By Rena Ryu, WWP Research Fellow

When I first encountered Margaret Cavendish’s The Description of a New World, Called the Blazing World (1666), I expected what many modern readers may expect from early science fiction: fantastical creatures, imaginative worlds, and much speculation. Certainly, I found those generic elements underneath the plot of a woman being transported and crowned as Empress in an unfamiliar universe surrounded by philosophers. But what fascinated me was the fact that Cavendish had to invent an entirely new world before she could imagine herself being a philosopher.

So, I decided to ask something more structural (in my opinion) rather than simply asking how early modern women gained access to knowledge. How does one build a space for women’s minds when the architecture of knowledge itself is presented as gendered? 

This question changed the way I approached The Blazing World, as it was tempting to sum it up as a mere feminist utopia, but I found that this description risked flattening its most interesting nuances. It turns out that Cavendish was less concerned with whether women possessed the capacity to learn than with the conditions under which knowledge acquired authority in the first place. In other words, the problem that she sought to fight was that spaces of learning and knowledge were never neutral. She suggests that in order to build a safe space for women’s minds, we must rethink the architecture of the space itself. The Empress declares that she will hear all sides before she gives judgment, “all which I refer to Truth’s Judgment, and expect her final Sentence,” insisting that knowledge must be fairly evaluated rather than being merely accepted (Q3v). By constructing a world in which a woman governs inquiry from the outset, Cavendish creates the conditions necessary for her own ambitions to take place which makes the figure of the Empress an incredibly remarkable character. 

One observation I made while reading was that the Empress embodies the reconstruction I mentioned above. Specifically, she has those with knowledge—including philosophers, scientists, and scholars—present their ideas before her as she evaluates their assumptions behind the discoveries. Cavendish establishes the Empress’s intellectual authority through her insistence on impartial judgment, “A Judg, replied the Empress, is easie to be had; but to get an Impartial Judg, is a thing so difficult, that I doubt we shall hardly find one,” emphasizing her capacity for judgement (P4v). Through this capacity for judgement, the Empress’ intellectual authority is imagined as the ability to question the systems through which facts become meaningful, emphasizing the question of “How do we know?” This becomes very apparent in the Empress’ conversations with the Spirits. Although the Spirits possess extraordinary quantities of knowledge, the Empress eventually learns that even they, as wise beings, cannot provide certain truths, such as the complete knowledge of God or the deepest mysteries of nature. Instead of treating their claims as unquestionably authoritative, she recognizes the limits of what can be known, and continues to interrogate the conditions under which knowledge can be truly produced. The Empress’ authority therefore lies in not possessing absolute answers, but in exercising careful judgment about which forms of knowledge deserve credibility. 

This concern of being the impartial judge becomes visible when the Empress encounters the experimental philosophers of the Blazing World, specifically the Bear-men. Historically, Cavendish was writing during the Scientific Revolution, a period where scientific and natural philosophies sought to transform the human understanding of the world. Tools such as microscopes and telescopes expanded the limits of perception, suggesting that knowledge could advance through increasingly precise observation. Once again, however, Cavendish ponders over the question of whether seeing more equates understanding more. 

In the scene where the Bear-men present their microscopes, they take pride in their ability to examine the smallest elements of the natural world, boasting their discoveries invisible to the human eye. Their confidence represents the common faith that observation yielded the firmer kind of truth. However, the Empress challenges this, arguing that such instruments create “differences and divisions” rather than truth and unity: “these Telescopes caused more differences and divisions amongst them, then ever they had before” (E1v).  She also commands them directly by saying that “your Glasses are false Informers, and instead of discovering the Truth, delude your Senses; Wherefore I Command you to break them” (E2r). This leads to the Bear-men ultimately confessing their preference to see illusion. The problem that the Empress points out is that a method based upon division and classification may lead to information being produced without deeper understanding. 

However, despite Cavendish’s rejection of experimental philosophy, she offers an alternative instead of completely shutting down the Bear-men’s ideas. Rather than relying on instruments to settle philosophical questions, she gathers the diverse schools of natural philosophers and queries them in turn. In this way, she establishes that truth may be settled through dialogue, comparison, and her ultimate judgment. The Empress takes on a role resembling that of an intellectual arbiter compared to a scientist, and through this role, she brings out a theme that knowledge emerges through reasoning minds engaged in discourse as opposed to increasingly elaborate technologies of observation. 

I noticed that this critique extends further beyond this little scenario itself. This critique of a mere microscope perhaps served as a criticism for the real world. The Bear-men represent  the scientific culture that privileges specialized observation over philosophical understanding. By focusing on isolated fragments of nature, they lose sight of the bigger picture that the Empress continuously seeks. This criticism therefore extends as a critique to real-world institutions, suggesting Cavendish’s disapproval of their methods of inquiry being so focused on technical precision. Cavendish implies that simply mastering their methods of zooming in on an object would not solve the problem if those methods encouraged narrower ways of knowing. 

I found that this idea connects to Cavendish’s larger natural philosophical comprehension. In the Blazing World, she challenges the basic understanding that matter is lifeless and passive, instead opting to categorize matter as something that is capable of its own movement. She expands on this as she writes that “nature is but one Infinite Self-moving Body, which by the virtue of its self-motion, is divided into Infinite parts” (G4v). Humans cannot stand as detached bystanders if matter possesses activity, which is a theme that she emphasizes through this example. Expanding onto the imagination of the Blazing World, Cavendish uses imagination as a method to examine possibilities unavailable within her own intellectual environment. By creating another universe, she creates a space where the flaws of her own world can be examined. The role of the Empress is Cavendish questioning what the world would look like if women were recognized as capable of shaping these intellectual communities from the beginning. 

Imagination becomes an additional essential philosophical method, and reaches its fullest expression when Cavendish inserts herself through more than just the Empress, but through the spirit of the Duchess of Newcastle, in what I believe is the most canonical sort of insertion from the author. By later introducing the Duchess as another version of herself besides the Empress, Cavendish emphasizes the theme of becoming both the architect and inhabitant of a new intellectual space. 

The most radical aspect of Cavendish’s theme is the fact that she recognizes that exclusion is a question of who designs these spaces, what assumptions serve as their foundations, and what forms of intelligence they ultimately create. When the Empress dismisses the microscopes as “false Informers” asserting that “instead of discovering the Truth, delude your Sense,” she is rejecting the model of authority built upon it (E2r). Similarly, by gathering competing minds and reserving the final judgment for herself, she reconstructs the conditions under which knowledge gains legitimacy. Therefore, the Blazing World becomes a space where women are the architects of it, and are thus admitted into intellectual life. 

Sources:

Cavendish, Margaret (Lucas), Duchess of Newcastle. The Description of a New World, Called the Blazing-World, 1668. Northeastern University Women Writers Project, 12 Feb. 2002. https://www.wwp.northeastern.edu/texts/cavendish.blazing.html.

Tweet