Social reproduction, struggle and the ecology of ‘women's work’ in world-literature

Abstract

Building on the insights of feminist scholars such as Maria Mies, Wilma Dunaway and Harriet Friedmann that ‘women's work’ in the realm of social reproduction, particularly in the (semi-)peripheries of the world-ecology, often draws heavily upon natural resources and is thus preponderantly affected by forms of resource depletion and environmental crisis including water scarcity, land degradation, pollution and toxification, this article argues for an approach to world-literary criticism that incorporates the insights of social reproduction feminism in order to interpret how literature of the capitalist world-ecology mediates social reproduction. I contend that world-literary criticism can help illuminate the socio-ecology of gendered forms of labour, by analysing how bodily dispositions, subjectivities and habituses corresponding to gendered divisions at household and systemic scales are mediated in specific literary aesthetics, and recuperating the utopian prospects of how texts imagine forms of struggle as arising from the contradictions immanent to capital's dependence on the unpaid work of both nature and social reproduction. In particular, reading novels by Kamala Markandaya, Ousmane Sembène and Latife Tekin, I explore three different world-literary depictions of types of environment-making labour that have been gendered as ‘women's work’ – foodgetting, water-carrying and waste-picking – in order to examine how novels imagine the terrain of social reproduction both as a site of appropriation, violence and crisis, and as the potential ground for organised resistance.

Tracking the monstrous gendered precarity of neoliberalisation through novels and films of 1980s England and contemporary Ireland

“…As Barker would have it, women's role here is spectral rather than embodied. Correcting that, she prefigures the call to shift ‘our focus from an overdetermination of waged struggles of the proletariat’ and instead recognise how waged battles are dependent on ‘the often gendered “woman's work” of “suturing” together’ (Deckard, 2022). Ironically, in cutting services and ‘privatizing the provision of basic needs’, neoliberalisation has restored ‘the centrality of the family-unit to the social production of labour – in classed ways’ (Drucker, 2011: 17).…”