M.A. Paper - Romance, Asexuality, & English Literature

[Blue Ice-Tea]

This September I'm starting a one-year M.A. in English for which I have to write a Major Research Paper (like a Thesis, but shorter). I've already decided that I want my paper to involve what I'm pretentiously thinking of as "Asexual Theory" (like Queer Theory, but with worse publicity). For anyone who's interested, I'd like to let you know about it and get your feedback on the subject.

My department is English, so my goal will be to apply Asexual Theory to English Literature. My plan is to focus on "Romance": to ask what the word means historically, what it means today, and how an asexual perspective might affect our understanding of it.

To explain, "Romance" is a word with a plethora of definitions:

• A genre of Medieval literature: Tales of knights on horseback, beautiful ladies, etc.
• A movement in English poetry: Byron, Shelly, Keats, etc.
• A "mythos" (as defined by Northrop Frye): The opposite of "Realism" or "Satire".

And then, of course, there is the modern definition, which is a particular kind of love. What distinguishes this form of love from others is difficult to define, but in practice it is almost always associated with sex or sexual desire.

Here's where asexuality comes in:

The asexual community distinguishes between "Romantic Orientation" and "Sexual Orientation", opening up the possibility of love, attraction, and desire that are romantic but not sexual.

My starting point will thus be to ask two questions:

1. What does "Romance" mean, outside of a sexual framework?
2. Where do we find examples of non-sexual romantic relationships in English Literature?

As far as (1) is concerned, my plan is to look at all the definitions of "Romance" and ask what common denominator links them together. From this, I plan to propose a definition of inter-personal romance that side-steps the issue of sex and sexual orientation. My current hypothesis is that, while romance and sex often go together, they are completely distinct things, and that anyone (regardless of gender or orientation) can feel romantic attraction for anyone else.

As for (2), I haven't made up my mind which books to use, but I'm thinking of focusing on ones with characters who are ambiguously gay, or whose behaviour is often read as homoerotic. I plan to argue that what often gets interpreted as repressed homosexuality in these characters may instead be read as homoromanticism and should be talked about as such.

Sorry if this seems esoteric. Let me know if you'd like me to make it simpler or give examples. I can also send you a copy of my one-page Research Proposal if you're interested.

I'd love to hear from anyone who's done similar research or who can recommend relevant sources. I'd also really appreciate general feedback on my ideas and how they could be made better. Although the paper is primarily for my degree, I'm hoping to publish the end product eventually. I know the emphasis on asexuality may seem relatively slight, but if I can help bring asexual ideas into the study of literature, I feel that will be one more small step towards recognition and legitimation for the asexual community.

EDIT: I tried pasting the text of my Research Proposal into a post, but for some reason the "Paste" function doesn't seem to be working for me on this message board.

[demiandproud]

Hey Blue Ice-Tea, a worthy goal, to include something like asexuality in your literature paper. It can be tricky, though, to balance the literary and non-literary portions. You've drawn it very wide right now, which makes for way, way more work. It's a trap I fell into and got major writer's block because I went in every direction during the research portion of my preparation. Even with so little on asexuality being out there yet, perhaps it's a good idea to narrow it down? Like: romantic friendships in Victorian era literature, or Courtly love in arthurian stories, or Sherlock Holmes as an asexual character (he canonically is) in different media (you could actually trace differing views on celibacy/asexuality in his reception/conception as a character).

I'm reading Asexualities: Feminist and Queer Perspectives. Ed. Karli June Cerakowski and Megan Milks, from Routledge, 2014. They're worth checking out, it's a collection of papers on asexuality, and part III of the collection is on asexuality and media culture, part VI on Reading asexually: asexual literary theory. I've only read the first two papers/chapters so far, and it's pretty accessible as far as language is concerned (i.e. you're not slogging through jargon for hours to get a good quote for the introduction-and-theory part of your paper, as you too often do with literary theory).

[Lucinda]

Your paper sounds interesting! I would pick the stories first and see if you can prove your hypothesis with them. Perhaps list the stories and characters in this thread. Let's analyze!!

Lucinda

[Blue Ice-Tea]

Thanks, Lucinda!

demiandproud, I just finished the Asexualities book! It was a good read, and also pointed me towards lots of other sources that should be useful.

I agree that my focus seems a bit broad at this point. It's too bad I couldn't post my research proposal, which attempts to narrow things down a bit.

Here's a summary:

My proposal is focused on same-sex relationships in late 19th and early 20th century English literature. These relationships are often read as examples of latent homosexual expression (ex. by Eve Sedgwick). However, they can also be read as a form of asexual romantic expression.

The problem is that the vocabulary needed to talk about asexual romance is lacking (or, at least, underused). I plan to start by building a lexicon (largely drawn from the asexual community!) with which to talk about non-sexual attraction, desire, and relationships. I then plan to look for examples of asexual expression in literature, and use the lexicon to analyse them. Note that I'm not looking for implicitly or explicitly asexual characters per se, but for non-sexual romantic expression in characters of all orientations.

I've fixated on the late Victorian/early Modernist period as one in which ideas about sex, sexual orientation, and same-sex love are in flux, thus generating numerous examples of same-sex relationships that are open to multiple readings. I plan to re-examine sexually-ambiguous characters in queer authors such as Oscar Wilde, Virginia Woolf, and E. M. Forster, but also in non-queer authors like Arthur Conan Doyle.

Some examples I've been considering are Basil and Dorian in The Picture of Dorian Gray (Wilde), Clarissa and Sally in Mrs Dalloway (Woolf), and some of the themes in E. M. Forster generally. I've also had Henry James recommended to me, and, of course, we can't forget the Sherlock Holmes stories.

That said, my ideas are open to change. One of my concerns is that by focusing on same-sex relationships I will be setting myself up in opposition to queer reading. My argument would probably be stronger if I discussed opposite-sex relationships too, but it's hard to think of examples. Eliza and Henry in Pygmalion, maybe?

I've also got a soft spot for the novel Brideshead Revisited, which is about a romantic friendship between a couple of (male) Interbellum Oxford students. If possible, I'd love to work it in somehow.

I really like the idea of discussing Courtly Love. Although it's not something I know a lot about, it does seem to fit the idea of "asexual romantic expression". What I might try to do is to take the concept in a medieval sense and apply it to more recent works of literature.

So, yeah, way too many ideas. ;) But I've got eight months of class coming up, during which I'll be studying Foucault, Queer Theory, Old English, Middle English, 18th Century Lit, and the Pre-Raphaelites. Hopefully those courses will help me to develop my focus before I start writing next spring.

[demiandproud]

That sounds like a really interesting research topic so far, and yes, with the description way more specific than your initial post :) This looks way more doable. Good luck with it!

[Blue Ice-Tea]

Update:

I've finished the first semester of my degree, and while I haven't made much progress on my Major Research Paper, I have written a class paper in which I start to float some of my ideas. I wrote it for my Pre-Raphaelites class, and it's called "Asexual Romantic Expression in Christina Rossetti's 'Goblin Market'".

My basic argument is that in the poem "Goblin Market", Christina Rossetti associates sexuality with the goblins and their fruit. This sets up a contrast between the insistent, harmful sexuality of the goblins and the non-sexual love and intimacy shared by the two sisters, providing a model for what a non-sexual romantic relationship might look like.

Although I got a good mark on the paper, I'm aware of some problems with it. One is that it seems odd to talk about a "romantic" relationship between sisters. More importantly, it was hard to make my argument without veering into "sex is bad" territory. I'm going to have to work on balancing sex-positivity with asexual awareness.

If anyone has ideas or suggestions I'd love to hear your thoughts on this topic. You can find the text of "Goblin Market" on line, and I can e-mail my paper to anyone who wants to read it.

[Wiseja1987]

I think one of the issues, is that a lot of Victorian authors wrote characters who could be perceived as Asexual, but their close relationships were often compared to sibling/parent relationships by way of explaining them. I could see how the sisters could be a model in that context, since Victorians didn't really have the vocabulary for Asexuality we do, and would likely miss asexual romantic relationship completely, assuming the pair in question felt filial rather than romantic sentiments.

"The Picture of Dorian Grey", is a possible example. Dorian's artist friend seems to be strongly attracted to him, but there is a glaring lack of sexual tension, which is significant considering the presence of it between the other characters. The artist indirectly addresses that himself, seeming confused why Dorian could be so important to him.

In terms of "The Goblin Market", I would think the relationship could be more closely representative of a relationship between an Asexual and a Sexual person. The first sister seems to have a curiosity, harmful or not, about the Goblins that the second one lacks. There's also the whole thing with the ill sister licking the antidote off the other while she stands there passively. Which is still fairly sex-negative if you go in that direction.

That's the other challenge, since Victorian culture, at least public culture, was fairly sex-negative already.

[Blue Ice-Tea]

Update:

I delivered a short talk based on my "Goblin Market" paper for a panel at a conference hosted by my school. The audience was small, but it was my first time "publishing" (i.e. making public) my ideas, and I'm glad of the experience. My classmates came and said nice things about the talk. Of course, they may just have been being nice.

Wiseja1987, Dorian Gray is a good example. I've all but decided to write one of my term papers on it.

[Blue Ice-Tea]

Update:

The winter semester is over now, and I've written another asexuality-themed paper. It was for my Queer Theory class, and it's called "Static Desire in The Picture of Dorian Gray".

In it, I argue that there are two different kinds of desire, "teleological" (goal-oriented) and "static". Teleological desire implies movement towards something, a goal to be achieved. Static desire, on the other hand, isn't interested in movement or change, but rather in preserving a situation as it already is. Teleological desire is for what one doesn't have; static desire is for things one already has. Since sexual desire has a very clear goal (sex with another person), it can be considered teleological. By contrast, static desire is, by definition, asexual.

The Picture of Dorian Gray provides a good model of how the different forms of desire work. Henry Wotton's desire for Dorian is explicitly teleological: he wants to "influence" Dorian; he wants Dorian to have "experiences" that will change him. Basil Hallward, on the other hand, does not want to influence Dorian at all. He loves Dorian exactly the way he is, and paints a picture of him so that he can preserve his youth and innocence forever. Basil's desire is less easily recognised and harder to put into words than Henry's, but it is clearly powerful and important to Basil.

The point of my reading is not so much that either Basil or Henry's feelings are specifically sexual (or asexual), but that they demonstrate different ways of understanding desire. While we tend to associate desire with actions and end-goals (like sex), desire can also have no goal, can lead to no action. Being able to understand desire this way allows us to recognise and appreciate different forms of desire, including asexual desire.

My paper draws a lot on Elizabeth Hanna Hanson's article "Towards and Asexual Narrative Structure" from Cerankowski and Milks's Asexualities. I got a reasonably good mark on it, although my prof pointed out several parts that need expanding on and counter-arguments that need responding to. If I have time, I might go back and revise it. I might even try to get it published.

Right now, however, I need to concentrate on my Major Research Paper, which will be the focus of my summer.

[Blue Ice-Tea]

Update:

 

Sorry for not posting recently.  A lot has happened since last time.

 

In July, I gave a talk based on my Dorian Gray paper at my department's graduate colloquium.  The audience was small, mostly my classmates and some teachers and friends, but I got a good response.

 

In August I finished my Major Research Paper.  I decided to write about the novel Brideshead Revisited, which is about a friendship between a couple of male Oxford students during the 1920s.  My thesis was that the relationship can be understood as an "asexual romance".  That doesn't mean that the characters are asexual, but it means their friendship is a romance while still being completely non-sexual.

 

The paper is 40 pages and is divided into three parts:

 

1. I argue that the relationship is not (necessarily) sexual.  I rebut other critics who read the boys' relationship as sexual.  I point out the erotonormative assumptions behind these readings, and how they ignore the possibility of both asexuality and of close platonic bonds between non-asexual people.  I acknowledge that the characters might be gay or bisexual, but point out that at least one of them could also be read as asexual.
2. I argue that, sexual or not, the relationship is still a romance.  I do this by testing it against three definitions of "romance": the mediaeval romance, the Victorian romantic friendship, and the contemporary asexual romance.  I show that the friendship has similarities to all three of these, meaning that it fits with many definitions of "romance" even if it doesn't fit with the most common sexual one.
3. I attempt to clarify the distinction between romance and friendship.  Various sources maintain that this distinction exists but are vague and contradictory as to what the distinction actually is.  I end up concluding that there may be no clear line between the two and that the romance-friendship binary may need rethinking.

 

I defended my paper at the end of August and got an A on it.

 

In November, I gave a very brief talk based on my Major Research Paper at the National Women's Studies Association conference in Montréal.  I was on one of four asexuality-related panels at the conference.  Only a few people heard my talk, but it was a good opportunity to share research and ideas with other academics.

 

I still hope to get my work published eventually, although I'll need to do some revising first.  I think I could get at least two articles out of my Major Research Paper, one on Brideshead Revisited specifically and one on the history of romance more generally.  And then there's the Dorian Gray paper, which might also have publication potential.

 

If anyone has any advice or suggestions I'd love to hear from you.  And if you want more information about my research just drop me a line and let me know.

[Blue Ice-Tea]

A simplified summary of my research has been published in the latest issue of AVENues.  It's similar to Part 2 of my Major Research Paper, but uses The X-Files instead of Brideshead Revisited:

 

http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/152395-avenues-marchapril-2017/