130 Feminist Review

through her research not only chal• multifarious world we all inhabit lenges the conclusions reached by now. academics like Stonequist (1937) and his followers that mixed-race Yasmin Alibhai-Brown individuals were marginal, ill• adjusted people, but goes on to show Reference that hi-racialism and bi-culturalism made them 'strong people with STONEQUJST, E. v. (1937) The Marginal diverse and positive perspectives on Man: A Study in Personality and Cul• ture Conflict New York: Russell & life', better able to function in the Russell.

Finding Our Way: parochialism, primitivism, and ir• Rethinking Ecofeminist rationalism that will ultimately Politics mystify and support the status quo rather than transcend it'. Biehl's merciless attack on Black Rose Books: Montreal/New York ecofeminist theory begins with an 1993 expose of the lack of theoretical rig• ISBN 0 921689 78 0£11.99 Pbk our in key ecofeminist texts. Facts, ISBN 0 921689 79 0£23.00 Hbk she alleges, are valued if they sup• port the ecofeminist world-view, dis• Nowhere in the world of contempor• regarded if they do not. In her view, ary theory is there richer ground for far from being a radical force for leg-pulling than the realm of eco• social change, has feminist writing. For some people to largely become an exercise in per• be Green is to be truly green and if sonal transformation. Biehl also you want to save the world through highlights the irony of a discourse espousing the ecofeminist line then which while focusing on religion as a you better get used to being accused locus of patriarchal power seems to of political naivety. Ever since Mary be creating 'a religion in its own Daly acknowledged the help of a right' breeding its own hierarchy of spider in the writing of her vast shamanesses and priestesses. Wickedary I have had a problem Biehl draws on anthropological with the web of ideas that has spun and archaeological research to back from ecofeminism. Is she serious? is up her criticisms of ecofeminist the question uppermost in my mind writing. In response to those eco• when reading anything which falls feminist writers who suggest that into the ecofeminist canon. Biehl's worship of a goddess in some way work is more respectful in that it facilitates a desired non-patriarchal does assume the seriousness of ecofe• society, Biehl points to some obvious minist theory but respect does not historical exceptions and then asks result in a gentle critique. There are the obvious questions. Did the wor• no cheap jokes or jibes here but ship of a goddess orchestrate early Biehl's view is unambiguous. Eco• social relations? Or did the social feminists have got it wrong. relations in the cultures themselves Biehl analyses the works of a produce the goddess? This line of range of feminist writers and theor• questioning leads to a key issue-the ists which are, for the purposes of role of myth. Ecofeminists, Biehl ar• this book, lumped together under the gues, appear to believe that umbrella title of ecofeminists. Char• swapping from god to goddess, in lotte Spretnak, Carolyn Merchant effect changing the content of myths and Starhawk are three of those from 'bad ones' to 'good ones' would whose work, Biehl concludes, takes change social reality. us along a path 'toward a narrow Many readers would see this as

Palgrave Macmillan Journals is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve, and extend access to Feminist Review. ® www.jstor.org Reviews 131 the critical point in Biehl's analysis address is the vast debate around the and hope for more exploration of the issue ofjust where the boundaries lie cultural role of myth. They will be between childhood and adulthood disappointed. Biehl is clearly not and just what it means to be a 'fuller interested in taking the poststruc• more differentiated being'. turalist route via Barthes, preferring In fact, the theory of dialectical instead to organize her criticism of naturalism seems little more than ecofeminist theory from the lane greenspeak for personal growth. marked 'social '. Biehl uses There is an unnerving similarity be• 's 'dialectical natu• tween Biehl's enthusiastic espousal ralism' as an alternative model for ofBookchin's theory and the work of defining nature and argues that this ecofeminist writers. Both share a theoretical concept allows for the fervent belief in one key set of ideas possibility of what all eco-theorists and while it is often satisfying to be appear to want-a different and less taken in an obvious direction by an damaging relationship between author with a set destination in humanity and the natural world. mind, there is a lot to be said for the Unfortunately, from the mo• theory flirt. An author who has not ment at which she names her pre• quite settled on a complete expla• ferred way of theorizing the world nation for everything but who was Biehl's work loses its critical edge. In willing to engage with a range of reproducing Bookchin's arguments ideas may have produced a more explanation comes perilously close to satisfying critique of ecofeminist exultation. Dialectical naturalism, politics. she explains, is an holistic approach To be fair, Biehl's project is to which looks at the world as a whole rethink rather than just demolish from a developmental perspective. It ecofeminism and this she does. Her is a theory of progress which posits a ultimate desire is clearly stated: to necessary passage from a state of see the elimination of capitalism and 'potentiality' to that of full develop• the nation-state and the restructur• ment which, in the case of individ• ing of society into decentralized, co• uals allows for the ultimate desti• operative communities. For Biehl nation of self-actualization. One the problem with ecofeminists is not example given is the development of what they aim to do but the way that the individual from a state of child• they do it. hood to a 'fuller more differentiated being'. What this example does not Shelagh Young

Getting Smart: Feminist odds with postmodernism. The line Research and Pedagogy of argument inspired by post• With/In the Postmodern modernism of 'gender as a social construction', which has proved Patti Lather fruitful in other areas of women's Routledge: New York/London 1991 studies, has scarcely produced any ISBN0415 903777£35.00 Hbk research on gender and educational issues (ten Dam and Volman, 1991). Research on gender inequality in The few exceptions concern small• education and postmodernism has scale research projects (e.g. Davies, never really clicked. The emphasis 1989). Patti Lather's Getting Smart on improvement and action in edu• qua theme really gets to the heart of cational research and the orien• the matter. Lather tries to make a tation of research on the individual connexion between feminism, post• learning and development processes modernism and critical educational of teachers and pupils appear to be at theory and considers the conse-