Hating Hannah: Or Learning to Love (Post)Feminist Entitlement

Imelda Whelehan

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review

    4 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    In this book, leading and emerging scholars consider the mixed critical responses to Lena Dunhams TV series Girls and reflect on its significance to contemporary debates about postfeminist popular cultures in a post-recession context. The series features both familiar and innovative depictions of young women and men in contemporary America that invite comparisons with Sex and the City. It aims for a refreshed, authentic expression of postfeminist femininity that eschews the glamour and aspirational fantasies spawned by its predecessor. This volume reviews the contemporary scholarship on Girls, from its representation of post-millennial gender politics to depictions of the messiness and imperfections of sex, embodiment, and social interactions. Topics covered include Dunhams privileged role as author/auteur/actor, sexuality, body consciousness, millennial gender identities, the politics of representation, neoliberalism, and post-recession society. This book provides diverse and provocative critical responses to the show and to wider social and media contexts, and contributes to a new generation of feminist scholarship with a powerful concluding reflection from Rosalind Gill. It will appeal to those interested in feminist theory, identity politics, popular culture, and media.
    Original languageEnglish
    Title of host publicationReading Lena Dunham's Girls: Feminism, postfeminism, authenticity, and gendered performance in contemporary television
    EditorsMeredith Nash and Imelda Whelehan
    Place of PublicationSwitzerland
    PublisherPalgrave Macmillan
    Pages31-44pp
    Volume1
    Edition1st
    ISBN (Print)9783319529707
    Publication statusPublished - 2017

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Hating Hannah: Or Learning to Love (Post)Feminist Entitlement'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this