1:20 pm

NEWS! Beginning in November, new Knight Library Honors College liaison Eliz Breakstone will hold office hours weekly in the Honors College library!

Wednesdays, 10 am to noon,
Thursdays, 2 to 4 pm.

She's ready to help you with library resources for your thesis work. Her e-mail is ebreak@darkwing.uoregon.edu, and her phone is 346-2689

Scientia is Latin for knowledge. In this course we will examine the texts of four women writers to assess their attachment to, interest in, and use of science as a body of knowledge, a rigorous discipline, and a framework for sapientia, wisdom.

Our first writer, Hildegard of Bingen, wrote her medico-scientific treatises during the first half of the twelfth century. Both her Physica, a “natural history,” and Causes and Cures, a compendium of medicine some argue derives from Hildegard’s own experience, reveal her immersion in the learned texts of her day as well as her unique additions to a received corpus. Trota, author of the Trotula and a teacher at the first medical school in Europe, wrote a medical treatise roughly contemporary with Hildegard’s. In true medieval fashion, the Trotula acquired other medical texts while retaining Trota’s name and her gender in its title. The Trotula was widely disseminated throughout Europe, in both Latin and vernacular languages, into the seventeenth century. We will then move from the western pre-modern to its modern. Margaret Cavendish, Countess of Newcastle, authored a “poetry of science” in the mid-sixteenth century, using atomic theory and mathematics, literally and metaphorically, for understanding the science of human existence. Jane Marcet wrote a chemistry book at the beginning of the nineteenth century to teach chemistry to interested parties, including women. Marcet pens a dialogue between “Mrs. B” and her two female charges in order to answer questions about chemical properties and experiments.

These four authors provide a wide-ranging journey through women writing science in the past. The final woman writing science will be at the choice of each member of the class. Each student will research a modern (beginning in the nineteenth century) woman writing science (or can delve more deeply into one of our four women writing science). Students may also choose to work collaboratively on particular figures. Among the candidates for further research are Barbara McClintock, Sophie Germain, Rosalind Franklin, Marie Curie, Ada Byron Lovelace, and Rachel Carson. Students are not in any way limited to this particular list. Students are encouraged to treat science broadly - medicine, “natural philosophy,” and mathematics all reside under the “science” umbrella - and to wrestle with social and literary meanings of women writing science. The goal of the class is, through "literary attention" (the "discursive," particular words, metaphors, treating books and texts as "things" with various effects, concepts and practices of authors and authority, and feminist practice) to evaluate the "march of science": its institutional shape, its hold on readers and language, and contests over its management and meanings for women and men in the 21st century.

See below for requirements.

(Back to top of page)

Texts

Three texts have been ordered at the UO Bookstore, and all are available: Hildegard of Bingen's Selected Writings (Penguin), The Trotula, edited by Monica Green (Penn State), and a Cavendish reader, called Paper Bodies (Broadview). Cavendish readings are also available on the Web, via Early English Books Online (enter the title on the library home page, then click to enter the resource). Our Marcet is available as a packet at The Copy Shop, on 13th Street. (Back to top of page)

Other readings are available in a timely fashion in the Honors College library in the "Bishop" box. They are also available from Electronic Reserve:

go to the library's home page,
click on "course reserves",
enter "Bishop L" (not case sensitive) in instructor box and click,
enter username "fall04" and password "cool" at the prompt,
then select your reading from the list

Requirements

1. Word paper. You'll start at the beginning of the term to become an expert in one of four words: science, history, nature, woman. For Tuesday, October 5, you'll write a short (500 words) paper that provides as many definitions for your word as you can find (list all sources, including web resources). You'll also speculate about the kinds of issues your word will bring up in class. Completing this assignment on time and with some acuity counts 10 % towards your final grade.

2. "Summary" paper for each of our four primary authors. I have not previously taught any of the primary texts we're reading this term; I'm very interested in your reaction to them. Your summary is to present your reflection on our authors: what most struck you as different in the text? What questions were answered, and what questions do you still need answers for? Include a short passage on the relationship between your "word" and the text. I will read these papers, comment on them, and grade them pass/no pass. Normally, a no-pass paper lacks a thesis and/or contains egregious writing errors. Four passing papers will count as a 4.0, three as a 3.0, two as a 2.0, one as a 1.0. You may also request that I give any response paper a "grade," meaning the grade it would get were it a graded assignment. I would "grade" the paper in order to give you an idea of how grading works on formal papers, but the grade won't "count," per se. 20% of your final grade.

3 . Thesis question and annotated bibliography. See this page for a guide for writing an annotated bibliography. By week SIX of the term, you'll have decided on your topic for your final paper. The range of choices is broad. On the one hand, as an arts and letters course, requirements include work with a primary text of some sort. We will include in the designation "primary text" biographies written by women scientists about other women scientists. Your paper will pay attention to "literary" qualities in your chosen research topic while, at the same time, you can skew your topic towards your own particular disciplinary interest. 20% of your final grade.

4 . Class presentation. See the presentation schedule. The last three class meetings will have you presenting to the class your 20th- or 21st-century woman writing science (or, if you wish, you can explore further one of our class selections). Ideally, a fair number of you will work in pairs or teams on a particular topic so that we can fit everyone into the four hours' total time allotted. Your grade will be a composite of my grade along with the class's grades of your presentation. 15% of your final grade.

5. Term project. While I'm quite happy for you to write a standard term paper (approximately 2500-3000 words), and a good portion of the work must be written, you may include other types of research, such as images or music. And, as mentioned above, you can certainly collaborate on particular women writing science, but each class member must write an individual term paper. 25% of your final grade. (Back to top of page)

Grading

The word paper constitutes 10% of your grade; the summary papers collectively, 20%, the thesis question and bibliography, 20%; class presentation, 15%; participation, 10%; and the term paper, 25% of your grade. Please note the University's "grade point value" system effective 9/90, as I will be using this system (unless otherwise noted):

A+ = 4.3

B+ = 3.3

C+ = 2.3

D+ = 1.3

A = 4.0

B = 3.0

C = 2.0

D = 1.0

A- = 3.7

B- = 2.7

C- = 1.7

D- = 0.7

Note that a grade of "C" is, according to academic regulations, "satisfactory," while a "B" is "good." That means that a "B" is better than average, better than satisfactory, better than adequate. The average grade, then, is a "C"; a grade of "B" requires effort and accomplishment.

(Back to top of page)

Daily reading schedule

Sept. 28 Honors College colloquia and the goals for this class; primary issues and methodology; what's at stake in such an analysis

Sept. 30 In-class film, VT 06065 (available at the Knight Library); two articles by Evelyn Fox Keller: "Gender and Science: An Update," Women, Science, and Technology (Routledge 2001),132-42; Evelyn Fox Keller, "A World of Difference," The Gender of Science (Prentice-Hall, 2002), 125-35
See this page for a brief article on Evelyn Fox Keller; here's a summary of our first week's readings

Oct. 5 Thanks for your "word" papers!
Hildegard and medieval science: read the intro to our text and pp 7-30, 37-8, 71-81,and Emerson essay (in Bishop box in HC library, as are all other essays). The relationship between theology and science: medieval philosophy. Check out the good web bibliography by Dorothy Disse at http://home.infionline.net/~ddisse/hildegar.html

Oct. 7 Hildegard, pp 93-105 (from Causes and Cures), and Chamberlain essay. Feminism and science.
–Do Fox Keller's ideas about good science "diverging from the norm" help us in reading Hildegard?
–What is Hildegard's idea of knowledge?

–How does reading Hildegard disrupt our sense of science?

–How does Hildegard use metaphor?

–Does Hildegard engage your sympathy for the Middle Ages?

See my little "medieval science" site here. And here's what I think are this week's big topics:

How important is the study of language for understanding pre-modern and modern science? What are the implications of such study?

What are the connections between ethics and science for pre-modern and modern readers?

Oct. 12 Hildegard, pp. 106-127 and Kitchell-Resnick essay. Classification and close reading. In-class debate: Is Hildegard a "science writer"?
Answer: depends on the definition of "science": is it "explanation"? "reproducibility"? How about the "contemplation of elastic horizon"? Its tie to "knowledge" shows us that, following Fox Keller, we produce knowledge, even knowledge about data and that which comes from observation, within linguistic (metaphor) and institutional (university) parameters.

Summary paper on Hildegard due
Oct. 14 Trotula read the intro (including the notes, in the back of the book), esp. pp 1-63 (pp. 52-60 are rather technical and you can skip them); think about Hildegard and Trotula's near-contemporaneity: what factors most condition their differences? Do these include treatment? Medicines? Attitudes?

Oct. 19 Trotula, Conditions and Treatments, pp. 65-112 What patterns, if any, do you see emerging in these texts? Other questions: Evaluate Green's assertions about theory and practice in the text. What do these distinctions mean for "women's medicine"? How does The Trotula fit into our questions about "science writer"?

Oct. 21 Trotula, Cosmetics and Materia medica, pp. 113-64. What do cosmetics have to do with the other texts in the Trotula? What do cosmetics have to do with medicine? Focus on differences/ similarities between Hildegard and Trota. In-class debate: Is Trotula "literature"? Look up "literature" in the OED

Summary paper on Trotula due
Oct. 26 Moving to the modern, beginning with a film. Cavendish, Paper Bodies, intro and chronology (pp 9-37), and a selection of her poetry, pp. 252-63. Start reading The Blazing World--it is pretty long. James Fitzmaurice of Northern Arizona University has an up-to-date bibliography of Cavendish available on-line: http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~jbf/CavBiblio.html

Oct. 28 Cavendish, The Blazing World, pp 151-251.

Nov. 2 Cavendish, Blazing World concluded, and Aphra Behn's preface, pp 314-27: women and science. Remember the four "modes" for thinking about Cavendish: she's secular, she's interested in hybrids, she uses experimental forms, and she's encyclopedic. Note too: what's the place of spirits in Cavendish's work? What's the place of theatre?

Nov. 4 Cavendish conclusion with an in-class debate: How distant are our scientific debates from Cavendish's? Look up the birth and death dates for all of the following, a learn a little more about the one you chose in class: Isaac Newton, Daniel Sennert, Sir Henry Saville, John Wallis, Thomas Hobbes, George Starkey, Robert Boyle, Humphry Davy, John Dee, Edward Kelly, Rene Descartes, Jan Baptista van Helmont, Galileo Galilei, Kenelm Digby, Marin Mersenne, Laura Bassi, Lucresia Cornaro Piscopia, Maria Agnesi, Caroline Herschel, Pierre Gassendi

Summary paper on Cavendish due
Nov. 9 Marcet, preface and conversations 1,2, and 3: the dialogue form, charts, and domesticity
See also Margaret Alic, "The Popularisation and Professionalisation of Science," Chapter 12 of Hypatia's Heritage (London: The Woman's Press Ltd., 1986 rpt 2001), 174-190.

Nov. 11 Annotated bibliography and thesis question due Marcet, conversations 4 and 5: heat and electricity
See also Greg Myers, "Fictionality, Demonstration, and a Forum for Popular Science," Natural Eloquence: Women Reinscribe Science, eds. Barbara T. Gates and Ann B. Shteir (Madison: UWisconsin Press, 1997), 43-60

Nov. 16 Marcet, conversations 6, 7, and 8: the "elements" and their reactions
Things to think about:

the dialogue form: where have we seen it before? What is its effect on the reader? How does it situate the narrator?

How is character established? How do you characterize our three conversationalists?

What is the role of metaphor in this book?

How does this text mark emotion?

How does this text handle unclarity and unsureness?

When does this text mention "beauty"?

What is the role of the footnotes?

Nov. 18*Marcet, conversations 9 and 10: diamonds and the purpose of science

Summary paper on Marcet due
You can read my "response paper" on Marcet here
Nov. 23 presentations : you'll be evaluating presentations on three main areas

Interaction with class: connection to audience, facility with questions and answers, audibility, enthusiasm

Organization, preparation: coherence, completeness, smooth presentation; handouts, visual aid; reinforcing main points; neither excessively general nor excessively detailed.

Creativity, ingenuity: stimulates class's interest; variety of approaches.

Happy Thanksgiving

Nov. 30 presentations cont.

Dec. 2 presentations concluded
Term paper due

(Back to top of page)

Readings on feminist science

Helen E Longino, "Can There Be A Feminist Science?," Women, Science, and Technology (Routledge, 2001), 216-222 (also in Tuana)

Helen E Longino, "Subjects, Power, and Knowledge: Descriptions and Prescription in Feminist Philosophies of Science," The Gender of Science (Prentice-Hall, 2002), 310-21

Donna Haraway, "Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective," The Gender of Science (Prentice-Hall, 2002), 361-71 (vision, bodies)

Naomi Scheman, "Though This Be Method, Yet There is Madness In It: Paranoia and Liberal Epistemology," The Gender of Science (Prentice-Hall, 2002), 371-91

Londa Scheibinger has written extensively on women and botany in 18th and 19th century western letters.

Secondary readings on Hildegard of Bingen

Jan S. Emerson, "A Poetry of Science: Relating Body and Soul in the Scivias," Hildegard of Bingen: A Book of Essays (Garland 1998), 77-102.

Marcia Kathleen Chamberlain, "Hildegard of Bingen's Causes and Cures: A Radical Feminist Response to the Doctor-Cook Binary," Hildegard of Bingen: A Book of Essays (Garland 1998), 53-73

Kenneth F. Kitchell and Irven M. Resnick, "Hildegard as a Medieval 'Zoologist': The Animals of the Physica," Hildegard of Bingen: A Book of Essays (Garland 1998), 25-52

Secondary readings on Margaret Cavendish

Sarah Hutton, "Science and Satire: The Lucianic Voice of Margaret Cavendish's Description of a New World Called The Blazing World," Authorial Conquests (FDU 2003), 161-78.

Article on Cavendish and cyber theory: http://www.shu.ac.uk/emls/si-14/wallspir.html; available from UO library by finding title "Early Modern Literary Studies," going to website, and clicking on volume 14

Secondary reading on Jane Marcet

Greg Myers, "Fictionality, Demonstration, and a Forum for Popular Science," Natural Eloquence: Women Reinscribe Science (Wisconsin 1997), 43-59

M. Susan Lindee, "The American Career of Jane Marcet's Conversations on Chemistry," Isis 82 (1991): 8-23

Back to top of page | Back to Bishop Home Page | This page created by Louise M. Bishop | Last updated 23 November 2004

A+ = 4.3	B+ = 3.3	C+ = 2.3	D+ = 1.3
A = 4.0	B = 3.0	C = 2.0	D = 1.0
A- = 3.7	B- = 2.7	C- = 1.7	D- = 0.7

Sept. 28 Honors College colloquia and the goals for this class; primary issues and methodology; what's at stake in such an analysis	Sept. 30 In-class film, VT 06065 (available at the Knight Library); two articles by Evelyn Fox Keller: "Gender and Science: An Update," Women, Science, and Technology (Routledge 2001),132-42; Evelyn Fox Keller, "A World of Difference," The Gender of Science (Prentice-Hall, 2002), 125-35 See this page for a brief article on Evelyn Fox Keller; here's a summary of our first week's readings
Oct. 5 Thanks for your "word" papers! Hildegard and medieval science: read the intro to our text and pp 7-30, 37-8, 71-81,and Emerson essay (in Bishop box in HC library, as are all other essays). The relationship between theology and science: medieval philosophy. Check out the good web bibliography by Dorothy Disse at http://home.infionline.net/~ddisse/hildegar.html	Oct. 7 Hildegard, pp 93-105 (from Causes and Cures), and Chamberlain essay. Feminism and science. –Do Fox Keller's ideas about good science "diverging from the norm" help us in reading Hildegard? –What is Hildegard's idea of knowledge? –How does reading Hildegard disrupt our sense of science? –How does Hildegard use metaphor? –Does Hildegard engage your sympathy for the Middle Ages? See my little "medieval science" site here. And here's what I think are this week's big topics: How important is the study of language for understanding pre-modern and modern science? What are the implications of such study? What are the connections between ethics and science for pre-modern and modern readers?
Oct. 12 Hildegard, pp. 106-127 and Kitchell-Resnick essay. Classification and close reading. In-class debate: Is Hildegard a "science writer"? Answer: depends on the definition of "science": is it "explanation"? "reproducibility"? How about the "contemplation of elastic horizon"? Its tie to "knowledge" shows us that, following Fox Keller, we produce knowledge, even knowledge about data and that which comes from observation, within linguistic (metaphor) and institutional (university) parameters.	Summary paper on Hildegard due Oct. 14 Trotula read the intro (including the notes, in the back of the book), esp. pp 1-63 (pp. 52-60 are rather technical and you can skip them); think about Hildegard and Trotula's near-contemporaneity: what factors most condition their differences? Do these include treatment? Medicines? Attitudes?
Oct. 19 Trotula, Conditions and Treatments, pp. 65-112 What patterns, if any, do you see emerging in these texts? Other questions: Evaluate Green's assertions about theory and practice in the text. What do these distinctions mean for "women's medicine"? How does The Trotula fit into our questions about "science writer"?	Oct. 21 Trotula, Cosmetics and Materia medica, pp. 113-64. What do cosmetics have to do with the other texts in the Trotula? What do cosmetics have to do with medicine? Focus on differences/ similarities between Hildegard and Trota. In-class debate: Is Trotula "literature"? Look up "literature" in the OED
Summary paper on Trotula due Oct. 26 Moving to the modern, beginning with a film. Cavendish, Paper Bodies, intro and chronology (pp 9-37), and a selection of her poetry, pp. 252-63. Start reading The Blazing World--it is pretty long. James Fitzmaurice of Northern Arizona University has an up-to-date bibliography of Cavendish available on-line: http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~jbf/CavBiblio.html	Oct. 28 Cavendish, The Blazing World, pp 151-251.
Nov. 2 Cavendish, Blazing World concluded, and Aphra Behn's preface, pp 314-27: women and science. Remember the four "modes" for thinking about Cavendish: she's secular, she's interested in hybrids, she uses experimental forms, and she's encyclopedic. Note too: what's the place of spirits in Cavendish's work? What's the place of theatre?	Nov. 4 Cavendish conclusion with an in-class debate: How distant are our scientific debates from Cavendish's? Look up the birth and death dates for all of the following, a learn a little more about the one you chose in class: Isaac Newton, Daniel Sennert, Sir Henry Saville, John Wallis, Thomas Hobbes, George Starkey, Robert Boyle, Humphry Davy, John Dee, Edward Kelly, Rene Descartes, Jan Baptista van Helmont, Galileo Galilei, Kenelm Digby, Marin Mersenne, Laura Bassi, Lucresia Cornaro Piscopia, Maria Agnesi, Caroline Herschel, Pierre Gassendi
Summary paper on Cavendish due Nov. 9 Marcet, preface and conversations 1,2, and 3: the dialogue form, charts, and domesticity See also Margaret Alic, "The Popularisation and Professionalisation of Science," Chapter 12 of Hypatia's Heritage (London: The Woman's Press Ltd., 1986 rpt 2001), 174-190.	Nov. 11 Annotated bibliography and thesis question due Marcet, conversations 4 and 5: heat and electricity See also Greg Myers, "Fictionality, Demonstration, and a Forum for Popular Science," Natural Eloquence: Women Reinscribe Science, eds. Barbara T. Gates and Ann B. Shteir (Madison: UWisconsin Press, 1997), 43-60
Nov. 16 Marcet, conversations 6, 7, and 8: the "elements" and their reactions Things to think about: the dialogue form: where have we seen it before? What is its effect on the reader? How does it situate the narrator? How is character established? How do you characterize our three conversationalists? What is the role of metaphor in this book? How does this text mark emotion? How does this text handle unclarity and unsureness? When does this text mention "beauty"? What is the role of the footnotes?	Nov. 18*Marcet, conversations 9 and 10: diamonds and the purpose of science
Summary paper on Marcet due You can read my "response paper" on Marcet here Nov. 23 presentations : you'll be evaluating presentations on three main areas Interaction with class: connection to audience, facility with questions and answers, audibility, enthusiasm Organization, preparation: coherence, completeness, smooth presentation; handouts, visual aid; reinforcing main points; neither excessively general nor excessively detailed. Creativity, ingenuity: stimulates class's interest; variety of approaches.	Happy Thanksgiving
Nov. 30 presentations cont.	Dec. 2 presentations concluded Term paper due