More questions on Onegin - and Richardson

Thu Apr 6 14:43:12 UTC 2006

>Samuel Richardson is known
>to me only through Hollywood (Clarissa), and I have no idea whether his
>books could educate a young lady on the matters of homosexuality. If
>anyone knows it, please share your information with the list.

"Clarissa" which Tatyana certainly read (and of which Pushkin was of a dual opinion), centers heavily on heterosexual relations between everybody. At least outwardly, I feel compelled to add.

Of the possible signs of homosexuality, recaling dandyism which was discussed in such a lively way, Robert Lovelace is certainly very concerned with appearance, both his own and Clarissa's. His detailed description of Clarissa's dress is an example. He describes himself as a great expert on ladies' dresses as he helped so many ladies out of theirs. 

His womanizing which could admittedly be interpreted as overcompensating for his striving for his own sex is explained as revenge on women for his being spurned by a lady he had thought to be his while she had preferred him to some duke. His aim is to ruin as many as he can because he thinks they are not deserving of anything better. Do we take his explanation for what he claims it is, or do we not? I would think his apparent misogyny rather speaks for his heterosexuality than the other way round. The most crucial question, however, is what would Clarissa and any other 18th century woman make of it? 

The word "love" figures prominently in the correspondence between Clarissa and her friend Anna Howe. How do we interpret it? The most obvious interpretation that Richardson means is that "love" signifies tender and spiritual friendship between the two girls. (When two girls in the 5th grade draw hearts in each other's diaries, what does it mean? Everything or nothing?) Clarissa refuses to get married to anybody (a very atypical thing for that moment) because nobody can live up to her moral standards. (Richardson seems to be wholeheartedly behind her in that; he, in general, thinks that women should stand on their own and not just be companion pieces for men.) Clarissa loves Lovelace as he becomes convinced after a series of trials but she never goes as far as bluntly admitting it. She refuses to marry the person who is repulsive to every other woman in England and she claims that such a marriage would jeopardize her immortal soul. (The poor filthy rich and ugly man, by the way, never gets married because everybody despises and abhors him.) Do we read her position as a manifestation of latent homosexuality and a desire to live with Anna (I am going out on a limb here, but why not?). Yet Clarissa repeatedly urges Anna to marry as Anna does have a suitor which Clarissa considers an excellent man, and when Anna offers to escape and stay with Clarissa to help her escape the persecutions of her family, Clarissa refuses and instead elopes with Lovelace. So, do we look at her behavior as suppressed homosexuality, or do we view it as a manifestation of the pride and egotism of virtue which proves to be perilous to Clarissa herself? Personally, I consider the second interpretation more interesting because it offers an unusual perspective on the issues of sin and virtue and opens up possibilities of interesting comparisons. Sin breeds not perdition only but also humility and love for thy neighbor while virtue breeds pride ans thus itself becomes a sin. Well, that is my pet topic so naturally I am biased here.

The mentioning of the TV Clarissa, though, led me to thinking about interpretations, especially modern interpretations of older texts. I hope we're talking about the same four-part BBC mini-series from 1991. It attempts to follow the book as closely as possible (one of the script writers is an 18th century English lit scholar), but makes some interesting departures. In the book, Clarissa has a dream which is something straight out of Edgar Poe, she dreams that Lovelace buries her alive. In the film, he stabs her through the heart with his sword. Also, the film hints heavily at the incestuous relations between Clarissa's siblings. Besides kissing and such like, Clarissa's sister sheathes her brother's sword in a very suggestive way. This is repeated several times. However, all it is based on is a single phrase in the book about the brother and sister walking towards Clarissa "lover-like," hand in hand. Now Richardson clearly used "lover" to mean "in love" without necessarily carnal implications ("Grandisson" begins with the phrase "the news of your departure greatly saddened your three lovers," and the phrase is applied to Harriet Byron, the paragon of virtue). Richardson repeats many things and situations but not his one. Is repeated kissing between the brother and sister in the film then amplifying what was clear to the 18th century audience, or is it reading something into a text which didn't necessarily mean it? I am still in doubt. 

Sorry for a long post, but I did it in less words than Richardson would have. 
Regards,
Tatyana

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                    http://seelangs.home.comcast.net/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------