Untitled - California State University, Long Beach

humanity by promoting a race that is weaned from this mother’s food.
While such a move serves to discourage infant mortality, the other aim of
the move should be looked at, that is, the production of a certain type of
humankind; one that is bereft of the milk of the mother. Here, the breast
is removed literally from the mouth of the child and metaphorically from
a picture containing the humanity of the future.
Such an erasure of the breast can be interestingly traced back to the
depictions of monsters in Old English literature, especially in The Wonders
of the East, a work that conflates text and pictures. Dana Oswald notes
that the erasure of genitals in the illustrations of monsters in The Wonders
of the East spells out the human fear of the potential of that monstrous
body to reproduce (Oswald 28). In this persistence, the monster becomes
the “permanent Other.” “Genitals and female breasts are the most taboo
and the most private elements of human bodies in Anglo-Saxon culture”
(29), and Oswald correctly observes that such depictions enable the
understanding of Anglo-Saxon attitudes towards gender and sexuality.
(However, if there is a trepidation that the monsters will reproduce like
humans at all, why bestow them with any characteristic of a human?)
Oswald draws attention to two particular and similar images in the
set of illustrations (54-57). Both are by different artists and both have
the same image; that of a masculine figure feeding animals. The figures,
at first glance, look masculine by virtue of their physical depiction – a
broad, stocky torso – and the genital areas are covered. But the most
important difference is that one figure contains breast and nipples while
the other doesn’t. Oswald suggests that there is a purpose behind the
depiction of the latter and notes the various hints that give away the sexes
of the monstrous figures in both illustrations.
However, Oswald differs from my position on one point. She claims
that the feeding of the animals, in essence, implies that the nurturing
quality of the feminine is not erased (57). But it is yet unclear why such
172 | Sivaraman
a difference in the illustrations then occurs (even if they are by different
artists). The pictures contain an embedded message. The erasure of genitals
and especially female breasts corroborate my earlier claim that breasts act
as a site of humanity. Here, I understand humanity to broadly be any life.
The erasure of breasts converts to the erasure of life, thus stunting the
possibility of further sustenance especially through nourishment (though
this disputes Oswald’s argument). Further, there is a masculine assertion
in the other illustrations themselves; “these women take on masculine
habits and carry them to excess, in that they work with animals fiercer
and hunt animals more exotic than those pursued by most medieval
men” (Oswald 56-57). The assertion is further found in the beards of the
women combined with their masculine attire and the very evident lack
of a womanly physique or features. Assuming the artist therefore to be
male (as given in Oswald’s book as conveniently generic “he”), it is hard
to believe that the male gaze can perceive a woman (even as a monster)
to acquire masculine characteristics and still expect her to be a symbol of
nourishment; for that simply counters Oswald’s earlier argument that the
erasure of body parts was done to quell the fear of the possibility of these
monsters’ reproduction.
Conclusion
The idea of the breast as a seat of passion, chastity, and humanity
is more than a romantic notion. As a conclusive argument, I consider
the most interesting angle the breast takes in Philip Roth’s book, The
Breast. When the protagonist, David Kepesh, wakes up one day to find
that he has metamorphosed into a six-foot breast, he now has to define
his identity as a function of his physical condition. Debra Shostak, in
an insightful essay on the book, explores the notions of (the erasure of)
masculinity and how this (or any) body part “turn[s] the human into the
Sivaraman | 173