Oponentský posudek na diplomovou práci Ivany Šubrtové 
"The Development and Changes of the Female Gothic Genre 
from the Beginning to the Present Day"
Oponent: PhDr. Libor Práger

The presented thesis sets out to map the development and changes of the Gothic genre written by women and in spite of the generally outstanding quality of the thesis, the very definition of the thesis statement in the title seems to present a methodological problem. While the concept of "male" and "female" gothic does exist in literary theory, it is a rather loose and not generally accepted category (outside the ideologically slanted feminist theory where the attribute "female" is a code word for defining virtually anything). However, the author doesn't hesitate to present the whole idea of a Female Gothic Genre as a centre of her argument, the only clear definition of such "genre" stemming out of a rather illogical statement "since its audience was predominantly female (,) Gothic was acknowledged as the female genre …". And in the next paragraph this simplistic reasoning leads to almost natural establishment of the "Female Gothic genre". (p.5) It is true that the 3rd chapter (p. 16 - 25) provides some further explanation of the phenomena but even Moers' and Botting's "definitions" avoid establishing a Female Gothic genre but rather speak of the female and feminine aspects of the Gothic as such. Naturally, the difficulties in defining individual aspect of the genre as a whole explain why most respectable authors understand the distinction between the male and female gothic as simply sub-categories within the Gothic genre. Especially because neither the female authorship nor female readership are relevant features to establish a whole genre (as the author seems to be suggesting in her introductory statement). The rough distinction between terror and horror, often utilized as a dividing line between male and female gothic, is hardly usable either, since it is often transcended by individual authors, especially in the modern times (A. Carter's brutally violent short stories being the most obvious example).
Apart from this objection (which could simply be avoided by a more careful use of the term "genre" in the title and throughout the text) the presented thesis meets all the academic standards both in form and contents, Ivana's work with both primary and secondary sources is extensive and exemplary, such as her use of citations and sources documenting style. Her argumentation is sound and persuasive (with a few exceptions as mentioned above), the whole work is written in very good English, yet it is a pity that the Conclusion section is only a little bit more than simple summary of the previous chapters. 
Therefore I would like to hear a more focused and analytical account of the thesis' outcomes during the oral presentation of the work. 
Doporučuji práci k ústní obhajobě a navrhuji hodnotit ji známkou "výborně".

6.6.2010							PhDr. Libor Práger