Author's Response

Author's Response John Scarborough (bio) Initially, Flemming acknowledges the template of feminist approaches in the widely known studies by Joan Scott and Judith Butler, but perceptive readers will note that Flemming does not implant any modern paradigms of gender or sex as basic in her analysis (Medicine, pp. 22-25 with nn. 40-45). In fact, she carefully qualifies the use of such paradigms, writing, "This focus on the failure of the past to conform to the present is, however, maintained at the expense of the successes of self-conformity, the various ways the past has worked in its own terms, with its own orderings of its own concepts and categories" (Medicine, p. 13, citing Park and Nye's criticism of Laqueur). Moreover, "[it is] better . . . to look at what aspects of human existence, as it was then understood (italics Flemming), are implicated in this appeal [to nature], are thus made natural, and which remain outside it, are considered conventional, or otherwise non-natural in some way" (p. 17). Flemming demonstrates her sensitive response to modern blueprints proposed by students of gender by stating that ". . . societies have been (and still are) concerned, in different ways and to different degrees, with the categories of male and female, with what it is, what it means, to be a woman or a man . . . this inevitable but variable facet of social organization [is what] Scott designates, in its entirety, as gender, [and] this all-encompassing concept, as given further depth by Butler . . . will be adopted in the present study . . ." [but] "The Reference to Butler is not to suggest, after all, that the apparatus of gender will function in the Roman context as it does now . . ." (p. 24). [End Page 877] [Begin Page 879] Flemming does not pick and choose her sources on the theories of gender, any more than she selects only those ancient texts that suit such purposes: she carefully melds arguments from modern theory into a more inclusive context for understanding a Greek or Latin tract. As I wrote in my review, Medicine deserves many readings, and perhaps a slight revision of that single line will mollify Green and her colleagues, so that they do not become irritated at someone who has valued feminist scholarship for almost three decades: "one cannot label this volume as merely feminist by any definition." Eliminate the quotation marks, add a merely, and I think Green and I, and her 87 colleagues, can simply agree on the brilliance of Medicine and the Making of Roman Women. John Scarborough John Scarborough is Professor, History of Pharmacy and Medicine, and Classics and Ancient History at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, 777 Highland Avenue, 2515 Rennebohm Hall, Madison, WI 53705 (e-mail:jscarborough @pharmacy.wisc.edu). His forthcoming book on Hellenistic toxicology will be completed shortly, and he continues his pleasant labors with the Greek text of Dioscorides of Anazarbus. Copyright © 2004 The Johns Hopkins University Press

Aesthetics · Appeal · Art · Blueprint · Criticism · Epistemology · Literature · Natural (archaeology) · Political science · Psychoanalysis · Sociology · Visual arts · Feminist Theory and Gender Studies · Historical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes · History · Law · Medicine, History, and Philosophy · Philosophy · Psychology