No description available.

No description available.

In the chapters of my thesis, I explore how "soft" consciousness-raising novels of the first, second and third-waves of feminism practice underground feminism by covertly exposing women's socio-political issues outside of the confines of feminist rhetoric. In moving away from the negative connotations of political language, the authors enable the education of female audiences otherwise out of reach. Working from and extending on various theorists, I construct a theoretical model for what I term underground feminism. Running on the principal of conducting feminist activism without using feminist rhetoric, underground feminism challenges the notion that "subtle" feminism means weak feminism. In illustrating how underground feminism works in novels and in physical activism, I hope to encourage the recognition of the political utility of women's writings that do not fit the strict archetypes of feminist authorship. Analyzing the effectiveness of covert feminist conversion narratives, I discuss one soft consciousness-raising novel for each wave. The novels - Sarah Grand's The Heavenly Twins (1893), Dorothy Bryant's Ella Price's Journal (1972), and Helen Fielding's Bridget Jones's Diary (1996) - accused by scholars of employing weak feminist politics, are investigated as feminist literature that disidentifies with the feminist label with the possibility of facilitating a wide spread conversion process in "would be" feminists. After analyzing how the novels place women's issues at the center of discourse by discussing female education, women's voice, and narrative control, I consider how the underground feminism implicit in the texts extends to activism outside of literature. I also end by arguing that these novels enable a more intricate conversation about women's issues in which the voices of both self-identified and non-identified feminists are recognized.

Although two hundred years separate Jane Austen and Helen Fielding and, subsequently, also their portrayals of society, the similarities outweigh the differences. When juxtaposing Pride and Prejudice and Bridget Jones’s Diary in the light of feminism it is evident that both books provide clear examples of the prevailing situation of women in each time and place. The aspects of the study, which are especially important today, show both the development and some degree of stagnation of women’s rights and identities.

Though feminist scholars criticize Helen Fielding’s Bridget Jones series as they feel that Bridget’s diary minimizes her work, close analysis reveals that Bridget’s work is equally important to her as her relationships. The novels charts Bridget’s linear progression toward autonomy and creative freedom, and her work mistakes function as ironic commentary on the creative industries. Though she critiques the entertainment industry, she validates its accessibility to a variety of audiences, particularly through adaptations. Throughout the series, Bridget documents her own life into her diary, and, in the final two novels, adapts her past diaries for a new purpose. The diary form departs from Austen’s more distanced narrator as well as from the traditional scholarship on the diary, which dictates the diary as a way to work through trauma. Fielding alters the diary form, and through her use of interiority, creates a complex protagonist whose success does not make her inaccessible.