this fact has often been neglected by those studying the traditions of
philosophy. Given the history of canon formation in Western philoso-
phy, the perspective most likely to be privileged is that of upper-class,
white males. Thus, to be fully aware of the impact of gender biases, it is
imperative that we re-read the canon with attention to the ways in which
philosophers' assumptions concerning gender are embedded within their
theories.

This new series, Re-Reading the Canon, is designed to foster this process
of reevaluation. Each volume will offer feminist analyses of the theories
of a selected philosopher. Since feminist philosophy is not monolithic
in method or content, the essays are also selected to illustrate the variety
of perspectives within feminist criticism and highlight some of the
controversies within feminist scholarship.

In this series, feminist lenses will be focused on the canonical texts of
Western philosophy, both those authors who have been part of the
traditional canon, as well as those philosophers whose writings have
more recently gained attention within the philosophical community. A
glance at the list of volumes in the series will reveal an immediate gender
bias of the canon: Arendt, Aristotle, de Beauvoir, Derrida, Descartes,
Foucault, Hegel, Hume, Kant, Locke, Marx, Mill, Nietzsche, Plato,
Rousseau, Wittgenstein, Wollstonecraft. There are all too few women
included, and those few who do appear have been added only recently.
In creating this series, it is not my intention to reify the current canon
of philosophical thought. What is and is not included within the canon
during a particular historical period is a result of many factors. Although
no canonization of texts will include all philosophers, no canonization
of texts that exclude all but a few women can offer an accurate
representation of the history of the discipline as women have been
philosophers since the ancient period. ²

I share with many feminist philosophers and other philosophers
writing from the margins of philosophy the concern that the current
canonization of philosophy be transformed. Although I do not accept
the position that the current canon has been formed exclusively by
power relations, I do believe that this canon represents only a selective
history of the tradition. I share the view of Michael Béruté that "canons
are at once the location, the index, and the record of the struggle for
cultural representation; like any other hegemonic formation, they must
be continually reproduced anew and are continually contested." ³

The process of canon transformation will require the recovery of "lost"

-xii-