Oof! We touched on a lot of stuff today: the historiography of women writers, the slave trade, racism, the C18 abolition movement, feminist-critiques-of-Behn, intersexuality, the queer Enlightenment era, and the sexual politics of consent (sort of).
Feel free to respond to any of it in response to this post. What would you have liked to say in class but didn't get the opportunity to? What further thoughts have you had on these readings? What questions or confusion do you have?
Deadline: Friday (4/22), start of class.
10 comments:
It's really easy for writing critics to impose ideas onto text. That's basically what we do in English classes. We make it our business to extrapolate and interpret, and it's even easier to do this when we know that an author like Aphra Behn was an outspoken political figure in addition to an author. I've only had one teacher ever ask me to write about why the characters do things as opposed to the greater purpose of the author who wrote it.
One of the things I picked up on in our discussion of the poem today was that there were moments where we weren't sure how to read the actions of the characters: did Lysander lose his mojo because he respected Cloris beyond a hookup? Was she just too much woman for him? Or did he think "the woman doth not protest enough?" (Sorry, I couldn't help myself). We ran into some really massive issues in Feminism and gender relations.
The question that I have now is whether the answer can be anything political, as a Feminist would insist for example, or whether it's much simpler and we're missing it? The fact that it could be any of these things, and yet could also be none, makes me wonder if our discipline does more work than it ought to. I know William Carlos Williams would say so, but I'm curious what anyone else thinks.
I think that it is easy for us to not only impose critical interpretations on a text but also to see what is not there. We look at the text and evaluate it based on 21st c. ideas and values but this not the context in which the text was written, nor the context for which it was intended. I think that in looking at a text like Behn's it is important to see it in context. There are things that we talk about in the text like sexual politics or feminist theory that had completely different meanings when Behn wrote than they do today. If we are going to evaluate the text based on sexual politics or feminist theory I think it is important that we do so from an enlightenment perspective and be very clear that this is what we are doing, otherwise there is a great tendency to see things in the text that simply are not there.
I think that there is a case to be made that Behn is addressing issues of gender in "Clarinda". Consider the lines, "In pity to our sex sure thou wert sent, / That we might love, and yet be innocent..." Behn also uses the first person plural in several places apart from this, with reference to other women. So she is establishing a kind of connection with other women and pointing out how there is a problem that women cannot have sexual relations without running into trouble. But it is clear that women in this poem desire and take pleasure in their sexuality and so it is a criticism of society's sexual mores.
I honestly found it extremely creepy when I read that Clarinda was a hermaphrodite. It was different from anything we have read this year, or anything that I have really ever read. I enjoyed "The Disappointment" because it was from a woman's point of view. Usually when a male fails sexually he blames the woman, but it was refreshing to hear a woman stick up for herself, and really all women, and almost 'call out' the male. It seemed he was intimidated by her confidence in the bedroom, and her willingness to be with him.
The gender issue about Clarinda and whether or not she is a hermaphrodite or not was shocking to me. I guess I hadn't read closely enough, but I enjoyed listening to others discuss whether or not the text supported that she was or not and I did ultimately come to the conclusion that I think she is one.
This does put into question however whether or not Behn supported lesbian relationships and sexuality with other women as Clarinda was "messing around" with another woman, or if it was just used to hide the fact that women cannot be sexually active without being ostracized for their behavior. Personally, I tend to believe that the hermaphadite was put in the poem to let Clarinda keep her innocence yet still express her desires and have fun, showing that, unless women are clever, they will be punished for pursuing their sexual desires.
When I first read the piece, I didn't think Clarinda was a hermaphrodite, but after the discussion I now see that she most likely was. It wasn't necessarily surprising, but it did catch me off guard. Before, I just thought it was a story of two female lovers in a lesbian relationship, but the hermaphrodite factor took it to a different level. They still had feelings for each other, however they got the perk of having a lesbian relationship in the sense that they were both women (mostly), but at the same time getting a heterosexual relationship when it came to sex.
The line in the piece that I didn't read further into, then that became fairly obvious after the discussion was when it talked about a snake hiding under the leaves. I just sort of read through it the first time, however after the discussion, that line made it obvious that she was a hermaphrodite.
We talked about the importance of a text about male inadequacy being written by a female writer for once. We ran out of class time, but I would like to say I find Behn’s interpretation both freeing and constrictive to women. On one hand it portrays a sexually desirable woman in control of her sexuality: “Her hands his bosom softly meet, / But not to put him back designed, / Rather to draw him on inclined; / Whilst he lay trembling at her feet, / Resistance ‘tis in vain to show; /She wants the power to say – ‘Ah! What d’ye do?’” (Stanza II). Cloris is the aggressive one who wants to dominate the experience. She equally pursues him, and sex. Reading of her eagerness empowers women by showing that they don’t always have to act as the passive one in a sexual relationship.
However, the constricting part comes when the Cloris’ aggressiveness proves too much for Lysander. His inability to get it up acts as a warning to other women, saying, Look you can act as defiantly in bed as you please but beware your man may not be able to keep up. Lysander blames Cloris’ willingness as his inability to get it up: “He cursed his birth, his fate, his stars / But more the shepherdess’s charms” (Stanza XIV). Basically the poem warns women that even if you aren’t the reason for a man’s impotency, if you act against the norm, he still may blame you.
I think that it is interesting how clear it is in Behn's poem is a clear piece of feminist literature, being far beyond its time in acceptance of people and their sexuality, yet it is reflected in the poem how little love between two women is actually even looked up as existing or respected. The speaker uses this naivity to her advantage in that she couldn't possibly be pursuing a female for the nature of those kinds of relationships is purely innocent. This creates an odd duality, in my opinion, in what the poem represents.
The question of what exactly happens to Lysander in the heat of the moment is still perplexing to me. I suppose there's room for multiple interpretations but it seems too integral to whatever point Behn is trying to make to be left so vague.
The prospect of Clarinda being a hermaphrodite raises questions of enlightenment sexuality. We have often talked of gender roles and how they affect expectations and behavior during the era, so what happens when we encounter a person containing both in a work of literature? In discussion, I found it most interesting how it was common for women to have female companions, and how this was not looked down upon as long as it did not openly interfere with other relationships. How, then, would involvement with a hermaphrodite be taken. We discussed if it still has the "innocence" of lesbian relations of the time, but does the "snake under the leaves" push it from innocence to danger, or something more?
Post a Comment