Comparing Sexuality In Nightwood And Miss Furr
An analysis of the novel Nightwood, by Djuna Barnes, and Gertrude Stein’s Miss Furr and Miss Skeene, provides us with a method of understanding the representation of sexuality in these examples of ‘lesbian literature’. Rather than engage with these two texts through simple literary appreciation, it is important to interrogate the ways that sexuality can be used as a means for expression, both cultural and personal. An even deeper analysis will reveal the ways in which terms such as ‘lesbian literature’ can lead to oversimplification of literary texts such as Nightwood and Miss Furr and Miss Skeene. These texts fundamentally offer readers insight through the depictions of characters and cultures filled with tension surrounding sexuality. First,
…show more content…
an investigation into the writing style employed by both Barnes and Stein will be used in order to frame our discussion. This will then allow for an in-depth view of the representation of sexuality in both Nightwood, and Miss Furr and Miss Skeene. Finally, this discussion will engage with the prominent theories of lesbian literature and discuss the place that these two works hold in such a category. It can clearly be seen that the categorisation of ‘lesbian literature’ is on the surface an accurate description of these two pieces. However, a deeper analysis shows that this term does little justice to the breadth of humour, pain, and absurdism surrounding the expression and representation of sexuality.
Djuna Barnes’ modernist novel Nightwood is an intensely melancholic text, following Robin Vote, an American expatriate, and the impact she has upon the individuals in her life. Nightwood is Barnes’ most popular novel, first published in London 1936, the text has gained a reputation as being a difficult novel to read, however its importance to the representation of sexuality is undeniable (Pekar 1995, online). Numerous academics and readers have praised Nightwood as being one of “the best known, most deeply felt, and generally best written… novel… dealing with gay themes” (Austen, p.82). Nightwood is in many ways a quintessentially modernist text, the prose is dense and gothic in style, utilising an unusual metafiction narrative style (Niven, p.39). Nightwood is a notoriously difficult text to read, in fact, an appreciation and understanding of the novel can only really be gained after a second reading of the text. T.S Elliot’s famous introduction warning the reader that “only sensibilities trained on poetry can wholly appreciate it,” rings true due to the writing style employed by Barnes (2015, p.xiv). The novel holds an odd position, often viewed as “either as a cache of modernism or, because it is rather tangled and obscure, it is sometimes rewarded with an extravagant explication de texte' (Pochoda 1976, p.179). Despite this, an analysis of Barnes’ writing style is helpful (if not crucial) to a comparison with Gertrude Stein’s work, and lesbian literature as a whole. Critics in general have not appreciated the novel, while other writers have felt that the book resonates with them (Pochoda 1976, p.179). What is so divisive about Nightwood? Barnes’ writing style. Barnes was a modernist writer in almost every sense of the term, particularly in Nightwood. Her experimentation with form and style was a desperate attempt to break free of expected characterisation and to return to “the tangled seepage of our earliest recollections and originations” (Hawkes 1962, p.2). Elizabeth Pochoda contends that if only “readers would take hold of the novel by the handle of its wit,” they would find that its “celebrated obscurities… would be less troublesome” (1976, p.180). It is after all a “tremendously funny book in a desperately surgical sort of way” (1976, p.180).
Gertrude Stein is herself no stranger to an unconventional, and to some impenetrable, writing style.
In a 1919 rejection letter to Gertrude Stein, the editor of the Atlantic, Ellery Sedgwick, revealed his opinion of her work. “Your poems, I am sorry to say, would be a puzzle picture to our readers. All who have not the key must find them baffling, and - alack! That key is known to very, very few” (Conrad 1995, p.217). Sedgwick holds an opinion shared by many, Stein’s work is seemingly incomprehensible. Her use of idiosyncrasies and repetition, often results in the wit and humour of her work being lost on the reader (Blackmer 1995, p.30). Stein’s short story Miss Furr and Miss Skeene is a primary example of her wit, humour, and her representation of sexuality. Published by Vanity Fair in 1923, the short story was accompanied by a succinct plot summary in the form of a subtitle: "The Tale of Two Young Ladies Who Were Gay Together and of How One Left the Other Behind" (Behling 1997, p.152). The text’s introduction comments that the short story “is written in one of Miss Gertrude Stein's simpler manners," allowing otherwise “baffled” readers to enjoy her work (Behling 1997, p.152). Vanity Fair’s attempt to have more readers engage with Miss Furr and Miss Skeene is not unfounded, its style and cadence is one of Stein’s most engaging works. The repetition suits the short story well, as Stein documents the very regular occurrences of gayness between Furr and
Skeene:
They were both regular in being gay there. Helen Furr was gay there, she was gayer and gayer there and really she was just gay there, she was gayer and gayer there, that is to say she found ways of being gay there that she was using in being gay there. (Stein 1993, p.255).
Clearly Stein is utilising repetition in this text and it lends itself well to the subject matter. Indeed, Vanity Fair commented when it first published the short story that “if it were not developed monotonously [it] could scarcely be developed at all" (Behling 1997, p.152).
an investigation into the writing style employed by both Barnes and Stein will be used in order to frame our discussion. This will then allow for an in-depth view of the representation of sexuality in both Nightwood, and Miss Furr and Miss Skeene. Finally, this discussion will engage with the prominent theories of lesbian literature and discuss the place that these two works hold in such a category. It can clearly be seen that the categorisation of ‘lesbian literature’ is on the surface an accurate description of these two pieces. However, a deeper analysis shows that this term does little justice to the breadth of humour, pain, and absurdism surrounding the expression and representation of sexuality.
Djuna Barnes’ modernist novel Nightwood is an intensely melancholic text, following Robin Vote, an American expatriate, and the impact she has upon the individuals in her life. Nightwood is Barnes’ most popular novel, first published in London 1936, the text has gained a reputation as being a difficult novel to read, however its importance to the representation of sexuality is undeniable (Pekar 1995, online). Numerous academics and readers have praised Nightwood as being one of “the best known, most deeply felt, and generally best written… novel… dealing with gay themes” (Austen, p.82). Nightwood is in many ways a quintessentially modernist text, the prose is dense and gothic in style, utilising an unusual metafiction narrative style (Niven, p.39). Nightwood is a notoriously difficult text to read, in fact, an appreciation and understanding of the novel can only really be gained after a second reading of the text. T.S Elliot’s famous introduction warning the reader that “only sensibilities trained on poetry can wholly appreciate it,” rings true due to the writing style employed by Barnes (2015, p.xiv). The novel holds an odd position, often viewed as “either as a cache of modernism or, because it is rather tangled and obscure, it is sometimes rewarded with an extravagant explication de texte' (Pochoda 1976, p.179). Despite this, an analysis of Barnes’ writing style is helpful (if not crucial) to a comparison with Gertrude Stein’s work, and lesbian literature as a whole. Critics in general have not appreciated the novel, while other writers have felt that the book resonates with them (Pochoda 1976, p.179). What is so divisive about Nightwood? Barnes’ writing style. Barnes was a modernist writer in almost every sense of the term, particularly in Nightwood. Her experimentation with form and style was a desperate attempt to break free of expected characterisation and to return to “the tangled seepage of our earliest recollections and originations” (Hawkes 1962, p.2). Elizabeth Pochoda contends that if only “readers would take hold of the novel by the handle of its wit,” they would find that its “celebrated obscurities… would be less troublesome” (1976, p.180). It is after all a “tremendously funny book in a desperately surgical sort of way” (1976, p.180).
Gertrude Stein is herself no stranger to an unconventional, and to some impenetrable, writing style.
In a 1919 rejection letter to Gertrude Stein, the editor of the Atlantic, Ellery Sedgwick, revealed his opinion of her work. “Your poems, I am sorry to say, would be a puzzle picture to our readers. All who have not the key must find them baffling, and - alack! That key is known to very, very few” (Conrad 1995, p.217). Sedgwick holds an opinion shared by many, Stein’s work is seemingly incomprehensible. Her use of idiosyncrasies and repetition, often results in the wit and humour of her work being lost on the reader (Blackmer 1995, p.30). Stein’s short story Miss Furr and Miss Skeene is a primary example of her wit, humour, and her representation of sexuality. Published by Vanity Fair in 1923, the short story was accompanied by a succinct plot summary in the form of a subtitle: "The Tale of Two Young Ladies Who Were Gay Together and of How One Left the Other Behind" (Behling 1997, p.152). The text’s introduction comments that the short story “is written in one of Miss Gertrude Stein's simpler manners," allowing otherwise “baffled” readers to enjoy her work (Behling 1997, p.152). Vanity Fair’s attempt to have more readers engage with Miss Furr and Miss Skeene is not unfounded, its style and cadence is one of Stein’s most engaging works. The repetition suits the short story well, as Stein documents the very regular occurrences of gayness between Furr and
Skeene:
They were both regular in being gay there. Helen Furr was gay there, she was gayer and gayer there and really she was just gay there, she was gayer and gayer there, that is to say she found ways of being gay there that she was using in being gay there. (Stein 1993, p.255).
Clearly Stein is utilising repetition in this text and it lends itself well to the subject matter. Indeed, Vanity Fair commented when it first published the short story that “if it were not developed monotonously [it] could scarcely be developed at all" (Behling 1997, p.152).