So I decided to take a look at the contents of the Women's Prize's Reclaim Her Name eBooks - and it just seems to get worse.
Here's George Eliot's introduction, which once again relies on the unnuanced idea that "she was forced to use a male pen name."

[THREAD]

There's a total disregard for each author's autonomy, and the entire argument is based on outdated ideas around male pseudonyms without a single acknowledgement of why each author decided to present as male. It's more than "women can't write books under their own names!"

George Eliot *CHOSE* to write as George Eliot, made an active decision to present as male in writing, and didn't want readers to "see the woman behind the pen name." In fact, many authors were forced or coerced into revealing their identities.

So even when pseudonyms were used, the author's were often subjected to gossip and intrusion, and were "outed". These authors *were* seen behind the pen name - and that was the problem because some of them had their identities revealed before they were ever ready.

And it gets worse! Here is George Sand's introduction - which refers to "subvert[ing] gender stereotypes" and yet still pushes on with the narrative that women *must!!* have been forced under a veil of pseudonymity.

"Rebellious clothing"? Hmmmm

It's impossible to explore the nuances in such a small paragraph, I get it, but George Sand was more than "rebellious clothing" in order to be "practical" and access spaces where women weren't allowed. Once again it feels very much as if a very basic narrative is being forced.

And this is a good place to mention @graceelavery's comment here, which also echoes thoughts I've been having.

Do read the rest of the thread too!

https://twitter.com/graceelavery/status/1293549331799257093?s=21 https://twitter.com/graceelavery/status/1293549331799257093

And let's take a look at the final biography I took a look at ... are you ready?

Of course the "first African-American to publish a biography" has been written off because "she always wrote with a male pseudonym." OF COURSE it's as simple as that.

And this is, ultimately, why I have an issue with the Reclaim Her Name campaign: because it's overly simplistic, lacks intersection, and relies on a single narrative that doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

In trying to "reclaim her name", this campaign ultimately erases the autonomy of the authors included and ignores how they chose to present themselves. It very much forces a single narrative.

THE END.