In the following excerpt, Ford surveys More's ambivalent attitude toward the aristocracy and male supremacy as revealed in her early essays and dramas.

In the following essay, Demers explores More's role as a poet and as a literary patron of Ann Yearsley, a working-class poet from Bristol, England.

In the following essay, Pedersen contends that More was attempting to counter the preponderance of unsuitable reading material for the poor through her tract writing, rather than trying to protect the prevailing social and political orders from possible revolution, as is often claimed by critics.

In the following essay, Elliott maintains that More's writing was an attempt to encourage reform among the aristocracy as well as to provide uplifting lessons for the poor.

In the following essay, based on a 1997 paper presented to the Southampton Branch of the Historical Association, Hole outlines More's contributions to the emerging field of propaganda literature in the late eighteenth century.

In the following essay, Keane reexamines More's reputation as a counterrevolutionary conservative, maintaining that this label fails to account for her antislavery writing, her efforts to reform education, her unorthodox religious practices, and her unconventional view of women's place in the national economy.

In the following essay, Myers analyzes the feminist implications of More's Cheap Repository tracts, stating that “didactic women like More shaped a new ideal of educated and responsible womanhood.”

In the following essay, Nardin argues that More's views on poverty and her commitment to the established social order have been misunderstood by most scholars and literary historians.

In the following essay, Scheuermann disputes recent criticism that idealizes More's life and work, claiming that the author's conservative views, particularly regarding the poor, are offensive to most contemporary readers.

In the following essay, Donkin discusses the charges of plagiarism leveled against More by the playwright Hannah Cowley and suggests that the real problem between the two women was precipitated by the death of their mentor, David Garrick, and the mismanagement of their plays by his successors.

In the following essay, Nardin evaluates More's attempts to balance the demand of her critics for morally uplifting material with the requirement of her readers for quality fiction.

In the following essay, Grogan disagrees with scholars who cite the numerous similarities in the writings of Mary Wollstonecraft and More, claiming that such comparisons ignore the authors' differences in the area of gender politics.

In the following essay, Dobrzycka argues that More introduced a concern for the condition of the poor and the working class into British literature, anticipating the nineteenth-century social problem novel associated with Charles Dickens and Benjamin Disraeli.

In the following essay, Kelly describes More's use of the conventions associated with popular chapbooks to forward her Evangelical agenda, including the notion that poverty was caused by the laziness and bad judgment of the poor.

In the following essay, Pickering claims that More's tracts were forerunners of the nineteenth-century short story.