Wikipedia:Peer review/Maria: or, The Wrongs of Woman/archive1

Maria: or, The Wrongs of Woman[edit]

This article is about a novel by Mary Wollstonecraft. I would eventually like to bring it to FA, so please critique accordingly. Awadewit | talk 07:59, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Overall this article is more persuasive than the one immediately below in this list. I'm still not quite satisfied by the effort to distinguish between contemporary reception and modern criticism; this distinction must be maintained. There are also places where, grammatically, the writing could use a little help - for example with commas before "and" in compound sentences, and for that matter, reducing the use of the word "and". :) Shalom ^Hello 05:28, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification: Are you saying that you cannot tell in both reception sections what material is contemporary with Wollstonecraft and what material is modern? (The "and's" are probably a result of trying to jam too much into one sentence - I'll look for those.) Awadewit | talk 05:34, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by BillC[edit]

A great article, though I have to confess to not having heard of this book. Some thoughts below:

a one-sentence plot summary in the lead might be useful. "The novel deals with the troubled life of its protagonist through a series of hardships", or such.

New version: Focusing on the social rather than the individual "wrongs of woman", Wollstonecraft's philosophical and gothic novel uses the story of a woman imprisoned by her husband in an insane asylum to criticize the patriarchal institution of marriage and the legal system that protected it. - Thanks for reminding me of this - I tend to de-emphasize plot in articles I edit. Awadewit | talk 15:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"coupled with the publication of Godwin's scandalous Memoirs of Wollstonecraft" I was momentarily confused by this, since I had slipped past the fact that Godwin was Mary's husband. Perhaps: "coupled with the publication of Memoirs, Godwin's scandalous biography of Wollstonecraft", but it's a minor point.

New version: Such themes, coupled with the publication of Godwin's scandalous Memoirs of his relationship with Wollstonecraft, made the novel unpopular at the time. Awadewit | talk 15:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Scholars most often read the The Wrongs of Woman as a fictionalized popularization". Does this mean "scholars often interpret"?

Yes. My "English-professor-speak" is coming through. New version of last paragraph: Twentieth-century feminist critics have embraced the novel, integrating it into the history of the novel and of feminist discourse. It is therefore most often viewed as a fictionalized popularization of the Rights of Woman, as an extension of Wollstonecraft's feminist arguments in Rights of Woman, and as a pseudo-autobiography. Awadewit | talk 15:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Wollstonecraft struggled to write The Wrongs of Woman; while she dashed off A Vindication of the Rights of Men". Perhaps some reordering here, as the semicolon is not immediately obvious, it perhaps appearing that Wollstonecraft was struggling to write The Wrongs of Woman while simultaneously writing A Vindication of the Rights of Men.

Perhaps something like:

Wollstonecraft struggled to write The Wrongs of Woman: she dashed off A Vindication of the Rights of Men (1790), her reply to Edmund Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France in under a month and A Vindication of the Rights of Woman in six weeks, but she was to work on The Wrongs of Woman for over a year.

New version: Wollstonecraft struggled to write The Wrongs of Woman for over a year; in contrast, she had dashed off A Vindication of the Rights of Men (1790), her reply to Edmund Burke's Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790), in under a month and A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792) in six weeks. - For some reason, this is a difficult sentence to write. I think that it is because the titles are so long. Awadewit | talk 15:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The entry into "Wollstonecraft died in 1797" is a little abrupt and is unexpected. Maybe there is a better way of leading the reader into this from the previous section.

I have made a new paragraph there and started it: The manuscript of The Wrongs of Woman was still incomplete at Wollstonecraft's death in 1797. Awadewit | talk 15:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

— BillC ^talk 10:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - this kind of help is greatly appreciated. I'm not surprised that you haven't heard of the novel, by the way. It is usually only found in university classrooms and other such esoteric locations. :) Awadewit | talk 15:57, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]