Sexual
repression as a concept has been with the readings in this class
since the syllabus titled it “The impossible, perverse and
strange.” Perversion is simply a cultural association of sex with
the negative. Sex is a natural part of life, and there is no innate
reason for it to be considered wrong. Yet, history demonstrates that
in the past, such as during the Victorian era, that sex is in fact
improper. To pervert something means to turn it from what is right or
proper, and when society decided sex was perverted it tried to
eliminate it altogether. The evidence of humanities continual
existence shows that society found that was impossible and chose to
instead suppress the sexual nature of people. As such, sexual
repression is a common factor in many different societies, and often
represents the “dark underbelly” of those societies. Sex is
associated with all sorts of negative things which is why whole
cultures try to ignore and repress it. However, repression is not
just a cultural act, but also one of identity. For example sex, as
base act, is one of the few things that humans have in common with
animals. In an effort to separate themselves from the animals and
appear “refined” people will claim to cast it off. In this manner
the repression of sex becomes a characteristic of anyone wanting to
be “refined”. The need to hide the sexual portion of one’s
personal identity is almost as old as the deed itself, and in fact
part of that person or character’s identity as well. Depending on
the reasons for repression, the nature of sex defines people and
characters differently. This means that the question of sexual
repression, as many of our readings have shown, is not about the “if”
of a character repressing their sexual side, but the “why?” The
answers to these questions have trickled out across the semester
revealing various snippets about each character in the readings.
“The
Bloody Chamber” is one of the stories in which this is most clear.
Our heroine mentions that she fears that the marquis can see the
beginnings of a perversion in her, and indeed he might. What is more
concerning is that she feels that it is within her in the first
place. If it were not, how could he see it, and why should she worry?
We are lead to believe that she is innocent for exactly the reasons
Susilo says in Burden of Blood but that seems to be merely a front,
because her disobedience, seems to be more deliberate in agency than
accidental. Though she may not have been planning to open the
forbidden door since the day she arrived, the action itself is in
direct opposition to the man trying to control her making it an act
of rebellion rather than happenstance.
As
stated in 50 Shades of Bloody Chamber and the ensuing comment the
ruby choker is indeed a fascinating symbol. The choker does in fact
represent all those things, carnal desire, wealth, and submission,
but I feel there is more to it. A choker is binding, worn tightly,
and because of that proximity, the choker becomes more of a symbol of
the girl wearing it that some other stand alone article worn. A dress
might symbolize chastity but could come off during sex. Shoes and a
tiara might also be “symbols” of the girl, but are ultimately
capable of being separated from her. However a choker especially in
the context of the story, likely stay on, even during sex. It makes
the girl herself a fetish object. Though she may have once appeared
naïve and chaste, whatever the marquis may see in her is brought to
the surface by the sheer presence of the choker. The heroine of “The
Bloody Chamber” is terrified not of what someone else may do to
her, but by what may ultimately be inside her waiting to escape. This
sort of fear is what would cause her to strive to repress that side,
though the story seems to claim that exposure to an environment
accepting of that “darkness”, such as the marquis castle, could
bring it out regardless.
“MyLast Duchess” is not far from “Bloody Chamber” when referring
to women and sex. The poem shows how harshly society wanted any form
of sexuality repressed. The Duke kills his Duchess simply because she
“smiled” too much. We are only left to imagine what he may have
done should she have actually strayed. Duke, you silver tounged devilyou, brings to the forefront this level of control and individualizes
it, but again I think this can be drawn out further. Society was at a
stage in which sex was to monogamous and not mentioned. The case of
“My Last Duchess” is extreme, but not inaccurate, because women
who could not follow the rules of society were looked down upon to
such an extent that this period made popular the “fallen woman”
archetype. It seemed any extent of accepting your sexuality or
embracing it could brand you a sexual deviant.
Speaking
of, we talked in depth of Oscar Wilde, and his case. The case of
Oscar Wilde is often used as the defining keystone for demonstrating
the repression present in Victorian society. Wilde is a venerable
portrait of the era. There was only a brief post about Wilde's “The Importance of Being Earnest” in which he was described as mocking
Victorian society, but Wilde himself flew in the face of Victorian
society. In the Adut article it is stated that Victorian society
would have normally tolerated people such as Oscar Wilde, and that
his case was actually a manner of degree of blatancy rather than of
just being homosexual. This is likely wishful thinking, I can hardly
find evidence for this, in history or literature. In this manner I am
inclined to agree with Hera Cook in Anna Clark's article. Sexual
expression is indeed inhibited by the negative associations it holds.
Wilde himself, was a well known homosexual, and made allusions to
such things in his writings, especially The Picture of Dorian
Gray. This too was discussed
in the Clark article which explains that homosexuality was looked
down upon beginning very early in history. As
an aesthetic Wilde was bound to be flamboyant and his whole
personage was one of acceptance of himself. Despite the consequences
of his sexuality and the public struggles he had, Wilde embodied
sexual acceptance. Society however responded by putting a well known,
if not respected author and artists in prison. In a sense the
imprisonment of Wilde was a physical representation of Victorian
society's repression of sexuality.
Both
Case in Point, and Hidden Hyde, describe their surprise at the sexual
implications of The
Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,
yet their understanding of the story is spot on. Jekyll is, like
Wilde and his imprisonment, a representation of the two sides of
Victorian society. Especially appropriate is Hidden Hyde's
characterization of Jekyll and Hyde as the ego and id respectively.
Hyde's darker more devious nature is in constant conflict with Jekyll
who is the face for society attempting to control those desires.
Despite that, the whole story occurs because Jekyll tries to rid
himself of the urges that become the personality Hyde. In group
discussion, the point was made that in the text Hyde (as sexuality)
is innate in the person who is Dr. Jekyll. Dr. Jekyll in turn states
that he always knew he had “dark urges”, and it was mentioned
(again in discussion) that Jekyll is most like Victorian society
because he was unwilling to get rid of the potion and forsake Hyde
altogether. One of my group members also suggested that the
connection between Hyde and sex is further developed in the fact that
his is ugly, but for no “discernible reason”. Victorian society
might see sex as this devious, animalistic, base act, but it creates
life, and is only given that negative connotation by society itself.
If
sexuality is repressed most frequently with negative associations
then “Why Shouldna Poor Folk Mowe” provides excellent evidence as
well. Burn’s words here make both a social and sexual statement.
During class some fairly basic conclusions were made about how the
poor have nothing to enjoy but sex, while the upper classes enjoy
finery and power. Once we were deeper involved in the discussion
however, the fact that many terrible things could have been avoided
had the rich had a “mowe” instead of committing the
aforementioned deeds, provided some interesting insight. The poor are
not capable of making the choices that the ruling class is, so they
mowe instead. This does two things, first it creates an association
between the poor and sex, our negative association, and secondly it
puts sex on the same level of the things that the rich did. In the
second connection the act of sex is interchangeable with other deeds,
in a “Instead you could have…” mentality.
Out
over the Rhine proud Prussia wad shine,
To
spend his best blood he did vow;
But
Frederic had better ne'er forded the water,
But
spent as he docht in a mowe.
In
this Burns almost argues against sexual repression, instead claiming
that things would be better if the ruling class had “less time on
their hands.”
Repression
in the literature we read was not only about class distinction. It
would be impossible to make an argument regarding the presence of
sexual repression in literature and ignore the influence of the
church. In Crazy Jane.. whatsmypassowrd? mentions that the bishop
looks down upon Jane in “Crazy Jane Talks to the Bishop” for
being “unchaste”. It is indeed likely that Jane refused the
advances of the Bishop at one point or another, and this only serves
to further the two-faced nature of sexuality. For if the church
condemns the act of sex, then the Bishop would be hypocritcal in his
“attempts” on Jane. At the same time I must admit I had not
considered Jane's message to be one of liberation the way
whatsmypassword? had. With a hopeful and happy message, Yeats would
be arguing that liberating yourself sexually has positive influences
on the soul. This would imply that such things are not devious by
nature, but again, only labeled as such by society. This happens to
be basically the same argument made in A forsaken love, in which the
struggle between religion and not only sex, but love are brought to
light. The the fact that the woman in question has children with the
merman draws that final important connection between sex and love.
Sex
is an act, but sexual repression is more. Sexual repression is a
deeply telling characteristic of a character. When a reader stops to
ask “Why?” the motives driving a character to hide their sexual
nature reveal more about them than anticipated. In that sense the
“Why?” question should be one of the first asked. Society from
very early on, has tried to hide it's sexual nature, because in
revealing it people and indeed society itself become vulnerable. Fear
of that vulnerability drives people to lie and hide the sexual part
of themselves, when it seems that literature advocates opening
yourself and accepting sex as a part of life. Without it not one
human being would remain, and society could not exist at all. Sex
creates life, while life grants us the opportunity to write, and that
seems like a good reason to let go and accept that sex happens.
Sources & Reading
A
Theory of Scandal: Victorians, Homosexuality, and the Fall of Oscar
Wilde
Ari Adut, American Journal of Sociology
, Vol. 111, No. 1 (July 2005), pp. 213-248
History Collection. Web. 9 May 2013.
Tuzin, Donald. "The Forgotten Passion: Sexuality And Anthropology In The Ages Of Victoria And
Bronislaw." Journal Of The History Of The Behavioral Sciences 30.2 (1994): 114-137. Academic
Search Complete. Web. 9 May 2013.
http://www.victorianweb.org/gender/sextheory.html
http://www.victorianweb.org/gender/sextheory.html
No comments:
Post a Comment