Apollon EJournal - Issue VI - 2016 by Apollon eJournal

Apollon

ISSUE VI

2016

UNDERGRADUATE DIGITAL JOURNAL FOR THE HUMANITIES AT FAIRFIELD UNIVERSITY

OUR MISSION At Apollon, we strive to publish superior examples of undergraduate humanities research from a variety of disciplines as well as intellectual approaches.

Our goal is to engage students in every stage of the process, beginning with student-faculty collaboration in generating undergraduate scholarship and finishing with the release of a polished digital journal. Apollon strives to take advantage of the unique opportunity of venturing into the digital humanities by engaging with image, text, sound, video, and a variety of presentation platforms in the process of showcasing the many species of undergraduate research.

AP-OL-LON’ Our name is derived from the Greek and Roman deity, Apollo, while the spelling more closely follows the Greek transliteration. Apollo is the god of music, poetry, art, light, and knowledge, making him one of the most complex deities in the Pantheon. In tribute to his multifaceted existence, our journal utilizes various media to create and reproduce knowledge within the humanities and to encourage critical thinking through multidisciplinary inquiry. With Apollo as patron to our musings and his Muses as inspiration for our content, Apollon seeks to provide our readers with thought-provoking, innovative ideas that explore the depth and breadth of humanistic inquiry.

CONTENT “From On Stage to in Office: Examining the Success of Political Actors in Eighteenth-Century France” by Catherine J. Bruns

pages 3-17 “Ormond’s Subversion of Heteronormative Gothic Characteristics: Constantia Dudley, Sophia Courtland, and Martinette de Beauvais” by Linsday Brents

pages 18-29 "Everything is True, Everything Anybody Has Ever Thought: (Im)possibility at the Interface of Science Fiction and Urban Fantasy" by Jeanette Tong Gin Yen

pages 30-40 "Artificiality, Blade Runners, and Capitalism: Examining the Postmodern in Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep and Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner" by Larisa Coffey-Wong

pages 41-51 "Legitimizing Illegitimate Power: Technology and Nature as Fictive Mediators" by Megan Krelle

pages 52-63 "A Story of Shifting Stone: Pygmalion in the Renaissance" by Grant K. Schazman

pages 64-75

“From On Stage to in Office: Examining the Success of Political Actors in Eighteenth-Century France” by Catherine J. Bruns

Over two hundred years after the

audience interaction that provided the

French Revolution, historians have yet

underrepresented public an opportunity

to reach a consensus as to what caused

to be heard. Author Michael McClellan

the bloody overthrow of one of Eu-

explains that during this time, theatres

rope’s leading political regimes. How-

served as venues for political ideas to be

ever, it has been agreed that the French

shared with empowered audiences who

Revolution marked “the beginning of a

then accepted, rejected, or changed

new world” (O’Brien, “Review: A Peo-

these messages (“The Revolution On-

ple’s History”) in its materialization of a

stage”). In this way, eighteenth-century

bourgeois public sphere that suppressed

French theatre both shaped and re-

individual interests to make room for

sponded to public opinion, effectively

the debate of public issues (Ravel 3). It

facilitating a discussion between the

is for this reason that eighteenth-century

people and the government. The inter-

France remains such a fascinating period

twining between the political and the

of history: not only was the French Rev-

theatrical allowed for “theatrico-politico

olution an uprising orchestrated by the

hybrids”

people and for the people, but it suc-

training and extended the power of

ceeded in restructuring the French po-

French theatre actors, resulting in per-

litical system and led to the attainment

formers being elected to high-ranking

of equal representation for the average

political and military positions (Fried-

citizen. However, while previous re-

land 2).

that

advantaged

theatrical

search has focused on the revolutionary

This unique involvement of thea-

policy and legislative changes that oc-

tre actors in eighteenth-century politics

curred during this period, there has

thus poses an interesting question: why

been little focus on the involvement of

was eighteenth-century France an op-

related subject – the political actor.

portune time for actors to transition

Eighteenth-century France has

into politics, and how were these actors-

been considered the country’s Age of

turned-politicians perceived by the pub-

Theatre, and French playwrights often

lic? By exploring how politics evolved in

used their writing to comment on polit-

eighteenth-century French theatre, ex-

ical, societal, and

economic issues

amining the theatricality of French Rev-

(Meeker, “Politics of the Stage”). This

olutionary politics itself, and studying

distribution of political messages on-

the actions of a selection of French po-

stage was also paired with a shift towards

litical actors, we can better understand 4

how the relationship between French

and audiences to be regulated and su-

theatre and politics set the stage for ac-

pervised

tors to transition into political roles and

Stage”). Playwrights were also forced to

how these roles were received by the

produce works that promoted the mon-

public.

archy and Catholic Church and whose

(Meeker,

“Politics

the

To begin, it is important to note

characters were of noble birth (Meeker,

that eighteenth-century France experi-

“Politics of the Stage”). Additionally,

enced not just a political revolution, but

plays were censored to reduce any allu-

also a theatrical revolution. Prior to the

sions or situations onstage that might

French Revolution, dramatic perfor-

rally the audience, and plays that

mance had proven to be of value be-

mocked or attacked public figures or re-

cause it provided an opportunity to

ligious beliefs were condemned or de-

communicate with an overwhelmingly

layed (Meeker, “Politics of the Stage”).

illiterate public (Hemmings 483). How-

Although the Crown yearned for

ever, in the seventeenth-century, John

plays that “extolled the monarchy and

Dennis, an English writing critic, began

perpetuated the powerful system of

noticing parallels between French thea-

privilege,” stories such as these did not

tre and the French monarchy (Ravel

resonate with average viewers (Meeker,

67). Whereas the impact of theatres had

“Politics of the Stage”). Molière’s early

previously been restrained to the public,

seventeenth-century work, for example,

Richelieu and Louis XIV began efforts to

was supported by Louis XIV, yet was

capitalize on the symbolic influence of

heavily criticized both personally and

theatre in court and in the city (Ravel

professionally by Parisian audiences

68), and French theatre soon became

(Leon 452). This public frustration bub-

seen as an opportunity for high-ranking

bled into the mid-1720s, when audience

individuals to impress others (Meeker,

reception in public theatres started to

“Politics of the Stage”).

play a role in “determining questions of

At the same time, French politi-

taste and repertory” and even impacted

cians and government officials adopted

productions’ financial success (Ravel

a hands-on approach towards theatre in

102). In 1724, a production of Voltaire’s

an effort to control public performances

Hérode et Mariamne, formerly a crowd

(Meeker, “Politics of the Stage”). In the

favorite, barely finished its evening per-

late seventeenth-century, the Crown

formance due to audience disruption,

called for productions, acting troupes,

eventually forcing Voltaire to withdraw 5

his work from the repertory (Ravel 128).

century, bourgeois dramatists such as

Author Kimberly Meeker adds that over

Denis Diderot, Pierre-Augustin Caron

time, “a system of market values

de Beaumarchais, and Louis-Sébastien

emerged to compete with the tradition

Mercier shifted to viewing theatre as a

of aristocratic sponsorship” and led to a

“didactic medium” that allowed them

major theatrical shift (“Politics of the

to educate the public on moral issues

Stage”).

(“Politics of the Stage”). As such, plays

Beginning in the mid eighteenth-

altered from aristocratic themes to mor-

century, artists, playwrights, and authors

alistic comedies and tragedies that

began creating works that better repre-

stressed realism over fantasy and inte-

sented public demand, allowing more

grated characters of varying economic

political and polarized theatrical con-

backgrounds (Meeker, “Politics of the

tent to become available (Friedland 55).

Stage”). Mercier wrote lines that aimed

Unbeknownst to the Crown, political

to “influence political or social senti-

theatre also made its way into the aris-

ment,” Beaumarchais used satire to

tocracy: during the 1750s and early

demonstrate “the abuses of the political

1760s, “radical assertions” were juxta-

system,” and playwrights across France

posed against “innumerable expressions

structured their works to incite societal

of loyalty and devotion,” and character

change

dialogue from nobility became less reli-

Stage”). The new purpose of theatre,

ant on abstract political models and

these playwrights believed, was to ap-

more focused on accurate French his-

peal to the masses and “be more acces-

tory (Friedland 58). The incorporation

sible to common contemporary inter-

of politics in theatre quickly escalated,

ests,” a revolutionary approach that

and from 1751 until the start of the Rev-

made the government increasingly wary

olution, soldiers were placed in Parisian

(Meeker, “Politics of the Stage”)

(Meeker,

“Politics

the

theatres in an effort to maintain control

Prior to 1789, only three Parisian

of an increasingly hostile public (Ravel

theatres – the Académie de Musique,

164).

the Comédie Française, and the ComéThis transition period not only

die Italienne – were officially recognized

transformed the content and perfor-

by the French government (McClellan,

mance of theatrical works, but also al-

“The Revolution On Stage”). Unfortu-

tered the purpose of French theatre.

nately, this relationship forced main-

Meeker explains that later in the

stage productions to emphasize the 6

values of the Crown and made venues

Stage”). Unfortunately, because the re-

of an “ambiguous legal position” more

forms of 1791 benefited the commercial

susceptible to censorship or governmen-

interests of playwrights, this enjoyment

tal attack (McClellan, “The Revolution

was short-lived (Ravel 223). Plays began

On Stage”). As the start of the Revolu-

to “pander to the least common denom-

tion neared, some public productions,

inator of taste,” a decision that increased

such as a 1770 performance of Mercier’s

the number of theatre closings (McClel-

Le Déserteur, began to take risks by in-

lan, “The Revolution On Stage”). In an

corporating propaganda to incite politi-

effort to regain control of the stage, the-

cal debate (Meeker, “Politics of the

atres were redefined as “venues of pub-

Stage”). The Crown, sensing unrest,

lic instruction” and thus subject to gov-

surrendered any hope of sponsoring its

ernmental supervision, but after the At-

own propaganda and instead main-

tack on the Tuileries and the subsequent

tained the defensive approach of editing

fall of the monarchy in August 1792, all

political theatrical content (Meeker,

theatres

“Politics of the Stage”). Soon, critics

(McClellan,

who had already found issue with the

Stage”).

country’s political system began attack-

were

temporarily

“The

closed

Revolution

As the Reign of Terror increased

ing the theatre system as well, arguing

radicalism

within

the

government,

that the monarchy’s continued control

French theatre underwent another large

of theatrical venues was “artificial,”

transition in terms of police surveillance

“outmoded,” and “kept other entrepre-

and demand for revolutionary opera and

neurs from succeeding” (McClellan,

drama (McClellan, “The Revolution On

“The Revolution On Stage”).

Stage”). The newly formed government

In mid-January 1791, a year and a

was uninterested in productions that

half into the French Revolution, the Na-

distracted publics from the task at hand,

tional Assembly passed legislation to

so the National Convention passed leg-

“free” the theatres (McClellan, “The

islation that required regular perfor-

Revolution On Stage”). The world of

mances of plays that represented the val-

French theatre transformed almost im-

ues of the Revolution and its defenders

mediately, as anyone with funds could

(McClellan,

open a theatre without fear of govern-

Stage”). The laws cautioned that any

ment

theatres that produced plays in an at-

interference

(McClellan,

“The

censorship

Revolution

tempt

“The

“revive

Revolution

the

shameful 7

superstition of royalty” would be closed

inciting debate, but as play content be-

and its directors arrested and punished

came more radical, audience behavior

(McClellan,

became more unpredictable. Not every

“The

Revolution

Stage”).

citizen agreed with the new reign of

In response, playwrights pro-

government, and the Government of

duced works that were even more polit-

the Directory was forced to begin con-

ical, this time embracing a genre known

trolling public opinion (McClellan,

as pièces de circonstance, or occasional

“The Revolution On Stage”). By the

or topical works (McClellan, “The Rev-

turn of the century, monitoring of play

olution On Stage”). Dr. Mark Darlow, a

content had effectively switched from

professor of eighteenth-century French

the aristocracy to the newly founded

theatre and opera at Christ’s College,

Revolutionary government, but unlike

elaborates that pièces de circonstance

are “concerned with making explicit

maintained their individual political

connections with the world which is

identities when viewing productions

represented and that of the audience”

(Maslan 41). Dr. Susan Maslan, an early

and thus seek to portray realism (390).

modern French literary and political his-

As a result, these plays were often

tory professor at the University of Cali-

French military or current event dramas

fornia-Berkeley, notes that “These audi-

that supported the Revolution and its

ences declared their right, not to ram-

radical government (McClellan, “The

page and attack, but rather, to exercise

Revolution On Stage”). Some, such as

popular censorship,” demonstrating the

Jean-Louis Laya’s 1793 L’Ami des lois,

public’s desire and ability to regulate

focused on politicians’ attempts to ma-

themselves (41). In essence, the theatri-

nipulate the people and included exag-

cal medium during the French Revolu-

gerated characterizations of politicians

tion assisted in furthering public de-

(Maslan 38). Others, such as Louis Be-

mand for representation and demon-

noît Picard’s 1793 La prise de Toulon,

strated the strong relationship between

incorporated direct references to and

eighteenth-century French theatre and

speeches from current political leaders

French Revolutionary politics.

(McClellan,

“The

Revolution

Stage”).

years,

audience

members

But it was not merely theatre that became politicized, but also politics that

The politicized plays of the

became theatrical. Literary critic and

French Revolution were successful at

historian Marie-Hélène Huet explains 8

that the French Revolution utilized the-

(Friedland 181). Although the boxes

atricality in politics with the hope that

were removed due to the king’s de-

it would “make the people into an au-

mand, when the Estates General met at

dience that could be disciplined and re-

the Hôtel des Menus-Plaisirs two years

pressed ‘by means of the spectacle’”

later, the boxes had reappeared and

(qtd. in Maslan 29). The concept of

were joined by amphitheaters on the

spectacle was utilized politically as well,

sides that allowed for even more audi-

from the staging of debates to the con-

ence seating (Friedland 181).

tent of political speeches. Much like

Aside from aesthetics, one of the

campaigning or lobbying, politics was

most prominent examples of theatrical-

not merely telling the audience, but

ity in French Revolutionary politics was

convincing them, an art form that the

the way in which debates were con-

theatre had been using for hundreds of

ducted (Friedland 180). Starting in the

years.

latter part of the eighteenth-century, Theatricalization in politics was

English viewers of French political de-

apparent by looking at the architecture.

bates began commenting on the “disor-

Dr. Paul Friedland, a French Revolu-

derly” appearance of both politicians

tionary historian and professor at Cor-

and spectators (Friedland 180). How-

nell University, notes that “The phrase

ever, French observers argued that the

political stage was no mere metaphor

apparent chaos onstage was not due to

during the Revolutionary period,” as the

a lack of rules, but rather, the use of

various halls in which the National As-

rules that were ill suited for politics

sembly met and debated were con-

(Friedland 181). Because French Revolu-

structed like theatre venues, with each

tionary theatre audiences were highly

location more theatrical than the last

engaged and interactive, similar forms

(181). Though political venues are often

of audience communication carried

arranged for the benefit of the politi-

over to the political stage. Friedland

cian, the theatricality of politics im-

writes that in January of 1790, the mag-

pacted the internal setup of arenas in

azine Mercure de France commented on

that it prioritized the audience over the

a particularly unruly audience that had

politician. In 1787, the king came to in-

continuously interrupted a politician’s

spect one of the earliest structures and

speech with loud whistling – a common

was stunned by the inclusion of specta-

expression of displeasure primarily uti-

tor boxes on the sides of the hall

lized in the theatre (181). 9

In fact, it was the spectators who

critics. Mirabeu, for example, was rec-

often insisted on bringing theatrics and

ognized as one of the greatest orators of

spectacle into the field of politics.

the time due to his ability to balance

Maslan furthers that during the trial of

both politics and theatrics (Friedland

Louis XVI, Bertrand Barère, the Presi-

182). But despite being a prominent pol-

dent of the National Convention, de-

itician, Mirabeau was also questioned

manded viewers remain silent and out-

for his ability to utilize spectacle (Fried-

lawed audience applause and murmurs

land 183). Friedland explains that the

(27). However, the spectators were not

public struggled with how to identify

so easily contained, and their gallery

him, questioning, “Was he a great rep-

participation eventually resulted in Ba-

resentative of the nation, or a great ora-

rère shouting, “Silence! Leave the ap-

tor? Did one admire his speeches for

plause for the theater” (qtd. in Maslan

their content or for their delivery?”

27). Over the course of the revolution,

(183).

these audience responses approved or

The content of political speeches

denied political decisions, suggesting

thus came under consideration when

that the commentary French audiences

distinguishing a political actor from an

voiced in the safety of the theatre in-

average politician. Because politics and

creased their confidence to hold politi-

theatre was so closely interwoven, the

cians accountable in the real world

awe and spectacle of watching a politi-

(Maslan 27).

cian speak sometimes outweighed the

In order to accommodate such

value of what he or she was comment-

demands, politicians needed to become

ing on. Though some would think that

more engaging, a change that opened

actors’ training would make it easier for

the door for entertainers and actors.

them to appeal to audiences, traditional

Some accounts claim that many depu-

politicians and orators were criticized

ties of the National Assembly partook in

for prioritizing theatricality over rheto-

acting classes, while others took the eas-

ric. To sound convincing, some politi-

ier route of planting audience members

cians utilized abstract theories in their

in the gallery to applaud their speeches

speeches, and others faked intense en-

(Friedland 182). Rhetorical skills were

thusiasm about topics that were so dull

also of great importance, and the orator-

an average audience could not decipher

ical abilities of many politicians gained

what was actually occurring (Gay 665).

the favor of both political and theatrical

Peter

Gay,

Emeritus

Sterling 10

Professor of History at Yale University,

them. As such, it is important to con-

furthers this claim with the story of Ed-

sider how these actors’ political roles

mund Burke, an orator who attacked a

were perceived by the public.

fellow speaker’s speech as being “full of

It has taken years for scholars to

false philosophy and false rhetoric” that

understand the significance of French

was intended to permeate weak minds

dramatic actors in eighteenth-century

(qtd. in Gay 664). Even French critic

politics. In explaining the opportune

Hippolyte Taine found issue with politi-

timing of the French Revolution, Fried-

cians’ flimsy claims, stating “All is mere

land writes, “The Revolution had given

show and pretence… It is not a difficult

birth to a world in which actors mixed

job; the phrases are ready-made to

familiarly with politicians and in which

hand,”

politicians’

the political and the theatrical intermin-

speeched were laden with theatrics (qtd.

gled to such a great extent that neither

in Gay 665).

was properly distinguishable from the

suggesting

that

The use of political spectacle

other,” contending that it was this oc-

combined with the inclusion of politics

currence that permitted a relationship

in theatre set the stage for French actors

to develop between politicians and dra-

to take their skills to the political arena.

matic actors (Friedland 168). Friedland’s

Though average politicians were cer-

2002 book Political Actors: Representa-

tainly effective public servants, actors

tive Bodies and Theatricality in the Age

were advantaged in that the French Rev-

of the French Revolution further exam-

olutionary public – essentially another

ines this connection through a collec-

theatrical audience – desired a political

tion of accounts of French actors’ tran-

show. For decades, actors had been por-

sitions into politics.

traying politicians onstage, sometimes

One of the most famous exam-

even performing snippets from actual

ples of an actor turned politician comes

political speeches, so when the world of

in the form of Collot d’Herbois, a suc-

politics later began valuing the reaction

cessful dramatist and playwright who

of the spectator more than the argument

joined the Jacobin Club early in the

of the debater, actors knew how to work

Revolution (Friedland 172). Despite be-

the audience. However, by the end of

ing elected to the National Convention,

the Revolution, spectators were no

serving on the Committee of Public

longer passive and quiet, but highly crit-

Safety, and assisting in the overthrow of

ical of the messages being presented to

Robespierre, Collot was often accused 11

of being heavily reliant on theatrics and

Accusations of theatrical rhetoric were

was considered nothing but “an actor

also launched against Claire Lacombe,

pretending to be a politician” (Friedland

an actress known as one of the co-

172). In fact, when he was eventually

founders of the Revolutionary political

tried for plotting to destroy a federalist

organization La Société des citoyennes

rebellion, most of the pamphlets and ev-

républicaines révolutionaires (Friedland

idence against Collot argued that his

178). Lacombe’s political career began

plan had been motivated by revenge for

in 1792 when she gave a political speech

being booed offstage at a theatre near

on the Legislative Assembly platform

the rebellion a number of years prior

that proved to be so successful it was

(Friedland 174).

quickly ordered for publication (Fried-

Similarly,

Jean-François

land 179). Although she was well known

Boursault-Malberbe, an actor and direc-

for her rousing speeches, Lacombe’s el-

tor of the main theatre in Marseille, was

oquent speaking also received strong

also suspected of involving himself in

criticism and she was eventually jailed in

politics for personal reasons (Friedland

1794 (Friedland 179). Upon being re-

177). When Boursalt began his political

leased over a year later, Lacombe once

career, he was named an elector of the

more returned to a life onstage in the

city of Paris and quickly moved up to

safety of the theatre (Friedland 179).

“supplementary” deputy to the National

The last example Friedland pro-

Convention (Friedland 177). However,

vides of an eighteenth-century political

unlike Collot, Boursault later relin-

actor is Fabre d’Eglantine, who achieved

quished the deputy position and re-

success as a playwright and performer

turned to manage the Théâtre Molière,

(Friedland 175). Fabre engaged in poli-

choosing instead to focus his efforts on

tics early in the Revolution, acting as

producing

plays

secretary of the Cordeliers Club in 1790

(Friedland 177). But despite never at-

and deputy of Paris to the National Con-

taining the same political status as Col-

vention in 1792 (Friedland 175). Unlike

lot and later returning to a nonpolitical

other actors turned politicians, Fabre

life, Boursault was still said to have

continued to work in the theatre world

fooled the audience by performing in

while he served in office and wrote nu-

character on the political stage and pri-

merous plays that were well-regarded

oritizing theatrical training over reason

(though one of his works was reported

(Friedland 177).

to have been booed offstage by an

politically

neutral

unimpressed audience) (Friedland 176).

to remain transparent in relation to the

But like Lacombe, Fabre was later ar-

people (Kroen 1100). After 1750, the re-

rested for his role in politics on the

sponsibility of theatrical believability

grounds that he “trafficked his opinion

shifted to the audience, and the connec-

as representative of the people” (Fried-

tion between political representatives

land 176).

and

their

constituents

disappeared

Examples such as these demon-

(Kroen 1101). By the time actors began

strate that despite producing tangible

to transition into politics, the skeptical

results while in leadership positions,

French public believed that actors could

public opinion towards and perception

only be performers because they were

of political actors was mixed. Some be-

unable to distinguish understanding

lieved that actors who transitioned into

from copying and thus lacked the

politics did so out of a lust for power

knowledge to support a political posi-

and that the period’s reliance on specta-

tion (Ravel 227).

cle allowed actors to get by “with an

Public skepticism thus played a

aura of illegitimate and dangerous the-

large role in eighteenth-century politics.

atricality” - essentially, that the theatri-

As French politics and theatre became

cality of French Revolutionary politics

increasingly intertwined, actors and pol-

unfairly advantaged dramatic actors over

iticians began facing the same audience

those with more qualifications (Fried-

– the theatre audience. As French Revo-

land 198). Furthermore, some actors

lutionary theatre took on the new role

seem to have made questionable deci-

of a political forum, audiences were en-

sions that could have been perceived as

couraged to learn, critique, and interact

internally motivated or prioritized the-

in ways that had previously been

atrical performance and spectacle over

frowned upon. As a result, when the

reliable and trustworthy content.

world surrounding these theatregoers

It is likely that the disapproval to-

revolted and became more radicalized,

wards political actors was a result of the

this newfound confidence carried over

political and theatrical transition France

to the political arena and produced

underwent in 1750, in which public ex-

spectators who were more comfortable

pectation of actors shifted from re-

with calling out politicians when they

presentation to representation (Kroen

made grandeur claims. However, it is

1100). Before 1750, actors were expected

important to note that eighteenth-cen-

to “embody” their roles, and politicians,

tury France was known for tension, 13

paranoia, and impulses that often ended

the political stage were aided by sub-

in bloodshed, making it likely that at

stantive knowledge just as much as the-

least some of the skeptical allegations

atrics. In other words, while theatrical

against political actors were exaggerated

training may have made it easier for ac-

or false. Additionally, many of the

tors to enter the world of politics ini-

claims against political actors attacked

tially, spectacle could only get a person

their methods of delivery and internal

so far: at the end of the day, skeptical

motivations, and without further evi-

constituents wanted answers. Further-

dence or accounts from the actors them-

more, because the rhetorical and per-

selves, it is difficult to know whether

suasive skills of actors and politicians

any of the accusations had basis.

were so tightly interwoven, it is likely

Yet even political actors who

that theatre actors who did manage to

demonstrated credibility and capability

succeed in politics likely did so for good

faced skepticism and criticism from the

reason.

public. Friedland notes that regardless

Eighteenth-century

France

of their political role, actors who at-

marked an influential theatrical and po-

tempted to make the jump into the po-

litical period that has yet to be fully ex-

litical arena were “lambasted by journal-

plored. In a theatrical sense, the eight-

ists and pamphleteers who were quick

eenth-century saw a shift towards the in-

to unmask these migrations as evidence

clusion of more political themes in

of both the insatiable political ambitions

plays, and both actors and playwrights

of dangerous clowns and the inherent

were more inclined to produce work

theatricality of the Revolution itself,”

that caused audiences to react and cri-

leaving little opportunity for actors to

tique rather than passively accept. Polit-

demonstrate their competence (170).

ically, the French Revolution encour-

Furthermore, Gay contends that the

aged the use of theatrical spectacle, pro-

French Revolution’s best political rhe-

ducing theatre-esque political venues

toricians both talked and acted, suggest-

that could accommodate engaged con-

ing that French Revolutionary politics

stituents and inspire public officials to

itself may have been more than mere

converse with the audience instead of

spectacle (664). If applied to political

talking at them. However, while this in-

actors specifically, this could mean that

terconnectedness did make the political

French actors who successfully navi-

world more accessible to dramatic ac-

gated the transition from the theatre to

tors, public perception of political 14

actors was mixed. Additionally, while skeptical eighteenth-century audiences may have made it more difficult for actors to distinguish themselves as knowledgeable politicians, this skepticism also made it more difficult for incapable actors to trick or manipulate their way into long-term political success. The political theatrics of the French Revolution can still be seen today in the form of public debates, audience interaction, and political spectacle. Although the events during and leading up to the Revolution continue to be debated amongst scholars and historians, it can be agreed that eighteenth-century France displayed one of the most radical transformations of theatre and politics ever seen. The events of the French Revolution thus reveal that both politics and theatre play a monumental role in shaping society, and only by exercising the two equally will a nation be able to thrive.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Darlow, Mark. “History and (Meta-)Theatricality: The French Revolution’s Paranoid Aesthetics.” The Modern Language Review 105.2 (2010): 385-400. JSTOR. Web. 20 Feb. 2015. Friedland, Paul. Political Actors: Representative Bodies and Theatricality in the Age of the French Revolution. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 2002. Print. Gay, Peter. “Rhetoric and Politics in the French Revolution.” The American Historical Review 66.3 (1961): 664-76. JSTOR. Web. 20 Feb. 2015. Hemmings, F. W. J. “Review.” The Modern Language Review 87.2 (1992): 482-83. JSTOR. 19 April 2015. Kroen, Sheryl. “Paul Friedland, Political Actors: Representative Bodies and Theatricality in the Age of the French Revolution.” The Journal of Modern History 77.4 (2005): 1100-02. JSTOR. Web. 11 April 2015. Leon, Mechele. (2009). Molière, the French Revolution, and the Theatrical Afterlife [Adobe Digital Editions version]. Retrieved from ProQuest ebrary. Maslan, Susan. “Resisting Representation: Theater and Democracy in Revolutionary France.” Representations No. 52 (1995): 27-51. JSTOR. Web. 20 Feb. 2015.

McClellan, Michael E. “The Revolution on Stage: Opera and Politics in France, 1789-1800.” (2004): n. pag. Web. 20 Feb. 2015. Meeker, Kimberly. “Politics of the Stage: Theatre and Popular Opinion In Eighteenth-Century Paris.” Binghamton Journal of History (2000): n. pag. Web. 20 Feb. 2015. O’Brien, Laura. “Review: A People’s History of the French Revolution, by Eric Hazan.” The Irish Times. The Irish Times, 22 March 2015. Web. 19 April 2015. Ravel, Jeffrey S. The Contested Parterre: Public Theatre and French Political Culture, 1680-1791. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1999. Print.

“Ormond’s Subversion of Heteronormative Gothic Characteristics: Constantia Dudley, Sophia Courtland, and Martinette de Beauvais” by Lindsay Brents

Introduction

involved in an arcane secret order baf-

During his attempts to create American

fling to outsiders; although not a mem-

literature distinct from its European her-

ber of the nobility, he possesses land and

itage, Charles Brockden Brown wrote

wealth that give him power over the

Ormond; Or, The Secret Witness. Writ-

heroine. Most importantly, he poses a

ten and set in the 1790s in the United

sexual threat to the heroine. Ormond is

States, this novel establishes a recogniza-

more explicitly dangerous than other

bly Gothic plot, only to thwart the ex-

villains, whose threats are either indirect

pected sexual violence by allowing the

(Montoni, who tries to control Emily St.

heroine to kill the man who threatens

Aubert’s marriage in The Mysteries of

her. With this and other examples of fe-

Udolpho) or at least hidden from the in-

male empowerment, including the rev-

génues they pursue (Ambrosio, The

olutionary soldier Martinette de Beau-

Monk). By contrast, once he realizes

vais, Brown argues that women are not

that Constantia plans to leave him for-

the inherently weaker sex. In the unset-

ever, Ormond seeks her for the express

tled years after the American Revolu-

purpose of delivering a rape threat: “one

tion, when the new democratic society

more disaster remains….Thy reputation

was defining itself, Brown had the per-

will be spotless, for nothing will be done

fect opportunity to write about the pos-

by thee, unsuitable to the tenor of thy

sibility of a new position in society for

past life” (Brown 198). While Constantia

women. Influenced by Mary Wollstone-

is confused about his language, readers

craft and the revolutionary ideal of true

clearly apprehend that the entirety of

equality, Brown sharply critiques the pa-

this five paragraph monologue is an ex-

triarchal, heteronormative society of his

tended description of how Constantia

time by suggesting that an alternative

will suffer after the sexual assault, cou-

was not only possible, but indeed nec-

pled with the disconcerting idea that, if

essary to allow women the full joys of

she takes the right attitude toward it,

human dignity.

Ormond could be doing a favor for her emotional stability.

Ormond as the Patriarchy

The reader has good reason to be-

Despite the fact that Brown sets Or-

lieve Ormond’s threats. At least two of

mond primarily in America, the work’s

the deaths in the narrative are directly

titular character is a classic Gothic vil-

his doing. He manipulates Thomas

lain: although not Catholic, he is

Craig into murdering Mr. Dudley, and 19

then murders Craig. Both of these are

and that men are entitled to that pleas-

convoluted attempts to control Con-

ure. Furthermore, Ormond discusses

stantia. First, by removing her father,

the planned rape as if he cannot stop

who disapproved of Ormond and Con-

himself, playing into another ancient

stantia’s relationship, Ormond takes on

stereotype of men as sexually uncontrol-

the responsibility of providing for her,

lable brutes: “Come, it will….An inexo-

which earns him her esteem even while

rable and immutable decree enjoins it”

it gives him an astonishing amount of

(198). Not even Constantia’s death

power over her life. Second, by killing

could stop Ormond’s lust, as he informs

Craig, he serves a paltry vigilante justice

her that “living or dead, the prize that I

for the father’s death. Ormond believes

have in view shall be mine” (216). Such

that this will endear him further to Con-

a perversion, while hopefully uncom-

stantia, despite the fact that the murder

mon in the general male population,

of Mr. Dudley was Ormond’s orchestra-

serves to demonstrate the inhumanity to

tion in the first place. Ormond addition-

which male entitlement can lead. This

ally has the audacity to admit all of this

extremity in Ormond’s assumptions

to Constantia and claim it as advance

about his rights as a man and Constan-

payment for the sexual gratification he

tia’s role as a woman are established as

desires (213-214). His actions demon-

a direct critique of those ideas, which

strate male entitlement in extremis: he

Brown deconstructs at the climax of the

believes he knows more than Constantia

novel.

about what will make her happy.

When confronted with the im-

One of the most frightening as-

mediate threat of rape, Constantia

pects of Ormond’s character is how cas-

doubts her physical prowess in a fight,

ual he is about his premeditated rape.

so she resolves to kill herself rather than

He views it as a natural conclusion to

allow Ormond to assault her. She later

their relationship, asking Constantia,

describes rape as “an evil worse than

“Art thou still dubious of my purpose?

death” (220). According to the sensibil-

Art thou not a woman? And have I not

ities of the time, the word rape is actu-

intreated [sic] for thy love, and been re-

ally never once used in the text. All ref-

jected?” (215). Implicit are the values,

erences to the act are centered on

both of the Gothic tradition and of

honor: Constantia is concerned with her

Brown’s society in general, that women

ability to “find safety for her honor”

exist to provide sexual pleasure for men,

(215),

Ormond

mocks

her

for 20

“preferr[ing] thy imaginary honor to

which Sophia enters is radically differ-

life” (216), and Sophia asks Constantia if

ent. Ormond lies lifeless on the ground,

“nothing has happened to load you with

and Constantia lives, all through her

guilt or with shame?” (220). This was –

own doing (219). For a Gothic novel,

and in some places still is – common in

this is an astonishing occurrence. Not

the discussion of female sexuality; an

only does the heroine escape – which

unwed woman’s virginity gave her

does sometimes happen – but she also

honor and was inextricably linked to her

saves herself from the male threat with-

social standing.

out male aid – which liberates her femi-

Beyond the social ramifications,

ninity from masculine control.

Brown acknowledges the more significant effects of rape on the mental health

Sophia Courtland: Female Relationships

of the victim. Ormond’s threat includes

At the end of the novel, Constantia does

the assertion that the event “will be

not have an honorable young man to

thought upon with agony: It will close

sweep her away into marriage. How-

up all the sources of pleasurable recol-

ever, she does have an intimately close

lection: It will exterminate hope… and

female friend who also functions as the

push thee into an untimely grave” (199).

narrator of the story. When Sophia and

All this from an event that Ormond re-

Constantia are alone together, their in-

iterates will not be known to the wider

teraction is “of too intimate and delicate

world if Constantia does not speak of it.

a nature, for any but a female audience”

If she never tells anyone, society will be-

(197). Ormond was written too early for

lieve her honor to be intact. The horror

the modern construction of lesbianism

of the crime is not in the loss of honor,

to exist, but Constantia and Sophia cer-

but rather in the powerlessness of the

tainly share a relationship outside 1790s

victim, which crystalizes, in a physical

heteronormativity.

act, the oppression women face in a patriarchal society.

Sophia’s position as narrator, romantic interest, and actor in the main

Constantia is willing to die rather

narrative reifies the Gothic subversion.

than suffer sexual assault, and Ormond’s

In the role normally occupied by a vir-

feelings of sexual entitlement make her

tuous male suitor, Sophia is the one who

resolution appear to be the inevitable

cares for Constantia in the aftermath of

conclusion to the episode (216). How-

Ormond’s death. She rescues Constantia

ever, the scene of the aftermath upon

from the locked mansion, justifies 21

Constantia’s actions to the judicial sys-

common. The exemplary Gothic novel

tem and reader alike, and arranges for

The Monk uses this convention to en-

the pair to travel to Europe (220). Even

hance the sexual passion between Am-

before this, the “effects of [their] ro-

brosius and Mathilda, who modeled for

mantic passion for each other” assist

Ambrosius’ personal Madonna icon. Ad-

Constantia in deciding to turn away

ditionally, Constantia is bitterly ag-

from Ormond and seek happiness else-

grieved at having to part with a mere

where (197). While Sophia is married to

picture: “It seemed as if she had not

a Mr. Courtland, he is laughably unim-

thoroughly conceived the extent of her

portant to her in comparison to Con-

calamity till now… she could have en-

stantia and functions more like a mis-

dured the loss of eyes with less reluc-

tress than a husband. After spending

tance than the loss of this inestimable

scarcely a page on Courtland detailing

relique” (58). The portrait is so dear to

how they met in Europe and decided to

her because it is her only connection to

marry, Sophia returns to her primary fo-

Sophia after the Dudleys have to leave

cus: “It was my inflexible purpose to live

New York and change their names to

and die with [Constantia]” (178). To

hide their infamy. When Constantia’s

this end, she is willing to forgo living in

fortunes finally turn, she searches for the

Europe if Constantia refuses to move

portrait in vain hope of recovering at

across the Atlantic; she arranges plans

least that connection. Her search instead

such that Courtland will come stateside

yields Sophia’s person, and Constantia

to live with her and Constantia.

“[sinks] upon the floor motionless and

This female affection is not unrequited.

without sense, but not till she ha[s]

Constantia shows a similar devotion to

faintly articulated; My God! My God!

Sophia. When she is forced by desperate

This is a joy unmerited and too great”

poverty to part with a portrait of her

(171). This excess of emotion is not in-

friend, her regret is immense, for the

spired by simple friendship.

portrait’s “power of her sensation was

In the book Female Masculinity,

similar to that possessed by a beautiful

author Jack Halberstam (Judith at the

Madonna over the heart of a juvenile en-

time of publishing) traces the history of

thusiast” (58). Comparing friendship to

deviant

the idolatry reserved for the Virgin Mary

women. This intersects with historical

is unusual; comparing romantic passion

accounts of same-sex desire because, in

to such a sensation is much more

the

late

gender

1800s,

expression

early

among

sexologists 22

attributed

homosexual

behavior

with the extremely masculine Marti-

“gender inversion,” explicitly linking

nette de Beauvais. Before formally meet-

gender and sexuality (Halberstam 82).

ing her, Constantia is struck by Marti-

Before that time, including when Brown

nette’s “heroic and contemplative” ap-

wrote Ormond, there was little public

pearance, in which “the female was ab-

discussion of the cause of same-sex

sorbed…in the rational creature, and the

erotic activity. Women were viewed as

emotions apt to be excited in the gazer,

asexual beings, and so all female-female

partook less of love than of reverence”

relationships were classified as romantic

(60). The traditional association of the

friendships and therefore not a threat to

male with the rational and the female

the institution of heterosexual marriage

with the emotional plays out here to

(65). However, any reader attempting to

characterize Martinette as a masculine

place Constantia and Sophia’s relation-

woman. Additionally, Martinette has

ship in this category is thwarted by the

spent time actively living as a man: dur-

fact that Ormond, the allegorical patri-

ing the American Revolution, she “de-

archy, is extremely threatened by them.

lighted to assume the male dress, to ac-

When speaking of Sophia and Constan-

quire skill at the sword, and dexterity in

tia together, Ormond’s “countenance

every boisterous exercise” (154). Inter-

bespoke a deepening inquietude and

estingly, this transgression of gender

growing passion. He stopped at the

boundaries is connected to Martinette’s

mention of the letter, because his voice

deep love for her husband, who dies of

was overpowered by emotion” (Brown

complications from a wound received

197). If romantic friendship is non-

on the battlefield (155). In this way,

threatening, what Constantia and So-

Martinette’s transgression is simultane-

phia share is not a romantic friendship.

ously excused – it was spurred by her wifely loyalty – and punished – it causes

Martinette de Beauvais and Revolution-

her to lose her husband. Of course,

ary Gender

many women who conformed to femi-

At the conclusion of the novel,

nine expectations lost their husbands in

the reader discovers that Ormond is

the war as well, so her punishment is

right to feel threatened by Constantia’s

not unique to her “crime.”

same-sex proclivities; however, Sophia

Martinette’s military career is key

is not the true reason. Constantia, ear-

to the threat that Constantia poses to

lier in the story, becomes enamored

Ormond. When Martinette mentions 23

that she would have been willing to

coiffed hair, body-altering corsets, and

commit suicide for the sake of the

hidden bodily functions, for example

French Revolution (in which she also

(Halberstam 258). Therefore, femininity

fought),

“shudder[s]….

could be performed by either men or

Hitherto she had read in [Martinette]

women due to its stylized, theatrical na-

nothing that bespoke the desperate

ture. Performing masculine actions not

courage of martyr, and the deep design-

only indicated masculinity, but also in-

ing of an assassin” (159). While this vi-

dicated a male body. What then of

olence initially repulses Constantia,

women who performed masculine ac-

when Ormond threatens her with rape,

tions? They were much more threaten-

her “unalterable resolution is, to die un-

ing than women who merely had mas-

injured…. To save a greater good by the

culine temperaments or intelligences.

sacrifice of life” (216). Martinette’s ex-

This is part of why Constantia (like

ample allows Constantia to overcome

many other Gothic heroines) retains her

her reservations, and she finds herself

desirability as a single woman despite

able to contemplate suicide as a way to

her conventionally masculine educa-

prevent Ormond’s triumph. Not to be

tion.

Constantia

defeated, however, Ormond reveals that

Stabbing Ormond is the only ac-

Constantia’s death will not prevent his

tive physical expression of Constantia’s

sexual gratification. She is then forced

masculinity: every other masculine trait

to counter Ormond’s inexorable mascu-

is internal. From her years as the bread-

line desire with masculine behavior of

winner of her family, Constantia shares

her own: murder.

with Sophia “obligations and cares little

Understanding the concept of

suited to [their] sex and age…[that] en-

maleness as a performance becomes val-

larged [their] knowledge” (Brown 195).

uable here. Rape and other forms of

She rejects suitors based on rational con-

physical violence were actions associ-

clusions, not emotion, and her father

ated with men and masculinity in the

trains her in masculine languages and

1790s. Furthermore, the distinction be-

philosophy, while Ormond teaches her

tween masculinity and the unaltered

about politics and other traditionally

male body was, and continues to be,

male topics. However, these masculine

nearly non-existent, while culturally ac-

mental exercises do not serve to defem-

cepted standards of femininity involved

inize Constantia. Sophia’s femininity is

a great degree of artifice: elaborately

even less in question, as she too is 24

characterized as extremely feminine by

American Revolution, American culture

her miniature portrait, which so attracts

was renegotiating itself. In creating a so-

a male stranger that he claims to be her

ciety that lacked hereditary nobility or a

lover.

monarchy out of the Western European Neither Constantia nor Sophia

tradition, the United States had already

regularly perform physically recogniza-

challenged and changed fundamental

ble masculinity – their masculinity

concepts of how a society should be

comes from their mental abilities. Given

structured. Gender roles were equally

the influence Mary Wollstonecraft’s the-

entrenched in the societal structure, so

ories had on Brown, these so-called

they were as apt to be re-examined as

masculine qualities should not actually

everything else that had been previously

be considered masculine. Pragmatism,

held sacrosanct.

logical reasoning, and diligence are

With Martinette, a veteran of two

among Wollstonecraft’s “manly virtues”

revolutions, as the most gender deviant

which, “properly speaking, [are] those

character, Brown makes the connection

talents and virtues, the exercise of which

between gender and revolution explicit.

ennobles the human character” (7).

Specifically, Martinette is a woman as-

Wollstonecraft argues that qualities con-

suming traditionally male power, and

sidered manly should simply be consid-

she is not alone. She speaks of “whole

ered universally human. The “masculin-

regiments of women” who had joined

ity” of Constantia and Sophia, therefore,

the French army in male disguise

should not be read as such. Brown is

(Brown 159). With revolutions on both

characterizing them as fully competent

sides of the Atlantic Ocean spurring

people, properly educated and inured to

women into new roles, the old system

the realities of the world.

of gender division becomes outdated

So why does Brown agree with

and in need of its own revolution.

Wollstonecraft and question the proper

Brown proposes Wollstonecraft’s idea of

roles of women? Halberstam writes that

educating women to have the same vig-

“minority masculinities…destabilize bi-

orous mental faculties that are expected

nary gender systems” (29). Conversely,

in men as a suitable outcome of this

destabilized binary gender systems allow

gender revolution.

for the exploration of minority masculinities – female masculinity among

Reception and Authorial Intent

them. In the unstable time following the 25

Critics of Ormond have rejected the ho-

such attractive properties in a form thus

moeroticism in the plot as a character

vaguely seen” (Brown 61).

flaw in Constantia, used it to bolster his-

Comment accuses Brown of the

torical surveys of proto-lesbian desire, or

same xenophobia and racism (Marti-

treated it as a metaphor for social anxi-

nette has a dark complexion along with

eties. After rightfully acknowledging

her foreign birthplace) that Halberstam

that none of these approaches focuses

finds in Lillian Faderman’s Scotch Ver-

on the dialogue about women’s rights

dict, which defends the “pure” nature of

that Brown deliberately explores, Kris-

a romantic friendship by accusing an In-

tin M. Comment argues that Brown

dian girl of lying about the sexual ac-

treats homoerotic behavior in women as

tions

a source of anxiety (57). She claims

women. Faderman’s goal, however, is to

Brown meant to use Martinette to at-

defend “her belief in a pure lesbianism,”

tack the idea of sexual female relation-

and Brown has no such motive (Hal-

ships as too radical: he gives Martinette

berstam 65). Queer historians like

foreign origins and a name that sounds

Faderman try to interpret truths about

like Marie Antoinette, the public figure

the past, while novelists, particularly

most closely associated with debauchery

early American ones like Brown, pub-

and destructive femininity (68). She ar-

lished commentaries on the current

gues that Martinette takes the perver-

state of affairs with an eye toward chang-

sions associated with homosexual desire

ing the future. Connecting Martinette

to “make Constantia and Sophia inno-

with the French Revolution might have

cent by contrast” (69). However, the

made her undesirable for some readers,

only contrast Comment cites is Con-

but Martinette’s first experience in di-

stantia shrinking from Martinette’s mil-

rectly assuming a male role came in the

itary violence – which Constantia later

American Revolution, about which all

emulates. Furthermore, narrator Sophia

of Brown’s intended readership would

uses Constantia’s complimentary first

have had a positive view. Thus, for all

impression of Martinette to describe

that she is sometimes frightening, Mar-

Constantia herself. In fact, the narration

tinette is an example of positive change

suggests that Constantia is drawn to

in the world.

she

witnessed

between

two

Martinette because of this very similar-

Both Faderman and Comment la-

ity: “this resemblance….maybe sup-

bor under the assumption that people

posed to influence her in discovering

before the 1900s viewed homosexuality 26

with the same negative connotations

mismanaging the affairs in the first place

created by the gender inversion theory.

(Comment 70). As to intimacy, Sophia

Suggested first by Richard von Krafft-

speaks of “three days…spent in a state of

Ebing and expanded by Havelock Ellis,

dizziness and intoxication….amidst the

the theory states that a gender inverted

impetuosities of a master-passion” when

woman would take on masculine char-

she

acteristics that caused her to pursue

(Brown 191-192). With Mr. Dudley al-

women, while a gender inverted man

ready dead, the two women are free to

would take on female characteristics and

do what they will with each other. With

pursue men (Halberstam 76). This the-

Sophia as the narrator, high romantic

ory came to pathologize lesbianism and

diction elevates the experience. The

homosexual behavior, which had previ-

limits to female intimacy are wholly re-

ously been more of a curiosity than a

moved: Sophia says that “henceforth,

disease. However, with Wollstonecraft’s

the stream of our existence was to mix”

ideas making Constantia and Sophia’s

(193). She even plans to whisk Constan-

competence not a symbol of masculin-

tia away from Ormond, the last possible

ity, their relationship does not follow

male authority figure in her life. Rather

gender inversion. Furthermore, Marti-

than preventing female autonomy and

nette, the woman who performs the

intimacy as Comment claims, Brown al-

quintessentially masculine role of sol-

lows his protagonist to indulge in the

dier, does so because of her heterosex-

full glory of those possibilities.

and

Constantia

finally

reunite

ual relationship. These women counter the gender inversion theory of homo-

Conclusion

sexuality before it has even been pro-

With Constantia as a heroine capable of

posed, and so studying Brown’s inten-

defending herself, Sophia fulfilling the

tions in that light is anachronistic and

typically masculine role of romantic

incorrect.

protector, and Martinette as a radical ex-

Comment further insists that Or-

ample of the power women are able to

mond makes “efforts to contain female

command, Ormond becomes a subver-

intimacy and autonomy,” but then turns

sion of the Gothic mode and patriarchal

around and cites the manifold examples

society. As a book Brown wrote to es-

of women handling their own affairs

tablish a uniquely American literary

without the assistance of men and ad-

identity, it makes an impressively revo-

mits that men are usually the ones

lutionary

statement.

Not

only

do 27

American women not need men to save them, but they do not seem to need men at all. Heterosexual marriages serve important reproductive purposes for the continuation

the

republic,

but

women’s happiness and ability to survive do not hinge on them. Patriarchal society, present even in the so-called “New World,” restricts women’s independence by forcing them to rely on men. Implicit in that statement is the idea that women should in fact have independence. Brown also makes clear the damaging reality of male behavior. Ormond is an extreme case, but his candor reveals the beliefs ingrained in men that society refused to discuss in the 1790s. The issues brought up in Ormond are progressive for their time, and they are unfortunately topical in the present day. Perhaps if this novel and its message had been received more popularly, they would not be.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Brown, Charles Brockden. Ormond; or The Secret Witness. Ed. Philip Barnard and Stephen Shapiro. Indianapolis: Hackett, 2009. Print. Comment, Kristin M. "Charles Brockden Brown's Ormond and Lesbian Possibility in the Early Republic." Early American Literature 40.1 (2005): 57-78. JSTOR. Web. 14 Dec. 2014. Halberstam, Judith. Female Masculinity. Durham: Duke UP, 1998. Print. Wollstonecraft, Mary. A Vindication of the Rights of Woman: With Strictures on Political and Moral Subjects. New York: A. J. Matsell, 1833. Google. 18 Oct. 2005. Web.

"Everything is True, Everything Anybody Has Ever Thought: (Im)possibility at the Interface of Science Fiction and Urban Fantasy"

by Jeanette Tong Gin Yen

Science fiction and Fantasy, fall-

For clarity, this essay begins with some

ing under the general classification of

expository detail on the two novels ex-

imaginative literature, have an estab-

amined. Wilson’s Bildungsroman tracks

lished tradition of charting the impossi-

teenager Alif as he traverses the contem-

ble through narratives that verge on pos-

porary urban setting of The City, an un-

sible, often articulating underlying con-

named Middle Eastern security state.

cerns about our social worlds through

Alif’s knowledge of technology and

the paradox of ‘(im)possibilities’. The

awareness of government control has

term ‘(im)possibilities’ is understood in

led him to identify as a ‘hacktivist’, a so-

this essay to describe that precarious and

cial activist who primarily undermines

uncertain divide between what seems

state control through data programming

objectively possible and impossible. G.

and hacking computer systems. He re-

Willow Wilson’s Alif the Unseen (2012)

sentfully develops a computer program

and Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids

called ‘Tin Sari’, which electronically

Dream of Electric Sheep? (1968) rely on

shields him from his ex-lover Intisar, but

conventions of other-worlds and keenly

also proves unexpectedly useful to the

observe these (im)possibilities to reveal

security agents of his government. The

the liminal fabric of reality as a nebulous

latter’s acquisition of Tin Sari triggers

uncertainty while questioning the tradi-

his flight into the underbelly of The

tion of secular rationalist discourse of

City, a techno-magical world of jinn

the Western Age of Enlightenment. De-

that defies the laws of reality and chal-

spite being written and published nearly

lenges its limits through an exploration

40 years apart, these texts share a rejec-

of the fantastic. There, Alif encounters

tion of rationalistic secularist thought,

Vikram, an animalistic, shape-shifting

adopting ‘(un)real’ narratives – a term

jinn who assists him on his quest to un-

which expresses a similarly located in-

derstand the Alf Yeom, or ‘The Thou-

stability of a pre-existing empirical real-

sand and One Days’, a book of tales nar-

ity and which therefore undermine the

rated by the jinn and the inverse to The

possibility of certainty of knowledge as

Thousand and One Nights.

such. A comparison of these novels re-

Dick’s science fiction novel, in

veals that their evocation of the (im)pos-

contrast, is set in a futuristic, dystopian

sible complicates and puts at stake the

San Francisco and tracks a single day in

knowledge system that underpins con-

bounty hunter Rick Deckard’s life as he

temporary Western liberal democracy.

pursues a group of fugitive androids (the 31

latest design by multi-terrestrial corpo-

(im)possible, producing an (ir)rational

ration Rosen Industries). The dominant

lens for readers to re-examine the world.

religion within this techno-future of hu-

Typically grounded in scientific

manoid androids and flying cars is Mer-

or technological ‘nova’ (“Latin for ‘new

cerism, in which the collective con-

thing’”) which are of “material, physical

sciousnesses

are

rationalization, rather than a supernatu-

merged through the use of an Empathy

ral or arbitrary one”, SF narratives rely

Box. In Do Androids?, the ability to ex-

on materiality to generate a credible

perience empathy delineates ‘human’

contextual reality.1 Literally, then, SF

from ‘android’, and as a signifier of em-

hinges on both matter and reality, a sort

pathic emotion, the moment of fusion

of ‘mater(reality)’, a neologism con-

through Mercerism significantly en-

structed in this essay which ties reality

twines humanism with a transcendental

into materiality. This mater(reality) sup-

religious belief.

ports those modes of (im)possibilities

its

proponents

Within contemporary Western

which are essential to SF narratives. Ma-

liberal democracy, the continued devel-

ter(reality) provides the “discourse of

opment and prioritisation of scientific

possibility” which further demarcates

rationality as the primary mode of phil-

SF’s split from fantasy, where fantastic

osophical thought has caused this frame-

elements of the text are not necessarily

work to permeate the discursive habits

grounded in demonstrable possibilities.2

of liberal subjects and innately con-

However, in introducing the

strains alternative modes of action. By

novum of the Empathy Box, Dick re-

manipulating genre, place, and realities,

jects these strict distinctions in Do An-

Alif the Unseen and Do Androids? pro-

droids? in order to manifest a world

duce a critique of the widely-held as-

which is simultaneously hyper-realistic

sumptions of that rationalistic episte-

and other-worldly. In disrupting the es-

mology as the pinnacle framework of

tablished SF conventions of using nova

philosophical thought. In transgressing

to generate mater(reality), Dick blurs

established conventions of their genres,

the barriers between reality and (un)re-

subverting and re-newing them, these

ality, unsettling the rationalist secular-

works insistently collide against the

ism of Western discourse. The unfathomable design of the Empathy Box blurs

Ibid.

Roberts, "Defining Science Fiction," 6.

‘hard science’ with the ethe(real) reli-

whose

gious experience of Mercerism: upon

mountainside against an unceasing vol-

contact with the box, users enter not

ley of rocks is simultaneously Sisyphean

virtually but actually “into the landscape

and Christ-like, imbuing the figure of

of drab hill, drab sky” that is shown on

Mercer with cultural significance but

the television screen it is connected to.3

also connotations of being mythical –

This shared empathic experience, “fu-

fictitious. However, though popular tel-

sion,” is only ever explained as a cross-

evision host Buster Friendly apparently

ing over “in the usual perplexing fash-

exposes Mercer as a Hollywood-esque

ion; physical merging – accompanied by

hoax relying on fake backdrops and

mental and spiritual identification –

cheap

with Wilbur Mercer”.4 Though propo-

physically “manifest(s) himself and of-

nents of Mercerism never physically

fer(s) aid” to prevent Rick’s death

leave their originary location, the emo-

through his omniscient knowledge and

tional experience of fusion during

presence.7 This moment becomes ut-

which rocks are thrown at Wilber Mer-

terly inexplicable: this dissonant event

cer leave material traces on the users

where the intangible intervenes in the

sharing in his experience; they find

tangible world births an (un)reality

themselves bleeding corporeally from

which rejects not only the strict distinc-

cuts left behind by the virtual rocks

tion between spiritual mysticism and re-

hurled at them.

Not only does Dick

ality, but also questions contemporary

blur the liminal line between the virtual

reliance on tangible, evincible rational-

and the real through this novum, this

ity as a system of knowledge that can be

embodied corporeality of psychological

trusted. By merging rational experience

experience also resists the dominant

with supernatural intercession, Dick

mode of thought which delineates the

tests the limits of rationality and rejects

separation between mind and body ex-

accepted SF conventions in order to

periences.

produce a new, provocative mode of

struggle

acting,6

never-ending

Mercer

nevertheless

Dick further blurs the dichotomy

thinking. By expounding on Mercerism

of science and mysticism through the

as a legitimate religious experience

uncertain existence of Wilbur Mercer,

where

Philip K. Dick, Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep? (London: Phoenix, 1968), 16. 4 Dick, Do Androids, 17.

the

moment

fusion

Dick, Do Androids, 17. Dick, Do Androids, 162-165. 7 Dick, Do Androids, 175. 6

experienced in the Real and leaves visi-

opening” between two walls is, signifi-

ble, corporeal markers on the body after

cantly, out of sight;10 Vikram finds it

the fact, Dick insistently presses at the

through its smell of “vagrant air…water

space between real and spiritual, reject-

in pools of quartz…garlic”.11 The hidden

ing the binary distinction between these

space is only accessible through an un-

modes to create an (im)possible world

orthodox

that poses inherent challenges to the na-

which Wilson strives to disrupt ‘ways of

ture of reality.

seeing’ or understanding – the presup-

sensory

faculty,

through

Wilson similarly melds the para-

posed essential conditions of epistemol-

normal with the rational through the

ogy as known in modern discourse. By

presentation of the jinn (an incredible

embedding the jinn and their living

phenomena) through Alif’s manifest,

spaces as embodied and manifest reli-

credible experiences, and in doing so

gious beings within The City-scape, the

de-familiarises the urban cityscape pre-

novel borrows from the SF convention

sumable known to that reader, compel-

of mater(eality) to lend credence to the

ling them to revaluate that familiar

real potential actuality of the para-nor-

world and begin to re-view it as some-

mal, merging urban modernity with ar-

thing that is simultaneously alien and fa-

chaic religiosity to upset modern secu-

miliar: the (un)known. Wilson im-

larism’s emphasis on scientific rational-

merses the world of the jinn within The

ity.

City, implanting “fantastic pocket uni-

Furthermore, stylised as a proper

verse(s)” such as the Immoveable Alley

noun, The City is simultaneously signi-

within the otherwise recognisable ur-

fied as unique even as it remains gener-

banity of The City.8 In doing so, Wilson

ically unnamed: it becomes “an any-

literally locates “the sublime in the ir-

where and a nowhere,” an “ultimate

ruption of reawakened supernatural

zone of uncanny spectrality”.12 The City

powers into the urban landscape”.9 The

becomes “a plural space” of “hidden

Immoveable Alley, accessible through

and liminal sites” which challenge and

the Old Quarter down a “slender

re-make

AC. Irvine, “Urban Fantasy,” in The Cambridge Companion to Fantasy Literature, eds. Edward James, Farah Mendlesohn (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 205. 9 Irvine, “Urban Fantasy,” 201.

our

perceptions

urban

Willow G. Wilson, Alif The Unseen (Crows Nest, N.S.W: Allen & Unwin, 2012), 160. 11 Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 160. 12 Maria Beville, "Zones Of Uncanny Spectrality: The City In Postmodern Literature," English Studies 94.5 (2013): 616.

modernity, de-familiarising the familiar

taken to a police department which

by invoking the (im)possible.13 Where

claims to be the only San Francisco Po-

impossible loci emerge as existent, the

lice Department (SFPD) to exist.14 He

para-normal is joined with the Real,

has no knowledge of these “parallel po-

generating a meta-physical space that in-

lice agencies,” nor they knowledge of

nately redefines reality. Just as Dick in-

him: they repeatedly refute Rick’s

terrupts SF conventions with a fantasti-

claims to being a bounty hunter, under-

cal techno-spirituality, legitimising Mer-

mining his knowledge of his own iden-

cerism as a religion based on a genuine

tity.15 Significantly, they are not just not

omniscient power to invite a reconsid-

known to each other but (un)known to

eration of secularist rationalism, Wilson

each other: Rick recognises the building

borrows from SF’s mater(realities) to

and all its internal functionality as “Like

create an (im)possible world which in-

this, but not this”.16 This moment trig-

tertwines magical impossibilities with

gers Freud’s ‘uncanny’, where that “spe-

scientific rationality. Alif the Unseen

cies of the frightening that goes back to

thus complicates the apparently strict

what was once well known and had long

disjunct between unbelievable magic

been familiar” (emphasis added) marks

and tangible rationality as well as the

the tangible dissonance between inverse

tendency

philosophical

realities, and this (un)familiar moment

thought to prioritise the latter abso-

highlighting the absolute (un)know-

lutely.

ability of the city.17 Briefly, Rick begins

modern

Where Wilson’s city stands for

to question his own being and his per-

the tension between strains of thought,

ceived reality, invoking the paranoiac

Dick’s San Francisco in Do Androids? is

fantasy where an individual, suspicious

a dark, inverted mirror city that stands

that “the world he lives in is a fake” rec-

for an uncanny unreal which challenges

ognises “its very hyper-reality” as that

the limits to individualist objectivity.

which makes it “irreal, substanceless,

Plunged into the ‘fake’ San Franciso,

deprived of the material inertia”.18 Just

Rick becomes “bewildered” when he is

as Rick’s knowing of reality as such

Beville, "Zones Of Uncanny Spectrality,” 616. Dick, Do Androids, 86. 15 Dick, Do Androids, 89. 16 Dick, Do Androids, 89. 17 Sigmund Freud, The Uncanny (London: Penguin Books, 2003), 124.

13 14

Slavoj Žižek, “Passions of the Real, Passions of Semblance,” in Welcome to the Desert of the Real!: Five Essays on September 11 and Related Dates, (London: Verso, 2002), 13.

within that inverted San Francisco be-

grasping of which elevates Alif’s intel-

comes confused and made (un)familiar,

lectual prowess.

so Dick complicates the potential recog-

Yet at this literal height of tri-

nition of any existing objective truths or

umph, during an allegorical dream se-

realities.

quence in which Alif rides atop “the col-

Wilson similiarly constructs a cri-

umns of code on his computer screen”

tique of epistemology and the ability to

that have become “a tower of white

know (empirically and objectively) in

stone”,23 he realises the “nature of his

Alif through the inverse relationship be-

coding scheme” can “no longer com-

tween Alif’s knowing and the function

pensate for its inherent instability” and

of his coding. Alif successfully develops

his tower begins to crack.24 Ironically,

the code for Tin Sari, a “software pro-

the knowledge Alif has used to form his

gram” that impossibly identifies “com-

code and programmed to “be anything

plete, individual personality,”19 based

it wanted” has “degenerate(d) into

on metadata, but he has no “under-

nothing at all”.25 The inverse parallel be-

standing [of] how it work(s)”.20 In con-

tween these two instances highlights the

trast, he believes that he is able to un-

disjunct

derstand the intrinsic truth behind the

knowledge, where they do not accord

Alf Yeom as a series of jinn tales that

but instead contradict. The reference to

have “developed a system of transmit-

the ‘ivory tower’ of academia further

ting knowledge that could accommo-

suggests a deep critique of institutions

date

infor-

which lay claim to knowledge, of know-

Wilson alludes here to meta-

ability itself, highlighting these things as

the

mation.21

contradictions”

phor as such, of “knowledge existing in

between

functionality

and

(im)possible fallacies.

several states simultaneously and with-

Besides inherently critiquing no-

out contradiction”.22 The shift in Alif’s

tions of objectivity and secularist ra-

mode of acquiring knowledge appears

tional modes of thought, Alif the Un-

to mark his fundamental understanding

seen also implicitly undermines liberal-

of how knowledge as such exists, the

ism and its claims to an objective mode of internalised subjectivity, exposing it

Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 46. Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 44. 21 Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 230. 22 Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 228.

Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 235. Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 240-241. 25 Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 240.

instead as hypocrisy. Wilson positions

until it makes some kind of rational

Alif

liberalist

sense” (emphasis added), advocating an

(mis)recognition, where Alif views him-

internalised rationalistic framework of

self as free-from-ideology in his belliger-

thinking that refuses to allow for gaps in

ent claim that “anyone who could pay…

knowledge.29 Dina, Alif’s childhood

was entitled to” his hacking protec-

friend, exposes the incongruity of this

tion.26

Yet even as Alif positions himself

mode of thinking when she calls him

as non-partisan and truly neutral, this

out for belittling her “for believing

liberalist statement, in espousing a par-

things [he] only read(s) about”.30 As

ticular construction of ‘free-for-all’, is al-

Dina accuses of him, he has “reactions,

ways-already ideologically constructed.

not convictions”; Wilson hints that Alif,

In presenting Alif’s mindset as a locus

a representative of the liberal mode of

where freedom from ideology is con-

thought, fundamentally and function-

ceptually possible, Wilson inherently

ally philosophises a priori but which rec-

critiques the dominant mode of liberal

ognises itself as functionally philosophis-

ideology by manifesting this (im)possi-

ing a posteriori.31 Wilson’s intuitive cri-

bility within her (im)possible world.

tique of contradictory modes of think-

within

the

apex

This (im)possibility is further pre-

ing here expressly lays bare the discrep-

sented rhetorically in Alif’s resistant mis-

ancy in liberal thought where its notions

recognition of the actuality of the jinn’s

of subjectivity and objectivity lies firmly

existence in the material world he be-

within what it holds already as an a pri-

lieves he understands and recognises,

ori truth, exposing the foundations of

despite his repeated encounters with the

liberalism as false ideology.

fantastic. In relation to Vikram’s “leonine joints”

Dick

similarly

addresses

the

and “improbable knees,”

(im)possibilities of true subjectivity as

Alif recognises the cognitive dissonance

such by highlighting Rick’s gradual loss

of what he can see encountering the

of liveliness as he grows to empathise

limits of his belief, but continues to re-

with androids and begins to recognise

ject the improbability of Vikram’s

(un)humanness as human. Rick origi-

(un)humanness.28 He wants instead to

nally understands his world as a straight-

“break it down into its composite parts

forward one where the human-android

Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 15. Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 93. 28 Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 129.

Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 93. Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 354. 31 Wilson, Alif The Unseen, 354.

binary is absolute and clear. This lack of

constitution of entangled agencies”.35

ambiguity is upset by his introduction to

Rick’s sexual relationship with Rachael,

Rachael Rosen, an android that initially

which is representative of his existential

passes for a “schizoid girl” with “under-

relationship to her, is thus not a point of

developed empathic ability”

and to

‘interaction,’ as assumed, but “intra-ac-

whom Rick is attracted.32 During his

tion”.36 This ‘intra-action’ is a “mutual

sexual encounter with Rachael, she re-

constitution of entangled agencies,”

flects on the violation of her existential

positing that “distinct agencies” do not

sense of self, questioning the “illusion

intrinsically exist, but follow on from

that [she] personally – really exist(s)”

“intra-action” as the very concept of

when, as an android, she is only a “rep-

“separate individual agencies” rely on a

resentative of a type”.33 Rachael’s intro-

“mutual entanglement”.37 Rick thus

spection, following a dispassionate but

recognises that his existential identifica-

nevertheless intimate sexual liaison, be-

tion as human is the obverse to

comes a powerful catalyst for Rick’s

Rachael’s identification as non-human –

cognisance of androids’ ability to recog-

their self-identification requires being

nise their own existentiality as such.

recognised in relation to what they are

Rick’s ontological re-cognition of Rachael Rosen as such literally human-

not in order for any meaningful perception to emerge at all.

ises her, through which Dick compli-

Exposed to the terror of this mu-

cates not just the categorisation of hu-

tual entanglement, Rick’s unambiguous

mans but “upends notions of auton-

dis-identification with the androids be-

omy”, another essential principle that

comes impaired. Physically and psychi-

supports the tenets of liberalism.34 In

cally connected to Rachael, Rick can no

humanising and existentially re-cognis-

longer bring himself to kill her.38

ing Rachael, the novel suggests “an on-

Rachael previously declares that she’s

tology of intra-action and entangle-

“not alive! You’re not going to bed with

ment,” postulated by Barad as the in-

a woman… it’s convincing if you don’t

stance of recognizing the “mutual

think too much about it”; Rick must not

Dick, Do Androids, 43. Dick, Do Androids, 149. 34 Jennifer Rhee, "Beyond The Uncanny Valley: Masahiro Mori And Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?," Configurations 21.3 (2013): 316.

Rhee, "Beyond The Uncanny Valley,” 316. Rhee, "Beyond The Uncanny Valley,” 316. 37 Rhee, "Beyond The Uncanny Valley,” 316. 38 Dick, Do Androids, 158.

think about it, because his belief in ob-

challenge to the trajectory of secularist

jectivity will be shattered – like Alif, he

thought emerging from the Age of En-

does not have convictions, but beliefs

lightenment, putting at stake the ration-

and reactions which, dangerously, can

alistic frame of thinking which pervades

be changed, disrupted.39 Faced with a

contemporary

world that strips him of his fundamental

within genres that already diverge from

principles through his exposure to a

realism, the narratives both Wilson and

(mis)recognition of bionic entities as or-

Dick re-present insistently disrupt genre

ganically alive, Rick Deckard’s dimin-

and narratively represent (im)possible

ishment of self is illustrated by the shift

worlds in order to re-present and reveal

in narrative at the end of Do Androids?

the (im)possibilities of our own world.

where his wife Iran’s perspective on

They rupture the foundations of the En-

events takes priority.40 Rick’s subjective

lightenment and that which follows

perspective becomes expressed in spec-

most pervasively – Western secularist

ulative terms: Iran, and thus the reader,

liberalism and its ethos of individualist

can only guess at his emotions, and it is

rationalism. By imbuing cities with

only ever “as if [he is] baffled,” “as if

(un)familiarity, these texts further sug-

perplexed,” or “as if hearing himself”

gest alternative opportunities to read the

(emphasis added).41 The loss of defini-

liminal spaces between what is known

tive expressive voice here marks Rick’s

and what is always-already (un)known

withdrawal from not only the novel, but

in order to experience the terrifying and

symbolically, his own world. The im-

terrific locus of existence. What is at

possibilities of retaining a sense of Self

stake in these (im)possible worlds is thus

in a world where the boundaries be-

a challenge to orthodoxy and a passively

tween subjectivities collapse put at stake

internalised rationality which precludes

the principles of liberalism which lays

and excludes disruptions. By bringing

claim to recognising subjectivity, expos-

forth these essential eruptions of dis-

ing it as the ultimate (mis)recognition

jointed disbelief, Wilson and Dick make

and a false ideology.

possible a mode which celebrates imag-

discourse.

Embedded

Despite being written out of dif-

inative potentialities and reinvigorates

ferent historical context, Alif the Un-

the dominant (and stagnant) mode of

seen and Do Androids? share an implicit

rationalistic secular thought.

Dick, Do Androids, 152. Dick, Do Androids, 189-193.

Dick, Do Androids, 191.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Dick, Philip K. Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?. London: Phoenix, 1968. Freud, Sigmund. The Uncanny. London: Penguin Books, 2003. Irvine, Alexander C. “Urban Fantasy.” In The Cambridge Companion to Fantasy Literature, edited by Edward James and Farah Mendlesohn, 200213. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Rhee, Jennifer. "Beyond The Uncanny Valley: Masahiro Mori And Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?," Configurations 21.3 (2013): 301-329. Roberts, Adam C. "Defining Science Fiction." In Science Fiction, 1-46. Routledge. Cornwall: Taylor & Francis Books, 2000. Wilson, G. Willow. Alif The Unseen. Crows Nest, N.S.W: Allen & Unwin, 2012. Žižek, Slavoj. “Passions of the Real, Passions of Semblance.” In Welcome to the Desert of the Real!: Five Essays on September 11 and Related Dates, 5-32. London: Verso, 2002.

"Artificiality, Blade Runners, and Capitalism: Examining the Postmodern in Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of

Electric Sheep and Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner"

by Larisa Coffey-Wong

Introduction Despite

well-docu-

tion of artificial life. It is ultimately these

mented differences that exist between

divergent central concerns that account

Ridley Scott’s loose filmic adaption of

for many of the disparities between

Philip K. Dick’s novel Do Androids

Dick’s novel and Scott’s film, and this is

Dream of Electric Sheep, as first and

demonstrated in the following examina-

foremost an adaptation, Blade Runner

tion of the points of variation between

necessarily has some points of similarity

Androids and Blade Runner, focusing

with its source text. In disagreeing with

particularly on setting, the characterisa-

the above statement, Paul Sammon in-

tion of the protagonist, and the repre-

sists that “the philosophical, ecological

sentation of women. However it is not

and social concerns” of the novel have

just the texts’ different central concerns

been “faithfully transplanted” into the

that reveal themselves where novel and

film, particularly noting the preserva-

film

tion of themes such as paranoia, aliena-

emerges at the points of divergence be-

tion, and ecological ruin at the hands of

tween Blade Runner and Androids.

mankind (20). Specifically, this paper

Thus an examination of the differences

will focus on two elements that remain

between Dick’s novel and Scott’s film

defining features of both texts: the reli-

will demonstrate that in spite of their

ance on Capitalist modes and structures

varying central concerns, both texts can

in the presentation of a dystopian world,

be firmly situated within the category of

and

postmodernism.

the

morality of both creation and destrucnumerous,

concern

surrounding

the

deviate;

the

postmodern

also

real/artificial dichotomy, both of which

Dick’s novel portrays a dystopian,

are key elements of Jay Clayton’s post-

post-apocalyptic view of future Earth, in

modernism (55). In spite of these key

which the majority of the human popu-

points of similarity between the texts, a

lation have migrated to a better life on

closer analysis reveals that Scott’s film

the off-world colonies. Those who re-

and Dick’s novel have, crucially, differ-

main behind are the unfortunate ones;

ent central concerns. Blade Runner’s

either too poor or too obtuse to emi-

foregrounding of the uncertainty re-

grate, they inhabit a dust-clogged, dete-

garding Rick Deckard’s status as human

riorating world. As a small-time bureau-

constructs this as the film’s central con-

crat within the Police Department, pro-

cern, while Androids concentrates on

tagonist Rick Deckard fits into the for-

the protagonist’s struggles regarding the

mer category, yearning for enough 42

wealth to purchase a genuine animal (all

Setting Up the Postmodern

but extinct in this future world) to se-

While the settings for both Blade

cure both his and his wife’s happiness.

Runner and Androids are quite differ-

After a senior member of the Police De-

ent, both texts succeed in producing a

partment is incapacitated by an escaped

postmodern aesthetic. From the very

android from the off-world colonies,

opening sequence of Scott’s film, Blade

Deckard is called upon to finish the task

Runner establishes itself as a split from

of discovering and ‘retiring’ the rest of

Dick’s novel with regards to setting.

these fugitive, superior robots known as

Text across the screen informs the

Nexus-6 types. The remainder of the

viewer that it is the year 2019 in Los An-

narrative sees the protagonist’s initial in-

geles, but the “de-familiarised urban

difference to his targets become more

landscape” does not reflect the 1992 San

and more compromised, especially after

Francisco setting that is described in An-

his meeting, and subsequent relation-

droids (Lussier & Gowan 165). Instead

ship with, a corporation Nexus-6 an-

of the pervasive dust, there is the omni-

droid named Rachel. Scott’s adaptation

present rain, and where Dick’s universe

follows the same basic plot as Dick’s

is a mostly uninhabited one that falls,

novel, but has several noteworthy differ-

day by day, “into greater entropic ruin,”

ences, which will be outlined and exam-

Scott’s is a “portrait of ecological disas-

ined in what follows. Although it may

ter and urban over-crowding, of a visual

have been these divergences from the

and aural landscape saturated with ad-

novel that resulted in the film’s initial

vertising, of a polyglot population im-

flop at the box office due to “befud-

mersed in a Babel of competing cul-

dled” audience members, there is no

tures” (Dick 15; Clayton 54). Mirroring

doubt that Blade Runner has gained mo-

the work of other critical commenta-

mentum and accreditation over time to

tors, Kevin McNamara notes that Scott’s

become a “science fiction cult film

visually striking juxtaposition of the

turned classic” (Kaplan). However, the

primitive and the technologically ad-

film’s standalone success does not ren-

vanced, as well as the miscellany of cul-

der it detachable from its source text,

tures and images, succeeds in embody-

and thus this essay will analyse Dick’s

ing Fredric Jameson’s postmodern no-

novel and Scott’s film in conjunction

tion of the pastiche, in which the post-

with one another.

modern text “cannibalizes all the […]

styles of the past and combines them in

divergent landscapes both include nota-

overstimulating ensembles (66).

ble features of postmodernism.

Scott’s use of this visual pastiche has two effects: firstly, it results in the

Capitalism and Career

creation of “a world in which the body

As indicated earlier, the use and repre-

cannot locate itself in space, or con-

sentation of Capitalist modes, a key ele-

sciousness in history” — another charac-

ment of postmodernism, is one of the

teristic typical of Jameson’s postmod-

strongest points of similarity between

ernism, which he calls the ‘postmodern

Blade Runner and Androids. Of partic-

hyperspace’ (McNamara 423). While

ular note is the emphasis placed on pro-

Blade Runner is much more effective at

duction and commodification, espe-

conveying this sense of an overwhelm-

cially in the case of the artificial humans.

ing, unidentifiable landscape than An-

Termed “androids” or “andys” in Dick’s

droids is, it must be noted that Scott had

novel, and “replicants” or “skin jobs” in

the benefit of using a multitrack me-

Scott’s adaptation, these artificial beings

dium which included moving visual im-

are created largely for slave labour on

ages and sound rather than Dick’s reli-

the off-world colonies and are viewed as

ance on the written word as a single

commodities to be exploited for labour

method of expression (Stam 56). Thus,

until their pre-programmed lifespans

while the hyperspace is discernible in

expire. In fact, the high demand for

Dick’s novel, as evident in the presence

these humanoid robots constructs them

of the permeating, suffocating dust that

as a key catalyst for technological re-

renders the world of the book largely

search and, consequently, economic de-

unmappable, it is Scott’s film that ex-

velopments in both the book and film

tends and foregrounds these elements.

(McNamara 422). However the constant

Secondly, the use of the iconographic

demand for development and refine-

pastiche denotes an “increasing conver-

ment in the sphere of production in an

gence of cultural and the economic,”

attempt to meet the “growing wants of

which Aris Mousoutzanis suggests is

the new market” introduces complica-

“symptomatic” of the cultural logic of

tions for humankind (Marx 35) — or,

late capitalism (161). Thus, while the set-

more specifically, for the protagonist,

ting of Scott’s film and Dick’s novel is a

Rick Deckard.

point of variation between the texts, the

In both Dick’s novel and Scott’s film, Deckard has made his career as a 44

dispatcher of escaped artificial humans.

“brooding, burned-out detective” who

In both instances, like the rest of the so-

is coerced into taking on the assignment

ciety, Deckard initially views his targets

by an authority figure within the police

as objects: “A humanoid robot is like

force (Sammon 20). This alteration of

any other machine; it can fluctuate be-

the protagonist’s character and career

tween being a benefit and a hazard very

situation in Scott’s film is significant be-

rapidly” (32). This boundary between a

cause it changes Deckard’s motivation

benefit and hazard is complicated when

for undertaking the retirement of six an-

the production of androids reaches a

droids.

level such that they are almost indistinguishable from humans. This new

Artificial Anxieties

model of superior artificial beings,

The nature of the protagonist’s job nec-

known as Nexus-6 in both novel and

essarily situates him within the “unsta-

film, is at least of the same standard as a

ble boundary between humans and an-

human in terms of intelligence and

droids”, which threatens to compromise

physically superior in many ways, such

not only his physical safety but also his

that Deckard wonders if “the servant

status as human (Vint 125) — so why

had in some cases become more adroit

does he do it? In the case of Dick’s

than its master” (23) — highlighting the

novel, Deckard’s primary motivation

anxiety that exists surrounding the

can be understood through the modes

real/artificial dichotomy.

of Capitalism — put simply, he desires

The narrative of both novel and

wealth. From the very beginning of the

film begin after a senior member of the

novel, it is clear that Deckard is unsatis-

police force in charge of the eradication

fied. Though he is fortunate enough to

of androids is incapacitated following an

have a large, comfortable apartment, a

attempt to identify and “retire” a group

pet (though artificial), and a wife, the

of escaped Nexus-6 robots. It is here

domestic argument that opens the novel

that another point of divergence occurs

suggests underlying tensions. It quickly

between the texts; as a ‘Bounty Hunter’

becomes

in Androids, Deckard is presented as a

source of this discontentment is Deck-

“petty bureaucrat” who eagerly takes on

ard’s inability to acquire a real animal,

the job in the hope of increasing his in-

which are all but extinct on this future

come levels, but as a ‘Blade Runner’ in

Earth. As a result, a real living creature

Scott’s adaptation, the protagonist is a

not

evident

only

that

absurdly

the

primary

costly,

but 45

commodified to represent the ultimate

headquarters, where a superior, his for-

status symbol (Vint 116). This desire for

mer boss, explains, “You wouldn’t have

an authentic animal is so strong that the

come if I just asked you to”. In the con-

protagonist develops an “actual hatred”

versation that ensues, the superior, Bry-

for his own electric sheep, resenting the

ant, tries to convince Deckard to take

reminder that it brings of his inability to

on these four “skin jobs”, to which

realise his dream (33). However, in his

Deckard refuses several times, insisting,

discontented musings, Deckard draws a

“I don’t work here anymore”. However,

parallel between his electric creature

eventually the old Blade Runner be-

and the humanoid robots: “Like the an-

grudgingly gives in: “No choice, huh?”

droids, [the sheep] had no ability to ap-

he asks, to which Bryant responds, “No

preciate the existence of another” (34).

choice pal”. It is unclear whether this

It is this comparison between the two

acceptance is a favour for an old friend,

artificial creatures that begins, for Deck-

simply something to break the monot-

ard, the spiral of “diminishing certainty

ony, or, as McNamara suggests, a neces-

with which the demarcation lines be-

sary effort to maintain the “social privi-

tween animal, android and human can

lege” that comes with being a retired

be agreed upon” — a realisation that

cop (431).

leads him to consider the moral impli-

In any case, while Deckard’s own

cations of his extermination of the an-

motivations for agreeing to retire these

droids, an act which he ultimately re-

advanced replicants are not as clear as

jects (McCarron 264).

those of Dick’s protagonist, his diver-

While it is Deckard’s desire for an

gent professional and personal situation

authentic animal that drives much of the

in the film suggest that an alternative

narrative plot and feeds the central con-

central concern may be at stake. As sug-

cern in Androids, the motivations of

gested above, Scott’s film is primarily

Blade Runner’s Deckard are not so

concerned with the identity of its pro-

clear. The Blade Runner depicted in

tagonist — specifically, whether he falls

Scott’s film is a retired member of the

into the category of human or replicant.

police department, who, in the brief

It is the representation of the Blade Run-

opening moments of the film, seems to

ner as a character with an indistinct past,

be living a rather mundane, purposeless

and as someone who is not particularly

life. However this soon changes when

anchored anywhere — emphasised both

he is coerced into visiting the police

by his preoccupation with photos, and 46

his frequent placement amongst the pol-

subdue this characterisation, but makes

yglot, lower-class masses throughout the

it overt: “Talk about beauty and the

film — which indicates that these small

beast”, Bryant says of Zhora, “She’s

variations in character portrayal from

both”. The lithe movement and partial

the novel can be seen to enhance the

nakedness exhibited by both escaped fe-

uncertainty and anxiety surrounding

male replicants furthers their sexualisa-

Deckard’s human status.

tion, but it is Pris’ creation as a “pleasure model” that firmly establishes the fe-

The Importance of Women

male androids, and, by extension, the

The postmodern anxiety surrounding

women of the film, as “models pro-

the real/artificial dichotomy is perhaps

duced by economic domination and

most pronounced in the portrayal of

male fantasy” (McNamara 439).

women in both novel and film, who are

Unlike the physical threat that

also key actors in constructing the cen-

Pris and Zhora pose to Deckard, realised

tral concern of each text. In many cases

through the close range violent encoun-

in both the print and cinematic versions

ters between protagonist and both rep-

it is women who emerge at this point of

licants, Rachel poses a different, more

the “unstable boundary” between hu-

subtle kind of danger: that of destabili-

mans and androids, though the manner

zation. It is only through his interactions

in which the two texts address the rep-

and subsequent relationship with Rachel

resentation of women is quite divergent

that Deckard is able to develop a level

(Vint 125). The dystopian landscape of

of empathy for the artificial humans, not

Scott’s Blade Runner features very few

simply viewing them as “jobs” to “re-

female characters, and it is prudent to

tire”. The film climaxes these anxieties

note that all of these representations of

surrounding women and artificiality in

women are highly sexualised and artifi-

its final scene, when Deckard, having

cial. Existing almost exclusively as the

completed his assignment, retrieves Ra-

female presence in the film, the three fe-

chel from his apartment whereupon

male replicants, Rachel, Pris and Zhora,

they enter the elevator. As the doors

are all depicted as seductive, desirable

close on the protagonist and the repli-

beings that pose a threat to Deckard in

cant standing beside him, the viewer

some form or another — key character-

cannot help but wonder what the impli-

istics of the cinematic ‘femme fatale’

cations of Deckard’s proximity to this

(Bade 10). The film does not attempt to

“unstable boundary” of authenticity and 47

artificiality are — thus epitomising the

of copulating with Rachel — a crime

central concern of the film.

that exists in Scott’s film only as an act

In contrast to the film, Androids

against the rule of law, rather than a

features a greater number of women,

moral sin; Iran, or any other wife figure

both android and human alike. The

for that matter, is absent from the film.

most significant of these characters is

However, just as Rachel’s pres-

Deckard’s wife, Iran, who plays a similar

ence in the final moments of Scott’s film

role to that of a moral compass for her

heightens and illuminates the central

husband. In the argument that opens

concern of Blade Runner, so too does

the novel, Iran very quickly expresses

Iran’s presence at the conclusion of An-

her distaste at Deckard’s job, calling him

droids emphasise the novel’s key con-

“a murderer hired by the cops”, and be-

cern. When Deckard finally returns

moaning

(1).

home after completing his “marathon

Though Deckard is initially deaf to her

assignment”, weary and disheartened,

sympathies, after his first meeting with

his wife is the one who provides him

Rachel, his encounter with“predatory”

with some measure of comfort: “”Do

bounty hunter Phil Resch, and then his

you think I did wrong?” he asked.

retirement of three androids, Deckard

“What I did today?” ‘No’”, she replies

admits his growing moral uncertainties

(192). Iran’s reassurance establishes her

to his wife: “I’ve begun to empathise

as a site of support for her husband, but

with androids” (137). It is in this mood

also indicates her status as the most im-

of doubt that he buys a genuine goat

portant female character, as it is she who

with his bounty money — a deed that,

is there both at the beginning and end

though making Iran ecstatic, leads her

of the narrative. Primarily, though, the

to pressure him to continue doing his

novel’s conclusion serves to foreground

job: “We need [the bounty money] or

the issues of morality that Deckard

they’ll repossess the goat!” (138). Iran’s

struggles with, thus clearly reflecting the

prioritising of a commodity over her

central concern of the novel.

“those

poor

andys”

husband’s moral conflict in this instance further emphasises the prodigious value

A Postmodern Conclusion

that is placed on genuine animals in this

The key difference between Dick’s An-

Capitalist society. It is perhaps this tem-

droids and Scott’s Blade Runner is the

porary lack of concern for her husband

divergent central concerns of both texts;

that spurs Deckard to commit the crime

while

the

novel

focuses

the 48

protagonist’s moral struggles concerning artificial life, the film concentrates on Deckard’s status as human. As demonstrated in the above analysis, these two differences can be seen to generate many of the smaller points of variation between the two texts, particularly in the case of the characterisation of Deckard, the way in which women are represented, and the closing moments of the narratives. Although a comparison of the two divergent settings of the texts at the beginning of this paper reveals that not all differences directly inform the central concerns of the text, they do, however, succeed in establishing both texts as postmodernist. Indeed, by adopting Clayton’s approach, all major points of variation between the text can be seen to contribute to this establishment of postmodernism: “Artificial life, commodification, and gender… are places […] where the transfer from modernity to postmodernity is accomplished” (55). Thus, as Sammon contends, more than just the “core” of Dick’s novel is maintained in Scott’s filmic adaptation. The heavy reliance on Capitalist modes in the creation of the dystopian future, and the anxiety surrounding the real/artificial dichotomy are cornerstone elements of both texts – ultimately enabling the realisation of the postmodern in both novel and film. 49

BIBLIOGRAPHY Bade, Patrick. Femme Fatale: images of evil and fascinating women. London: Ash & Grant, 1979. Blade Runner. DVD. Directed by Ridley Scott. Burbank, CA: Warner Home Video, 2007. Clayton, Jay. “Concealed Circuits: Frankenstein’s Monster, the Medusa, and the Cyborg.” Raritan 15 (1996): 53-69. Dick, Philip K. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? London: Phoenix, 2012 Jameson, Frederic. Postmodernism, or The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham: Duke University Press. 1991. Kaplan, Fred. “A Cult Classic Restored, Again”. New York Times, September 30, 2007: n. pag. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/30/movies/30kapl.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0 Lussier, Mark & Gowan, Kaitlin. “The Romantic Roots of Blade Runner.” Wordsworth Cycle 43, 3 (2012): 165-72. Marx, Karl & Engles, Friedrich. The Communist Manifesto. London: Pluto Press, 2008. 50

McCarron, Kevin. “Corpses, Animals, Machines and Mannequins: The Body and the Cyberpunk”. In Cyberspace/Cyberbodies/Cyperpunk: Cultures of Technological Embodiment, edited by Mike Featherstone and Roger Burrows, 261-80. London: Sage, 1995. McNamara, Kevin R. “Blade Runner’s post-individual worldspace.” Contemporary Literature 38, 3 (1997): 422-47 Mousoutzanis, Aris. “The Science Fiction Film”. In The Science Fiction Handbook, edited by Nick Hubble and Aris Mousoutzanis, 143-66. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013. Sammon, Paul M. Future Noir: The Making of Blade Runner. London: Orion Media, 1996. Stam, Robert. “Beyond Fidelity: the dialogics of adaptation”. In Film Adaptation, edited by James Naremore, 54-76. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 2000. Vint, Sherryl. “Speciesism and Species Being in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” Mosaic: a Journal for the Interdisciplinary Study of Literature 40, 1 (2007): 111-26.

"Legitimizing Illegitimate Power: Technology and Nature as Fictive Mediators" by Megan Krelle

Within both Philip K. Dick’s Do

intelligent group of organic robots

Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? and G. Willow Wilson’s Alif the Unseen,

called the Nexus-6 androids. Originally

technology is used to challenge the heg-

caped from the colonies on Mars to seek

emonic ideal that the natural is of more

emancipation and freedom by masquer-

value than the artificial. This prevailing

ading as humans on Earth. As Rick

valuation is explored through the exam-

hunts the ‘andys,’ he starts to question

ination of the societal power structure,

the morality of retiring the androids,

which asserts the dominance of one

particularly as he becomes emotionally

group and their ideals over any other,

attached to an andy named Rachael

and the way that value is constructed

Rosen, who is revealed to be protecting

and legitimized by the ruling centre of

a group of escaped androids.

built as servants, these androids have es-

the society. Consequently, both An-

Alif the Unseen is set in ‘The

droids and Alif are texts in which the use

City’, an unstated location in the Persian

of technology is legitimized if it is used

Gulf in the Arab Emirates. The book fol-

to support the hegemonic ideal (and

lows Alif, a hacker who works to secure

thus to assist in legitimizing the ruling

various groups on the Internet against

class’ power), yet is deemed illegitimate

the state security censors and the figure

if it threatens to replace or seriously

known as The Hand. After being trusted

challenge the central power’s position.

with a manuscript of a mythical book

The legitimacy of the central power

called the Alf Yeom wa Yeom — or The

structure in their claim to dominion is

Thousand and One Days, purportedly a

therefore at stake in the valuation of the

work by the jinn — by his former lover

natural/artificial, and technology is used

Intisar, and while being hunted by state

to mediate and undercut the centre’s au-

security, Alif and his friend Dina stum-

thority.

ble upon the world of the Unseen,

Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is set on an Earth contaminated

where they are helped by a shape-shift-

by radioactive dust, resulting in the

Alif is assisted by Sheikh Bilal, a reli-

deaths of a large portion of animals and

gious leader who attempts to hide him

affecting human reproduction and ge-

from the State’s forces. Both are arrested

netic material. The novel follows Rick

and tortured, but escape State custody

Deckard — a bounty hunter charged

with the help of NewQuarter, an ex-

with ‘retiring’ (i.e., destroying) a highly

hacker. The novel ends when Alid and

ing jinn named Vikram. Additionally,

The Hand use two computer programs

society are located. In contrast, S. Pie-

that Alif had designed to engage in a vir-

tikainen and H. Kelly-Holmes consider

tual battle that is tied closely with a spir-

the periphery to be “marginal, the op-

itual battle taking place between the

posite of the centre, the boundary or

Unseen jinn. They inadvertently crash

outer part of it”;4 those who are most

the Internet and the utility grids, plung-

marginalized and least valued according

ing the city into chaos, which instigates

to the values and ideals of the centre are

a revolution in the streets.

therefore positioned further out in the

The power structures of the societies within the two texts can be considered

that the relationship between the legiti-

model, a “spatial metaphor used to de-

mization of values and the centre is cir-

scribe and explain the unequal distribu-

cular: “the central values are those es-

tion of power in the economy, society,

poused by the ruling authorities, the rul-

In this essay, the centre is

ing authorities are those whose power is

conceived of in terms of being both the

legitimated by the central values”;5 the

“people who occupy positions” of au-

centre therefore privileges and legiti-

thority — those who are the “top deci-

mizes values which reasserts its own au-

sion makers” — as well as a space in

thority and hegemony. In order to posi-

which people and values are located.2 As

tion one particular group as superior or

Edward Shils notes, the centre exerts

worth greater value, there must be an

dominance over those who live in the

oppositional group with which to judge

particular society, and the “order of

it against — an ‘Other’ which the hege-

symbols, of values and beliefs, which

monic group defines itself against.6

govern the society” are located in this

Value is therefore “relational and practi-

central space.3 The centre is therefore a

cal, the outcome of processes of negoti-

position where the ruling authorities of

ation and contestation,” and hegemonic

S. Pietikainen and H. Kelly-Holmes, “Multilingualism and the Periphery,” in Multilingualism and the Periphery, eds. S. Pietikainen and H. Kelly-Holmes (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013), 3. 2 Sivert Langholm, “On the Concept of Center and Periphery,” Journal of Peace Research 8.3/4 (1971): 274, 273. 3 Edward Shils, “Centre and Periphery,” in The Logic of Personal Knowledge: Essays Presented to Michael

Polyani on his Seventieth Birthday 11th March 1961, (Illinois: The Free Press, 1961): 117. 4 Pietikainen and Kelly-Holmes, “Multilingualism,” 3. 5 R.D. Jessop, “Exchange and Power in Structural Analysis,” Sociological Review 17.3 (1969): 417. 6 Patricia Kerslake, Science Fiction and Empire (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2007), 8.

polity.”1

the

Furthermore, R.D. Jessop notes

centre-periphery

and

through

periphery.

ideals must therefore be considered in

discusses this notion in the figure of the

contrast to the ideals of an Other.7

‘double’, and posits that, “there is often

Within both Androids and Alif, those

competition or rivalry between doubles

who occupy the centre have their hege-

for the same space or location, the same

monic position threatened by another

position or rank, the same right to ex-

group through the use of technology: in

istence…This competition further im-

Androids, this centre-space is occupied

plies the threat of displacement: the

by a human faction which is threatened

original self may lose its uniqueness and

by the group of escaped androids, while

its identity to the other self which re-

in Alif, the central position is occupied

places the original.”8

by the ruling government, and they are

Within Androids, the androids

threatened by a number of groups who

function as the double for the human

oppose their rule - more specifically,

subject — apart from a bone marrow

groups who express discontent on the

test, the only way to discern an android

internet.

from a human is to test for a lack of em-

However, technology itself does

pathy. The fact that androids are visually

not threaten the centre; rather, it is

indistinguishable from humans is an is-

when technology is used in an illegiti-

sue because they are an artificial con-

mate manner that it is threatening to the

struct which can easily replace a human

centre’s hegemony. Of course, it is the

subject. Eventually created for colonists,

centre which has the power to define

the TV asserts that androids are “cus-

what is legitimate and what is not —

tom-tailored…designed specifically for

therefore, anything which threatens the

YOUR UNIQUE NEEDS, FOR YOU

centre’s power will be considered ille-

AND YOU ALONE” — they are explic-

gitimate, in order to ensure hegemony

itly created to be subservient to humans,

is maintained. Within both Androids

to be treated as inferior beings.9 The dis-

and Alif, technology is used in a way

tinction between human and android

which contests the centre’s hegemony

must be maintained in order to legiti-

by presenting an artificial construct as a

mate the humans’ power over the an-

possible replacement. Joseph Francavilla

droids, and to validate the way non-

Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, ed. J. B. Kerman, 2nd ed. (Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press, 1997), 7. 9 Philip K. Dick, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, (London: Phoenix, 2012), 13.

John Frow, Cultural Studies & Cultural Value (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 5. 8 Joseph Francavilla, “The Android as Doppelganger,” in Retrofitting Blade Runner: Issues in Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner and Philip K. Dick’s Do

humans are treated (as inferior); there

allows anonymity, and therefore it can

must therefore be a distinction which

obscure the social class of the user when

defines them as being non-human.

they operate within the virtual space.

Yet the distinction between an-

The obscuring of social status online is

droid and human becomes extremely

in contrast to the clearly defined and ob-

blurred - the Voigt-Kampff scale, used

servable social stratification in the real

to determine empathic response, is not

world — the City was “a place that

infallible, for “a small class of human be-

boasted one of the most sophisticated

ings could not pass the Voigt-Kampff

digital policing systems in the world,

scale,” and, though official ideology

but no proper mail service. Emirates

states that androids cannot feel empathy

with princes in silver-plated cars and dis-

for each other, Rachael sleeps with

tricts with no running water.”11 This so-

bounty-hunters in order to protect

cial division highlights the fact that

other androids, so that the bounty-hunt-

there is a specific ruling class which oc-

ers “won’t be able to retire more an-

cupies the space of the centre — the ar-

droids; it won’t be just me, it’ll be the

istocracy, the princes and their wealth

Batys and Stratton too.”10 Officially, a

— and the centre therefore wishes to

distinguishing characteristic (lack of

maintain this hegemony. The internet

empathy) is identified which positions

presents itself as a new space (though

androids as inferior and this is used to

virtual) where the government must

reassert the centre’s hegemony over

also maintain and assert its hegemony

them; however the fact that this distinc-

over; it is dangerous if the government

tion is repeatedly called into question

does not censor the virtual space of the

throughout the text is problematic for

internet because it would allow conflict-

the legitimacy of the centre’s power and

ing ideals an equal platform to be ex-

threatens to undermine it.

pressed on, and if this space of equality

In a similar manner, the internet

transitioned into the real world, then

acts as the double in Alif — the virtual

the government’s hegemony is threat-

space being a double for the ‘real’

ened. The internet is therefore tightly

world, which threatens to displace the

controlled, and “every forum is moni-

government’s authority. The virtual

tored for illegal expressions of distress

space of the internet is a place which 10

Dick, Androids, 30, 158.

G. Willow Wilson, Alif the Unseen, (Melbourne: Allen & Unwin, 2012), 15.

and discontent” to prevent the loss of control.12

Yet it is precisely because the virtual space does represent a serious threat

Despite the internet presenting a

that the State must continue to assert

palpable threat to the government, the

the hegemony of the real over the arti-

virtual realm is considered to be a space

ficial; if the virtual space, which allows

of less value than the real world, which

multiple valuation systems to be consid-

assists in constructing the assumption of

ered equally valid at once, is considered

illegitimacy and ineffectiveness of the

to be as equally valid as the real-world

online

real

space, then resistance to a hegemonic

change. Alif’s assumption that the “State

regime is given legitimacy. NewQuarter

crushed people like him because it

notes of the revolution that, “[c]om-

could, not because it saw them as a real

puter geeks did this. We told these ruf-

threat” demonstrates that Alif himself

fians they could all have a voice, but

does not consider his actions to be a le-

they had to share the same virtual plat-

resistance

gitimate threat to the

affecting

government.13

His

form15 — this idea that “they could all

assumption on why the government tar-

have a voice” undercuts the State’s

gets hackers, because “it could” as op-

claim that their value system is more val-

posed to being a “real threat,” high-

uable than any other regime. For the

lights the way Alif buys into the govern-

government, the virtual space threatens

ment’s construction of the virtual space

to replace the real-world space with a

as an illegitimate threat which cannot af-

system that values multiple viewpoints,

fect the real-world hegemony and con-

which would destabilise the centre’s

trol of the State. For Alif, there is a clear

power and position as the only valid sys-

division between online and offline re-

tem; the virtual must therefore be sup-

sistance against the government, for he

pressed and considered as a space which

had not considered the online resistance

can have no impact on the real world

to be able to have real consequences in

and the legitimacy of the government’s

the real world — “[h]e had not believed,

claim to power.

not truly. To choose a new name, to sit

The legitimacy of the centre’s

behind a screen and harry a few elites;

power is therefore seen in both texts as

the Hand was right, it had felt like a

contingent on maintaining the current

game, a fiction.”14

hierarchy,

Ibid. Ibid., 236.

one

which

identifies

Ibid., 423. Ibid., 381.

specific ruling group as the legitimate

he had of course never nosed into the

source of power; in both texts, this hi-

matter any more than they, his neigh-

erarchy can be seen to be upheld

bours, had pried into the real workings

through a valuation of the natural/real

of his sheep”;16 this passage illustrates

over the artificial/fiction. However,

that the electric animals serve an im-

both texts are shown to question the le-

portant function in maintaining the so-

gitimacy of this natural/real versus arti-

cial expectation of animal ownership,

ficial/fiction valuation, as sanctioned by

and, moreover, that it is a understood to

the centre, by questioning the right and

be a widespread practice.

logic the centre uses to maintain its po-

However, it is critical that the il-

sition through the way technology is

lusion of owning a real animal is main-

portrayed and used.

tained — if maintenance is required for

Within Androids, it is through

an electric animal “[t]he repair outfit’s

the contradictions presented between

truck is of course marked ‘animal hospi-

the officially sanctioned view — that hu-

tal something.’ And the driver dresses

mans (and the natural) are more valua-

like a vet,” an important fraud required

ble than the artificial — that the centre’s

to maintain the visibility of adherence to

legitimacy is undermined. Empathy is

the ideal of real animal ownership.17

used as a marker by the centre as that

Electric animals are, in a sense, a neces-

which defines a human, and it is there-

sary evil — Rick acknowledges that

fore important for humans to visibly

“[o]wning and maintaining a fraud had

demonstrate empathy to reinforce this

a way of gradually demoralizing one.

value. The ownership of a real animal

And yet, from a social standpoint it had

therefore becomes an important social

to be done, given the absence of the real

marker, as well as proof of one’s identity

article.”18 The fact that real and electric

as a human and morality. Yet the own-

animals are practically indistinguishable

ership of electric animals also occurs,

is condoned instead of condemned by

and is socially acceptable as long as it re-

the centre is because it (ironically) reas-

mains unknown that an animal is elec-

serts the centre’s notion that empathy is

tric. Rick asserts of his neighbours that

the distinguishing characteristic of hu-

“some of their animals undoubtedly

manity, and animals do not threaten to

consisted of electronic circuitry fakes; 16 17

Dick, Androids, 5. Ibid., 9.

Ibid., 6.

replace the centre in the way that an-

valuation within society, thereby chal-

droids do.

lenging the State’s hegemony. Sheikh

Yet Rick comes to an understand-

Bilal’s comment, “[w]e are living in a

ing that “[t]he electric things have their

post-fictional era…we can sit in a

lives, too. Paltry as those are,” and is

mosque and have a debate about the fic-

therefore satisfied with his fake toad.19

tional pork a fictional character con-

Iran’s commitment to look after the

sumes in a video game, with every grav-

electric toad, and claiming that “[m]y

ity we would accord something quite

husband is devoted to it,” is crucial be-

real,” highlights the way Alif undercuts

cause the toad is an extinct species —

the value in distinguishing the real and

any neighbours would know that the

the artificial.21 By positing that they live

Deckards’ do not own a real animal.20

in a “post-fictional era,” the novel as-

The toad is unable to enact its role legit-

serts that the virtual or artificial does in-

imately (i.e., to maintain the idea that

deed impact the ‘real’ world by collaps-

one must own a real animal) because the

ing the distinction between the two. If

Sidney’s catalogue clearly defines it as

there is no fiction — and therefore eve-

being extinct. Rick therefore explicitly

rything is ‘real’ — then everything has

rejects the value placed on the natural

impact and can influence the ‘real’

over the artificial, and also rejects the

world. If eating fictional pork can have

concept that empathy defines what it

moral or religious implications in the

means to be human. This has further im-

real world for a person, then any ‘fic-

plications for human hegemony — if the

tional’ thing can also have real-world

artificial and natural both have a right to

value and effects; it cannot be consid-

their lives, then the poor treatment of

ered inferior to ‘real’ concerns, because

androids, and the central position hu-

it has a real impact.

mans have in power relations, no longer maintains legitimacy.

Furthermore, NewQuarter raises the fact that the tendency to devalue the

In a similar manner, technology

fictional/artificial is because of the im-

in Alif is used to explore and highlight

portance placed on rationality: “I think

the impact the artificial has in ‘real’ life,

we’re going back to the way things used

and undercuts the notion that there can

to be, before a bunch of European intel-

only be one valid perspective and

lectuals in tights decided to draw a line

Dick, Androids, 191. Ibid., 193.

Wilson, Alif the Unseen, 370.

between what’s rational and what’s not.

of the jinn because the delineation of ra-

I don’t think our ancestors thought the

tionality was considered unnecessary.

distinction necessary.”22 His comment

However, the modern emphasis

highlights the value their society placed

on rationality and the ‘real’ affected the

on the rational, and notes it as a modern

way people approached religion, which

valuation which has been endorsed by

consequently impacted the jinn’s posi-

the centre — a distinct shift from the

tion in society. The jinn who escorts

past which allowed the rational and ir-

Alif, NewQuarter, and Sheikh Bilal

rational to co-exist.

through the Empty Quarter asserts, “Be-

The accepted blurring of rational

lief is dying out. To most of your people

and irrational in the past meant that hu-

the jinn are paranoid fantasies who run

mans and the jinn , “acknowledged one

around causing epilepsy and mental ill-

another,” and could co-exist together.23

ness. Find me someone to whom the

Vikram recalls “there were days when

hidden folk are simply real, as described

the world was crawling with walis and

in the Books. You’ll be searching for a

prophets who could stare right at us, but

long time”;26 despite their explicit doc-

that was a long time ago. Now it’s dif-

umentation within religious texts, the

ferent.”24 Moreover, the walis and

jinn are now discounted as “paranoid

prophets — those who could see the

fantasies” — a devaluation which cate-

jinn — are affiliated with Islam, suggest-

gorises belief in jinn as irrational and de-

ing that religious belief in the past

nies them an existence in the ‘real’

acknowledged the jinn and their do-

world. The modern religious belief sys-

mains as real, and allowed them a more

tem adheres to the centre’s valuation of

central position within society. Indeed,

rationality, and therefore rejects the jinn

the jinn are “straight out of a holy

as imaginary beings; Intisar writes in her

book,”25 and the validation of the jinn’s

thesis, “The suggestion that the Alf

position in society (as real beings) stems

Yeom is the work of jinn is surely a cu-

from people’s acceptance and belief in

rious one. The Quran speaks of the hid-

the religious text — a belief which

den people in the most candid way, yet

acknowledged the existence and reality

more and more the educated faithful will not admit to believing in them,

Ibid. Ibid., 312. 24 Ibid., 106.

Ibid., 93. Ibid., 303.

however readily they might accept even

considered “a little mad” because he as-

the harshest and most obscure points of

serts the reality of the existence of the

Islamic law.”27 Increasingly, religious

jinn — a claim contrary to the centre’s

belief is based on rationality, a view-

position, which thus pushes him to the

point

widespread

fringes of human society. Indeed, Alif

among “the educated faithful” — a term

initially rejects that Vikram could be a

which itself suggests a rejection of the

jinn because it would be irrational for

irrational within religious belief. Conse-

him to believe otherwise; despite realis-

quently, it is the burgeoning mass of

ing that Vikram’s legs were “leonine,”

“educated faithful” who discount the

Alif nevertheless asserts, “Of course he

existence of jinn because the centre pos-

was human. What else could he be?”29

its it as irrational for them to exist.

Alif clearly rejects the possibility that

becoming

Since the centre now places im-

Vikram is not human precisely because

mense value on the rational, it relegates

he values the rational over the irrational

belief in the jinn to the periphery. To a

– a valuation endorsed by the centre.

rational mind they cannot exist, and

However, the fact that the jinn do exist

they subsequently remain unseen to the

and affect the ‘real’ world undermines

majority of humans who share this be-

the centre’s valuation of the rational,

lief. Vikram comments, “You think I am

and thereby challenges the legitimacy of

an ordinary man who has gone a little

the

mad. Well, that’s what I get for spend-

NewQuarter’s assertion of a return to

ing too much time hanging around the

the past valuation system — which pos-

periphery of the seeing world. There is

its the distinction between rational and

danger in being seen as too real”;28 in

irrational as unnecessary — presents the

order for Vikram to exist in the eyes of

idea that contradictory systems can co-

the (human) society, he cannot be con-

exist equally and operate within the

sidered to be a jinn. When he is visible

same space, even if it defies rational

to humans, he must be defined as a man

thought.

centre’s

hegemony.

Instead,

in order to remain as a legitimate sub-

Technology within these texts is

ject within human society. Yet, even as

used to explore and question the idea

a man, he can only exist on the “periph-

upheld by the central power that the

ery of the seeing world,” and must be

natural or real is more valuable than the

Ibid., 111. Ibid., 109.

Ibid., 93.

artificial. Within Do Androids Dream of

also challenges the validity of one hege-

Electric Sheep?, the androids are posi-

monic power asserting control over oth-

tioned as the Other in order for human-

ers, and consequently undermines the

ity to be defined and asserted as being

validity of the government. Thus, the

of central importance. Yet ironically the

representation of technology within

society is heavily reliant on technology,

both texts is used to contest the legiti-

and relies on artifice to maintain the il-

macy of a central hegemonic power by

lusion that the natural is of more value.

contesting the way value is placed upon

This valuation, in turn, is used to justify

that which is considered natural and

the right for humans to treat anything

that which is considered artificial.

non-human as inferior, yet the logic used to reassert human hegemony is shown to be extremely problematic; in light of the logic of society, androids and humans are actually indistinguishable, and therefore the hegemonic legitimacy of humans is non-existent. Technology destabilises the human identity and the power structure which asserts it as supreme. In Alif the Unseen, the main piece of technology is the internet — a virtual space in which resistance against the State can occur. It is through this medium that different groups can exist and be considered equally, which undermines the prevailing idea of a hegemonic power. Despite being a virtual space, the internet is ultimately shown to be as important a space as the real world in allowing disparate groups to come together as equals and enact real change. The emphasis on considering different perspectives as equally valuable 62

BIBLIOGRAPHY Dick, Philip K. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? London: Phoenix, 2012. Francavilla, Joseph. “The Android as Doppelganger.” In Retrofitting Blade Runner: Issues in Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner and Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, edited by J. B. Kerman, 2nd ed. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press, 1997, 4-15. Frow, John. Cultural Studies & Cultural Value. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995. Jessop, R.D. “Exchange and Power in Structural Analysis.” Sociological Review 17.3 (1969): 415-437. Kerslake, Patricia. Science Fiction and Empire. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2007. Langholm, Sivert. “On the Concept of Center and Periphery.” Journal of Peace Research 8.3/4 (1971): 273-278. Pietikainen, S. and H. Kelley-Holmes. “Multilingualism and the Periphery.” In Multilingualism and the Periphery, edited by S. Pietikainen and H. Kelley-Holmes. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013, 1-16. Shils, Edward. “Centre and Periphery.” In The Logic of Personal Knowledge: Essays Presented to Michael Polyani on his Seventieth Birthday 11th March 1961, n.ed. Illinois: The Free Press, 1961, 117-130. Wilson, G. Willow. Alif the Unseen. Melbourne: Allen & Unwin, 2012 63

"A Story of Shifting Stone: Pygmalion in the Renaissance" by Grant K. Schazman

The metaphor of living artwork is

the effects of Ovid’s Pygmalion in a

interestingly appropriate to the history

wide swath of English culture during the

of Ovid’s Metamorphoses. The explo-

16th and 17th centuries. By peering into

sion of translation in the Renaissance

the religious work of Thomas Adams,

turned the dusty tomes of Greece and

the

Rome face up once more, but it is for

Francis Bacon, and the poetic work of

very good reason that the movement is

John Marston, we can gain a notion of

called a “rebirth” rather than a “redis-

the interpretations available to Shake-

covery”. Even a cursory comparison of

speare’s own reincarnation of Pygma-

early modern English texts and their

lion in The Winter’s Tale. Bearing in

classical shadows will show how often

mind that these works point not to a

ancient works display distinctly Angli-

consistent societal understanding, but

can features. This is especially visible in

rather to a clash of understandings—a

Arthur Golding’s work with Ovid,

dynamic Shakespeare often plays upon,

where monotheistic piety juts out like

as we shall see with The Winter’s Tale,

an aquiline nose from the pagan pages.

to great dramatic effect—we may also

Golding provides his own apology for

gain an inkling of the Poet’s own cul-

this in his opening epistle to the Earl of

tural meta-criticism.

scientific-philosophical

work of

Leicester, in which he openly states that

Because it is didactic as well as ac-

“in interpreting theis few I attrib-

ademic, Renaissance religion provides a

ute/The things too one, which heathen

context of broad cultural interpretation.

men to many Gods impute” (“The Epis-

The clergy were disseminators as well as

tle”, lines 306-307), with the ultimate

thinkers, and their ideas had a long

goal of reinterpreting the Metamorpho-

reach. Take the sermons of Thomas Ad-

ses to align with and further the morals

ams in the early 17th century, which

and teachings of “the whole true pat-

demonstrate a series of convenient ap-

terne”, or Christian scripture (379). It is

propriations of the Pygmalion story ra-

no surprise, then, that other Renais-

ther than a steady perspective on it. Ad-

sance writers also “rebirthed” Pygma-

ams seems to use the popularity Pygma-

lion with a new interpretation for every

lion’s tale as an endless parable, adding

cultural criticism and moralization. The

new (and often opposing) morals to

close ties between the Renaissance dis-

each iteration. Contextually, Adams

ciplines of religion, philosophy, litera-

wrote in an increasingly iconoclastic

ture, and the sciences allow us to inspect

culture, in which Protestants began to 65

extend the definition of idolatry until, as

Pygmalion to illustrate the natural love

Margaret Aston observes, it “became a

of Creator for creation rather than the

household word in the sixteenth cen-

impious dotage of idolaters. It is “natu-

tury” (Lee 52). As the 16th century con-

ral” for man “to love the work of his

tinued,

and

own hands,” just as Pygmalion does, for

thereby the English government, de-

God Himself “loves us…because his

claimed more and more fiercely the

own hands have fashioned us” (Adams

Catholic interpretations of the Eucharist

367). Pygmalion, then, represents both

as a vessel for the presence of Christ and

pride and proper love, the practice of

holy statues as vessels for the presence

idolatry and the paradigm of Creation—

of saints (51). In two of his sermons,

all from the mouth of a single clergy-

Thomas Adams takes up myth of Pyg-

man. Interpretation, we see here, tends

malion to cast down idolatry. “The

to flow according to the message rather

Black Devil” reprimands the apostate

than the myth, a quality not exclusive to

for the way they “deck the world, as the

Adams nor confined to the pulpit.

the

Anglican

church,

Israelites did their calf; and then super-

From the realm of philosophy, Sir

stitiously dote upon it, as Pigmalion on

Francis Bacon appropriates the myth of

his carved stone” (Adams 41). In “The

Pygmalion as well as the moralisation of

White Devil”, Adams directs this decla-

the iconoclasts in his critique of philos-

mation of impious dotage against the

ophy and the sciences. For him, the true

hypocrite who “Pigmalion-like…dotes

sin of idolatry is the love of a lifeless im-

on his own carved and painted piece”

age, a soulless body; philosophers that

(30). This latter passage criticizes the

love their own pure abstraction, their

false “statue” of themselves that hypo-

syllogism that lacks “the ‘soul’ of mat-

crites create, much as we might criticize

ter”, are as guilty of sacrilege as the pa-

a deceptive “mask”. In both cases, the

gans and the idol worshipers (Tillman

interpretation of Pygmalion is explicit,

71). Religion and philosophy are not as

demonstrating the direct influence of

separate in Bacon’s work as he some-

iconoclasm on the English understand-

times professes, Tillman argues. Bacon

ing of ancient myth.

easily extends the religious critique of

Religious interpretations of Pyg-

false love into a scientific critique of

malion were not confined to the nega-

false learning, which he represents

tive, however. In another pair of ser-

through Pygmalion’s false image. Ba-

mons,

con’s contextualization of Pygmalion is

Adams

uses

the

myth

useful to us not because it accounts for

won. The absurdity of the ideal when

the “idolatry” of philosophy, but be-

incarnate, complete with polished stone

cause it gives a philosophical account of

bosoms, lifts Marston’s criticism into

idolatry. Our goal is to understand the

the realm of hyperbole. But though

versions of Pygmalion available to

Marston’s interpretation of Pygmalion is

Shakespeare, and while it seems unlikely

guided by his message—a satire on Pet-

that the playwright would steer his sub-

rarchan love and, more broadly, “the

tle commentary toward the champions

swaggering humour of these times”

of syllogism, Bacon grasps at the root of

(Marston 211)—the poet exhibits a real

idolatry much like Shakespeare himself

loyalty to this interpretation. His poem

does.

demonstrates a consistency that Adams Both Adams and Bacon incorpo-

lacks and an interest in the myth’s orig-

rate Pygmalion into their didactic. (It is

inal context that Bacon overlooks.

hard to say they incorporate Ovid’s Pyg-

Whereas Adams wields the myth of Pyg-

malion, for ownership here seems either

malion as a convenient popular refer-

transient or non-existent.) But to see

ence and Bacon extends it into a useful

how the story of Pygmalion fares in the

analogy, Marston holds it up as a mirror

realm of literature, the womb in which

to Petrarchan love. His understanding of

Ovid originally conceived it, we turn to

Petrarch and of Pygmalion are almost

the satire of John Marston.

the same; the two are nearly inter-

Marston is the first of our exam-

changeable. Marston provides a serious

ined authors to emphasize a visceral, ra-

criticism that ranks among the most sig-

ther than a religious or intellectual, per-

nificant Renaissance interpretations of

version in Pygmalion. What Ovid origi-

Pygmalion.

nally wrote in a largely romantic tone,

Such a variety of interpretations

Marston casts as sexual vice and perver-

float on the fringes of Shakespeare’s

sion. This “maggot-tainted lewd corrup-

stage, each of them echoed in many tiny

tion,” as Marston calls it, is satire di-

pockets of early modern England. “Dot-

rected against the Petrarchan attitude of

ing upon one’s own work” became as

romance (Santano 261). The story of

commonplace a condemnation as the

Pygmalion is used to amplify the criti-

iconoclastic aversion to “idols”. The de-

cism; the tale of a marble lady literalizes

piction of physically perverted love re-

the Petrarchan ideal of a stony-hearted,

sounds in Chapman’s Monsieur d’Olive,

indifferent mistress to be wooed and

where the “soulless image” is a corpse 67

rather than carved marble. But there is

idolatry, the rational uncertainties of

one conspicuously absent interpretation

which he ultimately turns into a poign-

that we notice precisely because we in-

ant cultural analysis. Having tallied the

vented it. Marston and Chapman satiri-

total number of new appendages to the

cally reprimand the perversion of Pyg-

Pygmalion, he reimagines the myth by

malion’s passion for something that is

recasting the characters of Carver and

part stone, part himself. But his over-

Image.

controlling character, which is one of

The language of Marston’s “The

our primary focuses today, is only shal-

Metamorphosis of Pigmalions Image”

lowly criticized. To most Renaissance

viciously and directly satirizes the Pet-

men, the issue with Pygmalion’s desire

rarchan lover for his “feigned decency”

was deviancy, not domination. Any

as well as his idolatry, which parrots that

trace of a feministic critique of Pygma-

of “the peevish Papists” (Marston 206).

lion is absent in Marston and opposed

Marston’s poem criticizes and in a sense

outright in Brathwaite, who discourages

punishes the Petrarchan lover. Shake-

Pygmalion’s vanity in young men only

speare’s play, on the other hand, simply

so that the lady that they choose “may

shows the Petrarchan lover punished

embrace”

and criticized. The sense of judgement

(Brathwaite 262). It is little surprise that

is more difficult to locate in The Win-

not much criticism of male dominance

ter’s Tale than in Marston’s poem be-

arose from a society still largely centred

cause the part of the Petrarchan lover,

upon primogeniture. Shakespeare is one

or Pygmalion, is split throughout the

of the first to give any altitude to the

play, as is the part of the statue. Until

feminist attitude, though we must take

the fifth act, the play’s connection to

care to bring his Renaissance attitude

any iteration of the Pygmalion myth is

forward rather than retroactively insert-

tenuous. There are a couple of telling

ing the modern. He does this partly in

instances: before Time trots out on stage

The Winter’s Tale through a version of

and dismisses sixteen years, Leontes’

the critique of the Petrarchan lover,

jealousy is certainly a dominating force,

which we are already familiar with

and the sudden shift where his suspicion

through Marston. But Shakespeare pro-

is sparked reveals his preference for a

ceeds to take a closer look at Pygma-

cool and passive mistress instead of Her-

lion’s overall evolution, playing with the

mione’s active force. “Too hot, too

problems of the iconoclasts and ideas of

hot!” (1.2.139) are the first lines of

worthy

[their]

burning jealousy from Leontes, who

Our praises are our wages. You may ride

thereafter stops his ears when he cannot

‘s

stop Hermione’s mouth, turning his heart to stone to resist the reasoning of

With one soft kiss a thousand furlongs…

his queen of flesh and blood. For

(1.2.18-21)

whereas Pygmalion’s statue was stonelipped and wordless, Hermione speaks

Her verbiage suggests comparison with

volumes in her defence—only Leontes

slavish livestock, but the speech itself re-

does not hear. When Hermione says,

veals her insight into her position as his

“My life stands in the level of your

queen. She plays the game of clueless-

dreams,” Leontes responds, “Your ac-

ness well enough to show her clever-

tions are my dreams” (3.2.86-88). This

ness. Again, when she stands on trial be-

speaks not to Leontes’ ability to create

fore Leontes, she expresses the power he

or shape Hermione—she is innocent

holds over her, calling Leontes’ favour

quite independent of his dreams—but to

“the crown and comfort of my life”

his inability to reshape, or allow to be

(3.2.101). Quite paradoxically, Hermi-

reshaped, his own bitter fantasies.

one states her helplessness so lucidly that we are assured of her awareness.

Furthermore,

Hermione’s

lines

Her character avoids the classical role of

throughout the first three acts reveal far

Pygmalion’s statue just as Leontes’ does

too self-aware a statue. When speaking

the role of Pygmalion. Leontes finds in

to Leontes before his fit of envy, she

his wife not the malleable marble figure

paints her passive role in very acute lan-

of his desires, but a recalcitrant charac-

guage:

ter that does not, in fact, alter to fit his unhappy dreams.

I prithee tell me. Cram ‘s with praise, and make ‘s

The first three acts in The Winter’s Tale construct the characters of Leontes and Hermione with some small

As fat as tame things. One good deed

resemblances to Pygmalion and his carv-

dying tongueless

ing. Marston’s criticism of the worshipful lover with his idealistic construct is

Slaughters a thousand waiting upon

somewhat worked into Leontes, though

that.

it is tweaked by madness—for though the king ostensibly desires Hermione to 69

fit his definition of a perfect, faithful

statue’s steady posture, the supreme pa-

wife, his determination to condemn her

tience that Hermione demonstrated

suggests that he more truly desires her

with her poignant analysis of her posi-

to fit his suspicions. And yet what sort

tion in Act I and with her attitude of ac-

of Carver is Leontes, who cannot

ceptance and even “pity” (3.2.131) when

change his wife, nor even his own mind?

she stood at the very doorway of a death

And what sort of Statue is Hermione,

sentence in Act III. Then we are seized

who is so resistant to the chisel of her

by uncertainty as to whether we truly

husband’s accusations, and so aware of

behold a living Hermione or a statue. As

her own shape and character? The com-

Mueller says, “The audience is expected

plexity of these two characters and their

to be…naïve about the resurrection of

incongruity with the Ovidian myth, or

Hermione,” which comes as a sort of

even Marston’s reimagining of it, pre-

“rude awakening” (229). He argues that

vent predictability as well as certainty.

the signs that Hermione still lives are

As Act V builds toward the reanimation

“necessarily lost on a naïve spectator,”

of the Statue, the connections between

one who has not read the play at least

Shakespeare’s characters and their clas-

several times, which we can presume to

sical counterparts become even more

encompass nearly all of Shakespeare’s

obscured. The playwright, it seems, re-

original audience (227). This edge of

fuses give his audience the sense of di-

uncertainty provides for more than just

rect judgement that Marston provides or

dramatic bombast, however. We lack

the didactic that Adams demonstrates.

the crucial knowledge of whether or not

Instead, he uses the uncertainty of the

the statue has a soul—whether Leontes

fifth act as a means of exploring the

and Perdita stand in awe of Hermione’s

clash of ideals and understandings in the

presence or merely of her absence.

16th century, addressing most especially

The question of presence is criti-

the issue of idolatry and iconoclasm

cal to the 16th century cultural critiques

through the vehicle of his reimagined

that appropriate Pygmalion. By sus-

Pygmalion narrative.

pending the certainty of Hermione’s

When at last, after the speedy pas-

presence, Shakespeare is able to suspend

sage of sixteen years, we are presented

the audience’s judgements on the sub-

with Hermione’s statue on stage, we are

jects of idolatry and morbidity of love.

caught by a handful of realizations and

Jongsook Lee observes in an essay on

doubts. First we see accented, by the 70

presence, Pygmalion, and iconoclasm in

Social sentiment was increasingly in-

Shakespeare:

clined to condemn both of these in its war on icons. However, if we recall Ba-

Whether images were numinous or

con’s identification of idolatry and false

dead, whether pictures and statues of

love as that which fixates upon an image

the saints and the Virgin were vivacious

“without the ‘soul’ of matter”, we see

or inert…whether the real presence of

that Shakespeare has left out the most

Christ was in the bread and wine of the

important bit of information from the

Eucharist—all come down to that initial

accusers’ case. When Perdita first bows

question about how to imagine the dia-

and implores a blessing, does she do so

lectic between immanence and

at the foot of a statue or of her mother?

tran-

scendence. (51)

And when Leontes attempts to kiss the ruddy lips, does he lean toward his wife

Marston’s criticism of the Petrarchan

or merely her likeness? Much like the

lover also rests upon the question of

audience, the two find themselves una-

presence. To Marston, Pygmalion’s suit

ble to believe that they behold a mere

to “his remorsles image, dum and mute”

statue—for “What fine chisel/Could

(Marston 206) is a foolish result of lov-

ever yet cut breath?” (5.3.97-98)—and

ing a construct—an image that is sepa-

yet unable to reconcile the alternative

rate from any real substance, following

they faintly perceive. “Let no man mock

the Petrarchan habit of abstracting a

me,” says Leontes (5.3.98); “do not say

woman. The artistic representation of a

‘tis

woman, Marston concludes, is not a

(5.3.50). For as long as the audience is

woman at all, and therefore to worship

forced to suspend judgement on the

the representation is tantamount to

statue and Hermione’s presence, it must

idolatry. Adam’s idea of idolatry is, quite

also suspend judgment on Perdita and

simply, the worship of lifeless matter.

Leontes, the idolater and the Petrarchan

Shakespeare, however, pauses upon this

lover.

point in the final scene of the play.

superstition,”

insists

Perdita

Some will think that this moment

Julio Romano, whose skill, like

of suspended judgement requires an

Pygmalion’s, allows him to “beguile Na-

over-dumb audience, and that it is quite

ture of her custom” (5.2.105-106), cre-

obvious early on that Hermione never

ates a statue so perfect that it stirs Leon-

actually died. If this is the case, then

tes with love and Perdita with worship.

Shakespeare’s message to us becomes a 71

little clearer: what looks to be a statue

Paulina, not Leontes, demonstrates the

truly is a woman, filled with soul rather

power to shape the other characters af-

than stone. Marston, Adams, the icono-

ter the sixteen year intermission. It is

clastic Englishman: all are mistaken. But

she who echoes Ovid’s Pygmalion when

Shakespeare is not in the habit of giving

she speaks of Hermione’s perfection as

plain messages, and a good production

“unparalleled” by anything the world

ought to hold the non-dogmatic intel-

could contrive (5.1.16-18) and insists,

lect in at least partial suspension. That

“There is none worthy,/Respecting her

uncertainty serves as a catalyst for the

that’s gone,” (5.1.42-43). She holds Le-

reconciliation of England’s ideological

ontes to a vow of bachelorship and re-

culture war, but it is only accomplished

minds him regularly of Hermione’s vir-

through the rife uncertainty of charac-

tues, preparing and shaping his love so

ters. If we look back upon our earlier

that she can bring Hermione back to

conundrum of who is what in this ap-

him. Before performing her ritual of re-

propriation of Pygmalion, we find our-

animation, she admits to the enthralled

selves even further from an answer than

Leontes, “The stone is mine” (5.3.70).

before.

But Paulina does not only play

Leontes, who began to look a bit

the part of the now many-faced Carver.

like our Pygmalion when he held Her-

In the reanimation scene, Paulina adopts

mione helpless at her trial, now seems

a Venus-like role, both in the power she

far too clueless to be the Carver. He is

demonstrates and in the match she

surprised by the wrinkles beneath her

makes. It is she who binds Leontes to

eyes and taken aback by her beauty. He

Hermione again in love, with something

exclaims, “Does not the stone rebuke

between a blessing and a warning: “Do

me/For being more stone than it?”

not shun her/Until you see her die

(5.3.43-44). Though he plays the role of

again,” (5.3.131-132). Moreover, it is she

old bachelor like Pygmalion does, he

who (like Venus in Ovid’s myth) bids

shows himself to be something far dis-

Hermione,

tant. It is clear that Leontes did not

(5.3.125). Whether we are meant to be-

shape the statue to fulfil his desire; ra-

lieve, for a moment, that Hermione was

ther, his desire has been shaped to fit the

really resurrected from stone matters lit-

statue.

tle; a very real change comes to Hermi-

“Be

stone

more,”

one. The power of action, which she had been stripped of in her trial before 72

Leontes, is restored her. No longer does

misguided in their idea of artistic crea-

her husband wield the only potent voice

tion. The question it comes down to—

and complete control. The next com-

the question that tends to be assumed

mand that Hermione is given by Paulina

rather than analysed—is simple: can cre-

is “Approach” (5.3.125). And, quite un-

ation have soul? Though the culture

like Marston’s statue that “suffered” the

wars have subsided, that question is

embrace of her suitor’s arms (Marston

more confused than ever. Should we

206), Hermione extends her arms first.

ever stumble across its answer, we

“When she was young, you wooed her;

would find a much fuller understanding

now in age/Is she become the suitor?”

of what it is to be human, what it means

says Paulina to Leontes (5.3.134-135).

to create, and what sort of thing art re-

Hermione, who is “stone no more”, ex-

ally is. Quite possibly, though, that is

hibits her own agency. She acts for her-