The article focuses on Augusta Braunerhjelm (1839–1929, also cited as Braunerhielm): a highly versatile literary figure, in her time Braunerhjelm was recognised as fiction writer (across different genres), playwright and journalist. As continues to be the case with numerous women authors, especially where factors of translation impacting cross-border dissemination are involved, Braunerhjelm's work gradually faded from public discourse and fell into oblivion. This study reclaims Braunerhjelm as an important figure for late nineteenth-century naturalism. Motivated by Braunerhjelm’s innovation and the notable absence of literature on her work, and with consideration for her sensibilities and positionalities, this article foregrounds the author’s Italian volumes, which produce proto-ecofeminist depictions of the Italian milieu, from en equal landscape- and culture-focused perspective. The two volumes, titled Studier efter naturen. Teckningar från Italien and Nya teckningar från Italien, were both published in 1883 and contain, cumulatively, thirteen stories of varying length: seven in Studier efter naturen and six in Nya teckningar från Italien, the longest at 77 pages, the shortest at four. As this article argues, the nuanced and consistent integration of Italian ecologies in the above volumes, sharply infused with observations on gender, class, and the social transitions desired and in certain environments experienced by women in the late nineteenth century, renders Braunerhjelm not only a notable naturalist, for whom Italy serves as catalyst towards literary strides, but, also, a pioneer in what today would be described as intersectional ecofeminism. The latter is also accomplished by means of the author's consistent emphasis on access, labour and privilege, producing significant interventions in emerging discourses at the time, which remain enduringly relevant. It is for these reasons that, as this study proposes, this neglected female literary figure both invites and merits international attention today.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vicky Angelaki (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: