Feminist Literary Criticism: From Anti-Patriarchy to Decadence

Bennett tells us in passing that she
“first had sex with another woman in 1973.”
What business is that of ours? And note
the phrase had sex. Must she speak of her
private conduct in such a coarse way? Is
there to be no difference any more between
professional writing and tell-all
television shows? By the way, she is hardly
an obscure figure in the Canadian academy,
for she was recently asked to revise
a textbook on the Middle Ages and add
“more women’s history.” She did it, she
says, but only because it is “the best deal
we can get, for now,” though it leaves the
“master narrative” intact. 25 Naturally, she
wants to revamp the “master narrative”
and erase heteronormativity from all of
medieval history. And who in Canada will
tell her no?
There were feminists before Bennett
who wished to dragoon all women into a
big imaginary lesbian tent, as for example
Adrienne Rich, who proposed a lesbian
“continuum” that included the relationships
between mother and daughter, between
sisters, and between friends, and
who even urged women to rethink all
their connections with other women as a
form of “resistance to their sexualisation
by patriarchal culture.” 26 Of course, if we
were only a function of language, then
vastly enlarging the meaning of the word
lesbian would change a lot. But we are not
a function of language. History in reality
is not just a word-construct that can be
arbitrarily deconstructed and reconstructed
by “discursive practices.” We
betray our ancestors when we give public
monies in support of such a mockery of
history.
A prime example of the contemporary
celebration of decadence in women’s studies
is Rita Felski’s appreciation of the
“lesbian picaresque.” This is a new genre
exemplified by, among other works, Jane
De Lynn’s Don Juan in the Village and
Michelle Tea’s Valencia. Felski regrets that
these works have not “made as much of a
splash as they deserve,” but she remedies
this by giving them careful scholarly attention.
In these novels, there is no veiling
of the “nitty-gritty details” of what
lesbians do in bed. Rather, sex and violence
are here “inextricably intertwined”
and the “soothing rituals of sadomasochistic
sex” can be found. Soothing rituals of
sadomasochistic sex? The implication is
that she approves of these perversions. In
Don Juan, Felski says, the lesbian protagonist
is unembarrassed about her rampant
“lust” for women; she fills the chapters
with the details of her anonymous onenight
stands, and expresses a yearning for
the “calm purity of utter degradation.” 27
Purity of utter degradation? Is this a work
that should be taught in a classroom?
Such authors resemble suicide bombers
hellbent on self-destruction and on the
destruction of as many as they can reach.
Come to think of it, suicide bombers are
not so bad, since they kill only bodies, not
souls.
Ah, but Felski appreciates “the ebullient
glee with which these novels kick
over the pedestal of female virtue.” The
pedestal of female virtue? There’s nothing
left to kick in the West but a few
broken pieces of that pedestal. How can
Felski enjoy a glee in what is obviously
diabolical? She remarks blandly that we
are faced today with the “routinizing of
transgression,” because “subversion” like
this has become the “daily grist for the
academic mill.” 28 Who would not weep to
hear that pornography is routine fare now
for young people in the universities? Instead
of fearing an imaginary “patriarchy,”
feminists would do well to fear the
abyss opening at their feet. They will be
held accountable someday for leading
into antisocial and criminal actions those
they were trusted to educate.
Another example of the contemporary
celebration of decadence in women’s studies
is found in Leila J. Rupp’s essay, “When
Women’s Studies Isn’t about Women:
Writing about Drag Queens.” 29 Rupp, the
chair of Women’s Studies in the Univer-
398 Fall 2007