Critics from Joan DeJean to Marina Warner and Jack Zipes have lauded Charles Perrault's Apologie des femmes for its supposed defense of women against Nicolas Boileau's misogynous Satire X. Although Zipes wonders ‘[w]hether these works can be considered pro-women today,' this essay asks: can these works indeed be considered pro-women in the period in which they were written? Scholars studying the quarrel over Boileau’s Satire X tend to limit themselves to the response of Perrault, completely ignoring the more clearly pro-women reactions of writers and playwrights like Nicolas Pradon, Pierre Bellocq, Jean-François Regnard, Claude-Ignace Brugière de Barante, Marie-Jeanne Lhéritier, and Jean Donneau de Visé. This study thus asks a second question: are we basing our ideas about the epistemological limits of a period on the full array of actual discourses available, or on what we have assumed to be the available discourses of the period, which far too often is limited to what has become the classical canon?

中文翻译：

---

女士Querelle和Nicolas Boileau的《讽刺X：超越Perrault》

从琼·德让（Jean DeJean）到玛丽娜·华纳（Marina Warner）和杰克·齐佩斯（Jack Zipes）的批评家称赞查尔斯·佩罗（Charles Perrault）的《女性文学》（Apologie des femmes）为尼古拉斯·波洛（Nicolas Boileau）的mis怒的讽刺小说X辩护女性。文章问：这些作品在撰写期间是否真的可以被视为女性？研究Boileau的Satire X争吵的学者倾向于将自己限制在Perrault的反应上，完全忽略了作家和编剧如Nicolas Pradon，Pierre Bellocq，Jean-FrançoisRegnard，Claude-IgnaceBrugièrede Barante， Marie-JeanneLhéritier和Jean Donneau deVisé。因此，这项研究提出了第二个问题：