/ dave / wrote:
>
>
> Of course capitalism already has a shell in the chamber, given that both
> Condoleezza and Hillary are likely to step into the forefront as
> presidential contenders in the near future.
>
> (That we are accustomed to identifying them both by their first names
> says something about the role of women in the process thusfar *and* the
> spectacle inherent in their ascent.)
I have often seen such lists as the following in books and articles of literary criticism: "Fielding, Jane Austen, Dickens, James." Or "Yeats, Pound, Marianne Moore, Auden." Also Bobby Burns but not (unless the intent is some kind of vulgarization) Bill Shakespeare or Tommy Eliot.
With LRS incidentally, it wasn't only the top leadership that was female; women held dominant leadership positions at every 'level' of the organization.
Carrol
>
> --
>
> / dave /