Take 2.

Still fleshing out the prospectus . . . still quite rough . . . truly a living document.

***

Sadomasochism is the propulsory term of my project, the primary purpose of which is to complicate the way sadomasochism, as theme and form, functions among and between the disciplines of literary, cultural, and queer studies. My project will trace, and sometimes invent, a genealogy between the sadomasochistic themes and practices burgeoning in nineteenth century British literature and culture, through to the sadomasochism practiced in subcultures in the contemporary United States. This will not be a chronological tracing, but rather a movement between and among disciplines, histories, cultures, and texts—circular, turning in upon itself. In its circumlocutions and cruisings and general déjà-vu, this project will grapple with three moments: one, the emergence, and importance, of sadomasochism as both theme and form for nineteenth century British culture [should I expand to European culture, if I am to consider Freud, Sacher-Masoch, etc.?); two, the obsession with sadomasochism by queer theorists of the nineteenth century; and three, narrative theory that makes use, typically subconsciously, of the forms and themes of sadomasochism. Each of these epistemological moments relate to sadomasochism in ways both direct and indirect, yet my intention is to bring the concept to the surface in order to explore the erotic movement of sadomasochism beyond perversion, beyond power, beyond sexual practice and Freudian idiom. Rather idealistically, perhaps, I envision this project creating a queer feminist narrative theory of the erotic from the forms and themes of sadomasochism, using nineteenth century British literature and culture as a place to begin, but not necessarily a place to remain.

Sadomasochism is a freighted and emotional term, one that is invoked contemporarily with two dominant meanings: one, in reference its Freudian and sexological history, it refers to the deliberate conjunction of pain and pleasure that is recognized as one of the most common “perversions”; and two, with feminist disapprobation, it refers to the very structure of power and function of patriarchy. A third, less common use of sadomasochism comes through to us from a certain queer aesthetics that, in both literary and cultural theory, tends to idealize the affects and communities generated within texts and within consensual sadomasochistic communities (and to certainly separate the practice from the theory and from the artistic work). I will attempt in this project to combine these definitions, across histories and disciplines, in order to understand how sadomasochism functions in more complicated, rich, and, ultimately, valuable ways. I wish to move beyond pure pathologization or demonization or reification.

One of the most important aspects of my exploration of sadomasochism is to consider how it functions as an erotics of both theme and form. [MAYBE THE WAYS MY IDEAS RELATE HERE should be structured differently: that typically sadomasochism is theorized in terms of theme. But the intervention I wish to make is to consider sadomasochism as both an erotics of form and a formal erotics. Oooooo. To do this, you’ll have to shift the “theme and form” stuff that already infuses most of what you’ve written here. But here’s the thing: I am also interested in shifting the way we thematize s/m erotics. So perhaps the intervention I am making is this: to complicate the way we thematize s/m and to add depth by considering the erotics of form and the formal erotics. This would allow me to keep some of my previous writing, and it would allow me to discuss the interdependence between theme and form. And don’t literary theorists love that??? Hmmmmm.] My discussion of both the themes and forms of sadomasochism will vary depending on the texts, theories, and practices in question. In general terms, however, I use “theme” to refer to DEFINE . . . My use of “form” will draw primarily upon certain textual and, I will argue, cultural elements such as paradox and plot. By exploring the sadomasochistic formal erotics and the sadomasochistic erotics of form, I wish to build connections between texts typically separated on the basis of quality, historical period, and discipline [this makes my project sound more interdisciplinary than perhaps it is]; to build connections between the erotics and the plots of certain theories, disciplines, and cultural moments; and to expand the definitions of sadomasochism and its potential meanings, as well as our understanding of what gets privileged as “erotic.”

While “erotic” and “erotics” will be considered primarily in terms of aesthetics and Foucault [yes, I need to elaborate on these two angles, but this will take some more reading on my part], these terms refer more to the movement of my project, the particular texture and tone of my exploration of sadomasochism. As such, my use of “erotic” and “erotics” will remain ephemeral and dynamic, terms that my project will seek to perform, embody, and live, rather than clearly define and stabilize.

THIS IS GOING TO BE THE WHY-IS-THIS-IMPORTANT SECTION, aka, MY-INTERVENTION-IS section . . .[it's in some pretty desperate need of sources, but I'm forcing myself to tease out the different "moments" and the connections I (think) I want to make, before bringing in the surely complicating material . . .] My exploration of sadomasochism rests upon a series of analogical relationships, which by nature require a sort of suspension of disbelief, a kind of lyrical curiosity. These analogies have formed between disciplines that speak to one another, deal in one another, and which we might draw together along the lines of sadomasochism. Let us say that queer theory has always been a theory of narrative; and that narrative theory has always been a theory of the erotic; and that the erotic has always dealt with kinds of pleasure that are easily mistaken for pain, traded in pains that surface as pleasures. And that each of these . . . [Okay, the first part of this paragraph I’ve written to try to justify the attachment I feel to the immediately previous sentence. I’m not sure I understand what I mean by that sentence, but of course I like the voice – “Let us say . . . “ – and I think the “analogical” structure is important for understanding why I’m putting together what I’m putting together. ::sigh::] Sadomasochism occupies a peculiar place in critical theory. In literary theory it is, more often than not, invoked in order to pathologize the characters or the erotics of a text. This occurs primarily in reference to women and to femininity in general . . . especially if the female character in question is aligned with what is so often viewed as a “given” aspect of her gender role. Female sadists are definitely more celebrated than female masochists. The reverse is true for men: male masochism is often celebrated as a subversion of traditional gender roles, whereas male sadism can never be viewed as anything but purely demonic and patriarchal. Typically, literary theory deals in the themes of sadomasochism through the analysis of characters and subjectivities, and typically tends to negotiate subsequent erotics out of the text rather than granting their validity and value. [Note that there is a difference between the lit theory that deals directly with the term “sadomasochism” and those that talk merely about “pain and pleasure.” I suppose I will need to grapple with this distinction, but I’m not sure where.]

Within queer theory, reactions to sadomasochism fall in similar patterns along the lines of gender roles.

The relation between narrative theory and queer theory is, of all the moments I consider, perhaps the most indirect and yet owes the most to the form of sadomasochism.

I THINK THIS MIGHT BE CHAPTER the 1st STUFF: I will explore sadomasochism first as a viable form of eroticism. Indeed, Freud found the presence of sadomasochism so “common” in his patients that he was required to move it from the realm of perversions. For Freud, sadomasochism was not an isolated perversion of singular individuals, but it was the structure, the very form of even the most “normal” erotic relationships.

***

Bon appetit!