1. Introduction

Much of Donald Wiebe's work has challenged the shape and orientation of the field of Religious Studies. This has meant a herculean effort on his part to push the field more in alignment with a scientific study of religion. Like Wiebe, I too, as a poststructural feminist, have made efforts to shape the field, asking questions and providing analyses that veer from the mainstream. And, like Wiebe, I too have run into the field's failure of nerve to push beyond the status quo: unfamiliar theoretical premises and tools of analysis are often met with suspicion and rejection. In this chapter I will discuss my own efforts to bring a feminist and semiotic analysis to the field. To do this I will provide a context for the development of my own work, speak to the theoretical orientation I adopt and the kind of insights I think such an orientation provides, and lastly address change, resistance, and more change in the study of the systems of belief and practice otherwise known as “religion.”

2. What's in a Name?

Tradition, as Raymond Williams writes, is an active force in any social body, a force that is “the most powerful practical means of incorporation” (1977: 115).