Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Difference Between vs Difference Within in the Man of Law's Tale
Reading Schibanoff's article on the Man of Law's Tale, I was struck by the issue of "difference between" versus "difference within" in her discussions of religious othering and antifeminism. As we discussed in class yesterday, it seems as though only one type of difference/othering can be addressed at a time. This is most definitely seems to be the case in Schibanoff's interpretation of the Tale. In her discussion of religious and racial othering, she is concerned primarily with establishing the threatening proximity of the Romans and the Saracens, and the radical difference between Cunstance and the population of Saxon Britain. However, when she moves to a discussion of "mannysh" women, all racial and religious difference is cast aside. The Sultaness and Donegild are discussed as equals. Issues of their position as racial/religious others is not addressed, as it is their threatening proximity to the male position that is brought to the fore. In this case, it appears as though race and religious difference are overridden, as these women's proximity to male-ness becomes more threatening than their position as racial/religious others. These women function as part of the same group - one that threatens the male position - rather than as members of two very different othered groups. It is as though racial otherness is made absolute in order for the examination of their gendered difference to be carried out. Is it possible for us to view these two subversive women simultaneously in terms of their othered racial/religious positions and their proximity to male-ness? Or does viewing their racial difference undermine the power of their gender ambiguity?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I find your post very astute, Lindsay--and makes clear why it is sometimes structurally so hard to consider gendered difference and racial difference simultaneously. I do think that Shibanoff TRIES to do this by way of her notion of "proximate otherness." But I don't think she carries this through to its logical extension--and this is, in part, because of her interest in showing us that Said's notion of "Orientalism" can apply to medieval texts.
ReplyDeleteIt may be that "neighbor love" runs counter to notions of "Orientalism," which rely on a rather settled notion of who we are, and who are "others" are. One thing we might say about neighbor-love (whether the R/S/Z or the Kristevan variety) is that it shakes up a stable, coherent sense of the absolute difference between "us" and "them." I think, as Lindsay points out, that Shibanoff is trying to get at this more subtle issue, by way of gender, but she can't seem to get gender and ethnic difference operative at the same time.
I wonder, finally though, if Reinhard's notion of the "feminine position" might help us get closer.
Thanks, Lindsay, for such an astute opening!