Jonathan Dollimore's "Sexual Dissidence" offers
a multifaceted exploration of resistance, identity, and perversion within the
realm of gender and sexuality. While the titular concept of sexual dissidence
occupies a central position, Dollimore's analysis extends to a broader
consideration of power dynamics and ideological oppositions.
Sexual dissidence, according to Dollimore, disrupts the
binary oppositions between dominant and subordinate identities, particularly in
its challenge to notions of naturalness and unnaturalness. Dollimore draws on a
diverse array of theorists and writers, including Augustine, Shakespeare,
Freud, and Foucault, to elucidate the complex interplay between sexuality and
social structures. At the heart of his argument lies the notion of the
"paradoxical perverse" or the "perverse dynamic," which
refers to the production of perversion from within the very structures that
seek to suppress it. This concept underscores the inherent instabilities and
contradictions within dominant social frameworks, highlighting the ways in
which they simultaneously contain and exclude forms of sexual dissidence.
Dollimore also delves into the contrasting approaches to
identity, as exemplified by figures like Oscar Wilde and Andre Gide. He identifies
two modes of conceptualizing identity: anti-essentialist and essentialist.
While the debate between essentialism and anti-essentialism pervades cultural
and gender theory, Dollimore suggests that it is particularly relevant within
the context of dissident cultures. He argues that these specific histories of
dissidence challenge orthodoxies on both sides of the debate, complicating
simplistic binary oppositions.
Throughout the book, Dollimore interrogates the
complexities of identity formation and resistance, offering nuanced insights
into the ways in which power operates within cultural and social contexts.
While he acknowledges the importance of questioning essentialist assumptions,
Dollimore's analysis tends to favor anti-essentialist perspectives, with
figures like Wilde positioned as heroes in the struggle against dominant
ideologies.
Dollimore prompts critical reflection on the utility of
broad categorizations like essentialist and anti-essentialist for specific
cultural analyses. While Dollimore's intent to "read culture" with
awareness of historical and social complexities is commendable, his initial
categorization of figures like Gide and Wilde may oversimplify the intricate
interplay between rhetoric, social dynamics, and individual lives.
The dichotomy between Gide's essentialist stance and
Wilde's anti-essentialist position, as outlined by Dollimore, raises questions
about the nuanced relationship between rhetorical positions and the lived
experiences of individuals. Dollimore suggests that Gide sought inclusion
within dominant concepts, while Wilde embraced transgression and decentered
identity. However, this binary framework overlooks the multifaceted nature of
both authors' lives and writings, reducing complex social phenomena to
simplistic ideological positions.
Moreover, Dollimore's assertion that Wilde's
anti-essentialism contributed to the violence directed against him
oversimplifies the intricate factors at play in Wilde's legal persecution.
While Dollimore highlights Wilde's Phrases and Philosophies as evidence used
against him in court, he neglects to fully explore the broader context of
Wilde's trial. Wilde's legal troubles stemmed from a complex interplay of
personal relationships, societal attitudes towards homosexuality, and legal
proceedings. Dollimore's emphasis on anti-essentialist rhetoric as a primary
cause overlooks the broader social, political, and personal dynamics that
shaped Wilde's fate.
Indeed, Wilde's commitment to anti-essentialism, if
indeed present, would have influenced his interactions with society and his
understanding of himself. However, Dollimore's analysis could benefit from a
more nuanced exploration of how Wilde's rhetorical positions intersected with
the complex realities of his life. By delving deeper into the interplay between
rhetoric and lived experience, Dollimore could provide a richer understanding
of the ways in which individuals navigate social structures and negotiate their
identities.
In his thought-provoking concluding chapter, Dollimore
delves into Gide's complex relationship with Africa, highlighting the writer's
role in both nurturing creativity and perpetuating exploitation. Dollimore's
nuanced analysis raises questions about the dynamics of power and desire within
colonial contexts, particularly in relation to Western sexual dissidents and
their interactions with colonially subjugated peoples in Africa.
A key point of contention arises from Dollimore's earlier
depiction of a meeting between Wilde and Gide in Algiers in 1895. Here, Wilde
encourages Gide to transgress social norms and spend the night with a boy named
Mohammed. Dollimore argues that transgression holds different meanings for Gide
and Wilde, yet questions linger regarding the ethical implications of their
actions. When Wilde facilitates Gide's night of pleasure (or his own), does the
anti-essentialist stance of either figure mitigate the inherently exploitative
nature of their interactions?
Both Gide and Wilde navigate complex power dynamics and
personal desires, where essentialist and anti-essentialist rhetoric intersect
but do not fully determine their actions. While such rhetoric may shape
perceptions and beliefs, it does not offer a comprehensive explanation for the
complexities of their behaviors. Dollimore acknowledges the role of rhetoric in
perpetuating or challenging power structures, yet suggests that belief is not
always a prerequisite for enforcing social norms.
Moreover, Dollimore's book grapples with the challenge of
addressing the wide scope of its subject matter, from gay sexuality to
perversion and dissidence. While the central chapter on Othello illuminates the
rhetorical framing of female sexuality as perverse, the book skirts the nuances
of how different forms of sexuality occupy this space differently.
Additionally, Dollimore's treatment of central concepts often feels brief and
cursory, leaving readers yearning for more in-depth analysis and discussion.
No comments:
Post a Comment