“Is There a Feminine Genius?” by Julia Kristeva: Summary and Critique

Introduction: “Is There a Feminine Genius?” by Julia Kristeva

“Is There a Feminine Genius?” by Julia Kristeva was first published in 1975 as part of the collection “New French Feminisms: An Anthology.” This essay holds significant importance in both literature and literary theory as it challenges traditional notions of genius and authorship, which were historically dominated by male figures. Kristeva explores the possibility of a distinctly feminine form of genius, rooted in the unique experiences and perspectives of women. Her work encourages a re-evaluation of literary canons and a deeper appreciation for the contributions of women writers. In literary theory, Kristeva’s essay has been influential in feminist and psychoanalytic approaches, prompting discussions on the relationship between language, gender, and subjectivity.

Summary of “Is There a Feminine Genius?” by Julia Kristeva

• Summary of “Is There a Feminine Genius?” by Julia Kristeva
• Julia Kristeva’s article “Is There a Feminine Genius?” explores the concept of “feminine genius” through the lives and works of three influential twentieth-century women—Hannah Arendt, Melanie Klein, and Colette. Kristeva reflects on how these women “surpassed themselves in their respective fields” (Kristeva, 494), offering inspiration for others to achieve similar self-transcendence. The term “genius,” which Kristeva provocatively applies to these women, serves as a guiding principle for understanding their unique contributions to intellectual life (Kristeva, 494).
• Critique of Mass Feminism
  Kristeva critiques mass feminism for its totalizing ambitions, which she argues often overlook the uniqueness of the individual (Kristeva, 495). She contrasts this with her approach, which focuses on the potential for individual freedom and creativity. According to Kristeva, feminism’s historical focus on the collective liberation of women has sometimes led to a neglect of the individual’s unique path. She emphasizes that the “highest realization of human rights, and of women’s rights, is…the flourishing of the individual in his or her uniqueness” (Kristeva, 494). For Kristeva, this focus on individual uniqueness is crucial in recognizing the true essence of genius.
• Simone de Beauvoir’s Influence
  Simone de Beauvoir’s seminal work “The Second Sex” significantly influences Kristeva’s thought, particularly in its exploration of the conflict between a woman’s imposed status as the Other and her potential for self-realization (Kristeva, 495-496). However, Kristeva critiques Beauvoir for not fully exploring the individual potential of women, arguing that Beauvoir’s focus on equality overshadowed the importance of difference (Kristeva, 496). Kristeva notes that by setting aside the question of difference, Beauvoir limited the existentialist agenda she had announced—one that could have explored “the possibilities of freedom of each one of them as a unique human being” (Kristeva, 496).
• Common Characteristics of Arendt, Klein, and Colette
  Kristeva identifies several common characteristics among Arendt, Klein, and Colette that exemplify the concept of “feminine genius.”
• Object Relations: Each of these women’s works demonstrates a deep connection to others and to the world. Arendt emphasized the importance of political relationships and the uniqueness of individuals within a “web of human relationships” (Kristeva, 498). Klein revolutionized psychoanalysis by focusing on the psyche’s relationship with external objects from the very beginning of life (Kristeva, 498-499). Colette’s literary work celebrated the sensual and the sensory, cultivating a connection to the world that transcends mere individualism (Kristeva, 499). Kristeva suggests that this emphasis on relationships and connections may be a “constant of feminine psychosexuality” (Kristeva, 499).
• Life and Thought as One: For all three women, life and thought were inseparable. Arendt’s political philosophy was deeply intertwined with her lived experience, as she fought against totalitarianism and for the value of life with meaning (Kristeva, 500). Klein’s psychoanalytic practice aimed to preserve and enhance the capacity for thought in her patients, particularly children (Kristeva, 500). Colette’s writing, deeply embedded in the sensory world, was an expression of life itself—her prose becoming a living embodiment of her thought (Kristeva, 500-501). Kristeva highlights how, for these women, “life is thought and thought is life” (Kristeva, 501).
• Temporality of Rebirth: A key theme in Kristeva’s analysis is the concept of rebirth and renewal, which she sees as central to the work of Arendt, Klein, and Colette. Arendt’s philosophical reflections on freedom are grounded in the idea of new beginnings, which she associates with the human capacity for birth and renewal (Kristeva, 501). Klein’s psychoanalytic work, especially with children, focused on the potential for psychic rebirth through therapy (Kristeva, 502). Colette, who celebrated birth and creation in her writing, embraced the idea of continuous metamorphosis, both in her life and in her literary work (Kristeva, 502). Kristeva notes that this emphasis on renewal may resonate with “female psychosexuality” and its complex trajectory of changes (Kristeva, 503).
• Beyond Sexual Difference
  Kristeva argues that the creativity demonstrated by these three women transcends traditional gender binaries, suggesting a more fluid understanding of sexual identity and individuality. She posits that true genius, whether feminine or otherwise, lies in the ability to challenge and redefine one’s sociohistorical identity (Kristeva, 503-504). This transcendent creativity pushes beyond the conventional binary sexual system, highlighting the importance of psychical bisexuality, which Kristeva believes is a fact for both sexes, albeit with different dominant factors in each individual (Kristeva, 503-504).
• Legacy of Arendt, Klein, and Colette
  Kristeva concludes by asserting that the legacy of Arendt, Klein, and Colette is their ability to challenge societal norms and redefine individuality, particularly through their experiences as women. Their pioneering work not only reshaped their respective fields but also contributed to a broader understanding of the incommensurability of the individual—an understanding rooted in sexual experience but realized through the courage to question thought, language, and identity (Kristeva, 504). For Kristeva, this is the essence of genius: the capacity to transcend and redefine the sociohistorical conditions of one’s identity, a legacy left by Arendt, Klein, and Colette.

Literary Terms in “Is There a Feminine Genius?” by Julia Kristeva

Term/Concept	Definition
Feminine Genius	A term used by Kristeva to describe the unique creative and intellectual contributions of women like Arendt, Klein, and Colette, who transcend traditional gender norms.
Ecceitas	A concept borrowed from Duns Scotus, referring to the unique individuality of a person, which distinguishes them from others and elevates them beyond ordinariness.
Bifacial Oedipus Complex	Kristeva’s psychoanalytic theory suggesting that women experience a stronger form of bisexuality, characterized by identification with both the mother and father figures.
Mental Hermaphroditism	A term used to describe the blending of male and female qualities in intellectual and creative expression, allowing for a more complete and unique self-realization.
Object Relations	A psychoanalytic concept, particularly developed by Melanie Klein, that emphasizes the importance of relationships with others in the development of the self.
Psychical Bisexuality	The idea that both men and women possess psychological traits of both sexes, with varying dominance, influencing their identities and creative expressions.
Poetic Regions of Thought	Kristeva’s term describing a feminine preference for a type of thinking that is rooted in sensory experience and instinct, as opposed to abstract, logical thought.
Temporality of Rebirth	A concept emphasizing the cyclical nature of time and renewal, particularly in feminine experience, as opposed to the linear progression towards death.
Scotist Ideal	A reference to Duns Scotus’s philosophy that emphasizes individual uniqueness (ecceitas) and the flourishing of the individual as a fundamental human right.

Contribution of “Is There a Feminine Genius?” by Julia Kristeva to Literary Theory

Examples of Critiques Through “Is There a Feminine Genius?” by Julia Kristeva

Literary Work	Author	Critique through Kristeva’s Lens
The Second Sex	Simone de Beauvoir	While Beauvoir champions women’s liberation and autonomy, her focus on the collective “feminine condition” overshadows the individual’s unique potential and freedom. Her work could be seen as neglecting the ‘object relation’ in its emphasis on societal structures over individual subjectivity.
Political Philosophy	Hannah Arendt	Arendt’s emphasis on the ‘web of human relationships’ and the individual’s identity being revealed through interaction with others strongly aligns with Kristeva’s idea of the ‘object relation.’ Her work could be seen as a prime example of how the feminine genius manifests in valuing interconnectedness and recognizing the self through the other.
Psychoanalytic Theory	Melanie Klein	Klein’s postulation of an inherent ‘self’ in the infant capable of relating to the ‘object’ from the very beginning resonates with Kristeva’s view. Her work could be seen as highlighting the feminine genius’s understanding of the primal importance of connection and relationship in the formation of the subject.
Literary Works	Colette	Colette’s transcendence of romantic love and her finding solace and fulfillment in friendships and the act of writing could be seen as an example of the feminine genius’s ability to navigate and redefine the ‘object relation.’ Her work could be interpreted as demonstrating a shift from traditional romantic love towards a broader, more fulfilling connection with the world and the self.

Criticism Against “Is There a Feminine Genius?” by Julia Kristeva

• Ambiguity in Defining Feminine Genius:
  • Critics argue that Kristeva’s concept of “feminine genius” is vague and lacks a clear definition, making it difficult to apply or understand in concrete terms. The term’s broad and inclusive nature may dilute its analytical power.
• Overemphasis on Psychosexuality:
  • Kristeva’s focus on psychosexual theories, particularly the bifacial Oedipus complex and psychical bisexuality, has been criticized for reinforcing psychoanalytic determinism and potentially reducing women’s experiences to psychological frameworks.
• Potential Essentialism:
  • Some scholars criticize Kristeva for potentially falling into essentialism by emphasizing inherent differences between male and female creativity, which could inadvertently reinforce traditional gender binaries rather than deconstruct them.
• Lack of Engagement with Intersectionality:
  • The article has been criticized for its lack of attention to intersectionality. Kristeva focuses primarily on gender, without adequately addressing how race, class, and other social categories intersect with the concept of genius and creativity.
• Elitist Perspective:
  • Kristeva’s focus on prominent intellectuals like Arendt, Klein, and Colette may be seen as elitist, potentially excluding the experiences and contributions of less recognized or marginalized women.
• Insufficient Critique of the Canon:
  • Some critics argue that while Kristeva challenges traditional notions of genius, she does not go far enough in questioning the broader literary and intellectual canon that continues to marginalize women’s voices.
• Complex and Dense Writing Style:
  • Kristeva’s writing style is often criticized for being overly complex and dense, which may make her arguments less accessible to a broader audience, limiting the impact of her ideas.
• Possible Contradictions in Feminist Stance:
  • Kristeva’s critique of mass feminism, combined with her emphasis on individual genius, has been seen by some as contradictory, potentially undermining collective feminist efforts while advocating for a focus on individual achievement.

Suggested Readings: “Is There a Feminine Genius?” by Julia Kristeva

• Kristeva, Julia. The Feminine Genius: Hannah Arendt, Melanie Klein, and Colette. Translated by Ross Guberman, Columbia University Press, 2001.
• Kristeva, Julia. “Is There a Feminine Genius?” Critical Inquiry, vol. 30, no. 3, 2004, pp. 493–504. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.1086/421159. Accessed 9 Aug. 2024.
• Jefferson, Ann. “Julia Kristeva and Female Genius.” Genius in France: An Idea and Its Uses, Princeton University Press, 2015, pp. 212–18. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1287kkg.23. Accessed 9 Aug. 2024.
• Linda M. G. Zerilli. “A Process without a Subject: Simone de Beauvoir and Julia Kristeva on Maternity.” Signs, vol. 18, no. 1, 1992, pp. 111–35. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/3174729. Accessed 9 Aug. 2024.
• Schippers, Birgit. “Kristeva and Feminism: A Critical Encounter.” Julia Kristeva and Feminist Thought, Edinburgh University Press, 2011, pp. 21–54. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt1r2d38.6. Accessed 9 Aug. 2024.
• Chléirchín, Caitríona Ní. “Abjection and Disorderly Elements of Corporeal Existence in the Irish-Language Poetry of Nuala Ní Dhomhnaill and Biddy Jenkinson.” Proceedings of the Harvard Celtic Colloquium, vol. 30, 2010, pp. 157–74. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41219659. Accessed 9 Aug. 2024.

Quotations with Explanation from “Is There a Feminine Genius?” by Julia Kristeva

Quotation	Explanation
“The provocative hyperbole of the term genius was the guiding idea that helped me to understand how these three twentieth-century women were able to surpass themselves in their respective fields.”	Kristeva uses the term “genius” provocatively to highlight how Hannah Arendt, Melanie Klein, and Colette transcended traditional gender roles and excelled in male-dominated fields. The term is meant to challenge conventional notions of genius.
“The highest realization of human rights, and of women’s rights, is none other than the Scotist ideal…to the flourishing of the individual in his or her uniqueness.”	Kristeva emphasizes the importance of individual uniqueness (ecceitas), drawing on Duns Scotus’s philosophy. She argues that true human and women’s rights are realized in the recognition and nurturing of each person’s unique qualities and potential.
“To appeal to the genius of each individual is not to underestimate the weight of History…but to attempt to free the feminine condition, and more generally the human condition.”	This quotation underscores Kristeva’s argument that individual genius can transcend historical and societal constraints. She advocates for the liberation of both women and humanity by focusing on the creative potential of individuals.
“A woman has a greater inclination than a man to seek and to nurture, in the context of her attachments, that which permits the flourishing of what is unique in her.”	Kristeva suggests that women’s psychosexuality may lead them to prioritize relationships that foster their unique identities. This idea reflects her broader argument that women’s creativity is deeply connected to their relational and nurturing roles.
“By paying particular attention to sexual difference, my investigation of female genius has led me…to distance myself from the initial presupposition of a binary sexual system.”	Kristeva critiques the binary understanding of gender, proposing that creativity and genius transcend traditional gender categories. She emphasizes psychical bisexuality, suggesting that both sexes share traits that contribute to their unique genius.