14. In "Toward a Feminist Narratology," Lanser articulates her goal to be the first to "begin the movement toward a feminist narratology." Lanser, p. 341.
15. Gibson 102.
16. See Teresa de Lauretis, ed., Feminist Studies/Critical Studies (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986), 14.
17. Views, like McHale's, on a male postmodern mimesis see it as "alive and well," but do not seem to broach the topic of its provisionality. McHale agrees that postmodern fictions may not "reflect objective" realities, "but they do faithfully reflect our culture's ontological landscape." If anything, postmodern mimesis, in male terms, far from recognising its partiality, is defined in terms of excess. McHale claims that not only does postmodern fiction posit a mimetic relation between itself (the fictional) and the real, but, it also involves a "double-decker" structure. "Literary texts project at least one internal field of reference... [and] they inevitably refer...to an external field of reference: the objective world." Even when postmodern fictions are "illusion-breaking," and insist upon foregrounding their "ontological structure," they are still mimetic according to McHale. Postmodern fictions become more real through the act of reading: readers experience it "as the moment of wakening from the dream into reality," and as an "estrangement from objective reality." This separation from reality enables postmodern fiction to be, paradoxically, more realistic and more mimetic. Brian McHale, Postmodernist Fiction (London: Routledge, 1987), 55, 29, 221.
18. Braidotti, Nomadic Subjects, 6. 19. Ibid, p. 7.
20. Braidotti, Patterns of Dissonance, 240.
21. Braidotti, Nomadic Subjects, 7.
22. Emily Phol-Weary and Youngman Choi, "A Novel Approach," Shift: Where Culture and Technology Collide [journal on line] (10.2, (2001), accessed 20 May 2004), available from Shift Magazine: http://www.shift.com/content/10.2/264/1.... Internet.
