quibbles with Sedgwick

Two small quibbles need to be aired concerning the passage from Sedgwick’s Epistemology of the Closet excerpted in our readings. First, it’s jarring to notice Sedgwick’s use of the epithet “gypsy” in reference to the people known properly as Roma or Rom, since that is how they name themselves and how they are recognized by the United Nations, the EU, and other international bodies. “Gypsy” is a word of 16th-century European origin based on a dialect word for “Egyptian,” as Roma were once widely believed to hail from Egypt. What makes Sedgwick’s casual use of “gypsy” unfortunate is the highly derogatory charge the term carries, particularly in many European social contexts. It would be impossible to imagine Sedgwick referring, with a straight face as it were, to Native Americans as “Injuns,” yet something very similar occurs in her uncritical use of the functionally racist term “gypsy.”

Secondly, and in full awareness of the strategic liberties an eminence of Sedgwick’s rank may exercise with evidence, I find it nonetheless a bit odd to see her enlist Melville’s Billy Budd as evidence in her treatment of the historical process by which “sexual knowledge and knowledge per se” come to be conflated with knowledge of homosexual desire (p. 688). In tracing her epistemic arc from Diderot’s La Religieuse (The Nun), Sedgwick cites the “influence” of Wilde’s Dorian Gray and Billy Budd on this process of conflation, yet—without putting too fine a point on it—how can two novels published some 35 years apart be said to exert such a parallel “influence”? Famously, Billy Budd lay cobwebbed in a drawer before its belated publication in 1924, well after Melville’s death in 1891, one year after the publication of Dorian Gray. Sedgwick advances the two works as if contemporaneous, which would be a trifling anachrony except for the fact that Billy Budd cannot be said to have had an influence on anyone until its publication and reception. Sedgwick appears to suggest that its influence radiated by some occult means from the drawer in Melville’s dusty hovel, where he lived in impoverished obscurity at the end of his life. By the time the novella actually surfaced in the twenties, the process for which Sedgwick offers it as proof—her “condensation of the world of possibilities surrounding same-sex sexuality [. . .] to the homosexual topic” (688)—would have been completed, or mutated to a further phase.

Hester and the Scarlet Letter

Hester is a character that is in control of her life. She is capable of choosing how she deals with her disgrace within her society and how she lets it affect her. Hester is an intelligent woman who knows how to handle herself and even Pearl while she is in her more crazed state. The main weakness that I saw with Hester was that at the wrong time her emotions got the best of her. She was clearly capable of avoiding getting into an affair with Dimmsdale but her emotions caused her downfall.

I have to admit that I approached Johnson's article with an incredible amount of skepticism, and was truthfully blown away by how convincing I found her arguments. Certainly, The Scarlet Letter, confronting in its plot the issue of adultery, would naturally face analysis of a sexual nature, but Johnson's exploration of the role of impotence in the work was suprising and yet extremely plausible.
It seems that the most obvious approach to the work would be to consider sexuality of a female nature, considering that the only character we find with any kind of consistent and blatant sexual element is Hester. Hawthorne highlights her sexuality and youth, removing her sexual nature from the realm of censure which it encounters in the work. It seems that the most obvious sexual element in the work then is Hester's, seemingly representative of female sexuality as a whole. Johnson however, moves away from this aspect of the work, and chooses instead to focus on male sexuality, and how it is this sexuality, or lack thereof, which motivates the plot of the story. It is not female sexuality then, which is the main element of the story, but the exploration of male sexuality, including the narrator's own.

The Scarlet Letter and Impotence and Omnipotence

Reading "The Scarlet Letter" I did not realize that impotence was such a main theme of the story. Johnson shows very clearly that throughout the story and even the narrator shows signs of impotence. It could be physical in the case of Chillingworth or just morally in the case of Dimmsdale. Johnson also points out that Hester's act of adultary was important in regards to history because at that time many young women were married to older men and it was not unusual to find marraiges like this to breakup. What if Hester had pointed out earlier that Chillingworth was her husband? Maybe the towns people would somewhat sympathize and understand her situation. Hester would not have been as ashamed and guilty.

Impotence and Omnipotence

I found this reading to be rather interesting, yet somewhat disturbing. i have never viewed the Scarlet Letter in this light of impotence and sexual lacking. Or if i did discuss that in high shcool English, i dont remember it. I found the authors close reading of Chillingworth to be rather interesting, and finally the story made more sense to me. The fact taht Chillingworth became so involved iwth herbs and natural cures brings new light to his problem. it also helps justify his closeness and relationship with Dimmesdale. chillingworth, as i said in class, seemed to be such a two-faced man and very sketchy, but now it all makes sense. Chillingworth wants revenge on Dimmesdale, but more importantly wants to avenge his manhood. Another element that was new to me in this reading was the fact that divorces or annulments could be granted based on impotency. I found this to be completely shocking and disturbing, but i was rather intrigued by the fact. I had a mixed reaction to this reading.

Hester and "Femininity"

"If she be all tenderness, she will die. If she survive, the tenderness will either be crushed out of her, or... crushed so deeply into her heart that it can never show itself more."

This powerful quote seems to allude to Freud's idea of femininity. Freud asserts that the ideal female will become passive, similar to the concept of tenderness. If a woman is not successful in achieving passivity, she is at risk of becoming sexually neurotic, or frigid. Likewise, Hawthorne seems to suggest a similar concept that Hester has somehow abandoned her womanliness, or sexuality in her necessary, yet aggressive, attempts to survive. These binary conceptions of women are quite popular, but also very dangerous, they imply that women can only possess one simple quality, for instance, a woman is either "smart" or "beautiful." Therefore, when Hester is able to be simultaneously sexual, tender and tenacious, Hawthorne opposes Freud's idea of femininity by portraying a very modern heroine, who serves as a complex dichotomy of human characteristics.

The Scarlet Letter

I wonder how this novel would have turned out if the gender roles were switched. What would happen if Hester were a male. Number 1, I highly doubt if the male version of Hester would have been scrutinized in front of the whole Puritan community. As a matter of fact, I doubt if there would be any punishment to consider. Nathaniel Hawthorne is a feminist genius. His idea of the A to label Hester as an adulterer, makes Hester a very important character throughout the community. In my opinion this scarlet letter makes Hester important. She is an important, because she is a noble strong hearted heroine who stands tall by her daughter Pearl and the sin that she has committed.