Chisholm 1997

Obscene Modernism: Eros Noir and the Profane Illumination of Djuna Barnes
Author(s): Dianne Chisholm

Source: American Literature, Vol. 69, No. 1, Unnatural Formations (Mar., 1997), pp. 167-206
Published by: Duke University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2928172 .
Accessed: 16/12/2014 11:14
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Duke University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American
Literature.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Dianne ObsceneModernism: ErosNoirandthe
Chisholm ofDjunaBarnes
ProfaneIllumination
Fromthemoment thatSade delivereditsfirstwordsand

markedout,in a singlediscourse, theboundaries ofwhat
suddenlybecameitskingdom, thelanguageofsexuality
hasliftedus intothenightwhereGodis absent,andwhere
all ofouractionsare addressedto thisabsencein a pro-
fanationwhichat once identifies it,exhaustsitselfin it,
and restoresit to the emptypurityofits transgression.
-Michel Foucault, "PrefacetoTransgression"
But the true,creativeovercoming of religiousillumina-
tion. . . residesin a profaneillumination,a materialistic,
anthropological inspiration.-WalterBenjamin,"Surreal-
ism"
he questionofobscenity challengestheboundsof
legaldiscoursebyprompting inquiry intothenatureoftransgression.
The transgressivityof"obsceneart"doesnotderivefromitsillegality
alone.Drawingupona tradition ofavant-gardepractice,obsceneart-
istryis engagedwithbutdifferent fromobscenity as definedunder
thelaw.Obsceneartmaybe legalizedby newcourtrulingsand/or
legitimizedby a bodyofliberaltasteand stillretainthe powerto
shock.Questionsconcerning theartistry ofobscenityand theread-
ingofartfornondiscursive modesoftransgression are oftenlostin
thediscussionofthestrategies andeffectsoflegalization.
Modernist artis producedatthesamehistorical moment andinthe
same socialspace as "obscene"art. When we think ofthe provoca-
tiveworkofAnglo-American literarymodernism, thefamoustrialsof
AmericanLiterature, C) 1997byDuke
Volume69,Number1, March1997.Copyright
Press.
University

Literature
168 American
JamesJoyce'sUlysses, D. H. Lawrence'sLadyChatterley's Lover,Rad-

clyffeHall's WellofLoneliness, HenryMiller'sTropicofCancer,and
WilliamBurrough's NakedLunchcomeimmediately to mind.Their
transgression was madevisiblethrough thelegalspectacularization
of"obscene"sexuality.' Or,toputitanother way,modernist sexuality
becamegenerallyrecognizable throughthe law's censoriousfocus
on "corruptive" speechandverbalimage.2 Legalprosecutions ledthe
wayinshapingpublicknowledge abouttheobscenepracticesofmod-
ernistart;through legalmediation, thereaderwas directedto con-
struemodernist transgression,favorably orunfavorably, as outlawed
sexualrepresentation.
Opposingcensorship, libertarians arguedforthe "artisticmerit"
or
ofbanned confiscated work thatthe lawhadjudgedobscene.The
claimofartisticmeritbecametheprincipaltacticoflegitimization
deployed inthestruggle todefineandextendthelimitsofsocialvalue
and acceptability. Championsof the outlaw,libertarians neverthe-
less collaborated with the law by attempting to containthe shockof
avant-garde sexualitieswithinan aestheticsofpornography, forging
a discourseandpedagogyof,and eventually a marketfor,"modern-
ist erotics."3Throughthe "liberation" oftaste,society'sdominant
idealironically prevails.The argument ofartisticmerithas repeat-
edlybeenused to groundthecampaignto legalizeor evencanonize
obsceneproductions wheretheobscenity in questionis believedsuf-
ficientlyartisticandcentrally heterosexual, andwheremisogyny and
homophobia are the impliedsubtextsofthework'spoeticlicense.4
Sucha liberalstrategy mayeventually accommodate tasteful,counter-
cultural(andevenhomosexual)representation, butitbrandishes an
epistemology thatexcludesan obscenity whichis critically aberrant
andunrepresentative ordialecticallyantisocial.
In theUnitedStatesobsceneartwontherighttoprotection under
theFirstAmendment providedit coulddemonstrate sufficientartis-
tic merit-orthe supposedequivalent, "socialvalue"-to justify its
obscenity.5Based ona modernist standard ofartisticsufficiency,such
legislationplaces an impossibleburdenon postmodern transgres-
sion.The legalizationof obscenemodernism sets a precedentfor
theaestheticization ofthepolitical-thedisciplining andneutralizing
ofshockthrough publictraining in literary appreciation. The avant-
gardeassaulton bourgeoiscultureandtheaestheticsofcommodity
consumption is,to a greatextent,authoritatively recuperated bythe
legalandcanonicalstrategies oftheliberalarts.

ofDjunaBarnes 169
Illumination
The Profane
Howdoesartforgeobscenity? Whatmaterials andtechniques does

artobscenelyassembleto subvertthe codes of social domination?
Howdoes thelegalviewofobscenity, including theperception ofex-
ceptional artisticmerit,obscureandarresta radicalartistic practice?
How does the legalization of obscenemodernism servea dialectic
offalsesocial "progress"thatsecuresa liberalappreciation of its
symbolic capital,whilemanaging modernism's transgression through
tastefulmisrecognition?
The Frenchphilosopher MichelFoucaultsawsomething otherthan
legal obscenityin the pornography of GeorgesBataille,to which
he payshomagein his "Prefaceto Transgression." He pointsto a
Sadean "languageofsexuality" pro-
that,sinceit is self-referential,
fanesneitherdivinenorsecularsocial codes and suffers no trans-
gressivelimit.Againstthe absoluteillumination of Enlightenment
morality, Bataillecircumscribes a carnalityofunfathomable night.
But Foucault,afterlocatingthis"singlediscourse"beyondthe do-
mainofGodandLaw,haslittlemoretosayaboutBataille'ssubversive
capacity. Ultimately, Foucaultlosesfaithinthenegativecapability of
avant-garde obscenity. He retireshis projectoftransgressive mod-
ernismand initiatesa critiqueof quotidianspace, abandoning the
esotericlanguageofSadeannihilism forthepublicand populardis-
courseofsexualhygienics, thecommunications ofeveryday regimen
androutine.6
The introductory volumeofTheHistory ofSexuality, inwhichFou-
caultoutlineshis soberdeparture fromBataille's"subversive" His-
toirede l'erotisme, assessesthedisciplinary
clinically spaceproduced
bytechnological modernity.7 Specifying boththemacro-and micro-
scopicrangeofthesetechnologies, fromtheformal strategies ofstate
surveillance to thedailyoperations ofsexualself-administration, he
leaveslittleor no roomforavant-garde intervention. Forthe disen-
chantedFoucault,thereis no space forobscenepracticesthatare
notcriminal, insane,or pathological undersocial,medical,or legal
rubrics.Artists whocreatean obsceneworkdo so,he implies, under
theimperceptibly ubiquitous gaze ofpanopticpowerandattheriskof
conforming to an authority-imaginary ormaterial-ordisqualifying
themselves as rational,socialbeings.
Foucault'sdystopic recoilfromtherevolutionary aimsofmodernist
transgression is troubling,
butitcontributes substantiallytoanunder-
standingofhowthe questionofobscenity maybe framed.Froma
genealogical pointofview,thequestionis rhetorical, sinceitis bound

Literature
170 American
to be posed in the termsofa discoursethatdelimitsand hyposta-

tizes all formsof sexualdeviancein categoriesof criminaland/or
pathological perversity. The latervolumesofTheHistory ofSexuality
traceFoucault'sreturn totransgression as a practical problem forthe
aestheticsofeveryday existence.His projectdetoursthrough thears
eroticaofantiquity as a prolegomena tounderstanding howthespace
ofsexualmodernity might be recovered andpracticed bytoday'smar-
ginalselvesand communities. But in the courseofreorienting his
critiquefrompanopticspaceto marginal practices(forexample,the
S/M practicesofgayleathermen), he neverreturns to thepractices
ofobscenemodernism to elaboratehis "preface"to transgression.8
The genealogist's postscript toobscenemodernism is missing.
To openthequestionofobscenity to a fullerdialecticalinquiry, I
urgethatwe avoid both the pretensions of liberalstrategy andthe di-
gressionsofFoucaultian cynicism. Likea lineofavant-garde theorists
andcriticsbeforeme (PeterBurger, forinstance, andJuliaKristeva),
I suggestthatwe thinkoftransgression as an explosiveinteraction of
heterogeneous material, lawful and artful, discursive and nondiscur-
sive,eccentric andquotidian. Inaddition, I urgethatwe thinkofartis-
ticobscenity as a particular practiceoftransgression thatshocksand
dispersesthereactive forcesofthesexualstatusquowhilemobilizing
radical,historical,andpoliticalinsight. We mightfurther reevaluate
obscenemodernism as a specificmodeofartistictransgression, one
thatemploys languagetoforgea textualspacewithin sexualdiscourse
andsexualmodernity wherewe can see simultaneously theeloquent
suppression oferoticpossibility and theprofanelimitofbourgeois
decency.
We mightalso considera moreoverdetermined case ofobscene
modernism thanBataille'spornographic extremism. The artofDjuna
Barnesbothattractsand eludesthe censor.Her modernist classic
Nightwood (1937)helpssettheaestheticstandardoflegalobscenity
inthesamemoment thatitsubverts thelegalunderstanding ofartis-
tic transgression, conveying a shockthathas yet to be received.
Constituting whatGilles Deleuze and Felix Guattarimightcall a
"nomadicassemblage, " thenoveltraverses, combines, andjuxtaposes
Americanpuritanism and Frenchpornography, Frenchsurrealism
and Americanrealism.The noveldisplaysthe prudent(aesthetic,
legal,marketing) orientation ofBarnes'seditor, T. S. Eliot,thenwork-
ingfortheEnglishpublisher Faber,as wellas theimpetusto mimic

ofDjunaBarnes 171
Illumination
The Profane
Joycean afterthelifting
profanity ofthebanon Ulysses in 1933.Writ-
ten mostlyin Englandin the thirties, but situatedin Paris in the
twentiesandbetweenthebohemiasofParis,NewYork,Vienna,and
Berlin,Nightwood thedistancebetween"flaneur
also articulates real-
ism"and"lesbianrealism,"9 betweenthecityofsurrealist revolution
andthestateoflesbianexile:a queerspace.10
WhatmakesNightwood an especiallyinteresting case is thatit
pointsto its ownobscenity,to obscenespeechand acts,evenafter
Barnes revisedthe manuscript in responseto EmilyColeman's
friendlyemendations and Eliot's editorialadvice.The manuscript
was firstbroughtto Eliot'sattentionas a bold exploration intothe
wilderness ofhumaneroticism. "'Can youreadthatandnotsee that
something newhas been said aboutthe veryheartof sex?-going
beyondsex, to thatworldwherethereis no marriageor givingin
marriage-where no modernwriter evergoes?"'11wroteColemanto
Eliot,arguingforthetext'spublication on thegroundsofits trans-
Eliotwaspersuaded,
gressiveoriginality. butittookBarnes'sfurther
insistenceon the necessityof obscenityto overrulehis censorial
omissions.The newcriticaleditionofNightwood fromDalkeyArchive
Pressindicatesthecutsand changesmadebyEliotthatBarnesdid
notalwayscondone.WehaveevidencethatBarnesconvinced Eliotto
retainthenovel'smostshockingpassage,whichhe strongly recom-
mendeddeleting but she foregrounded by moving to thelastchapter.
Moreover, to makeexplicitthe characterofher transgression, she
persistedin usingthe word"obscene,"whichhe had changedto
"unclean." 12
Yetas a deviceofartistic
transgression Nightwood'sobscenitygoes
unnoticed, evenwhereitssexual"decadence"continues to fascinate
and trouble.Directedby Eliot'sintroductory remarksto regardits
offensivelanguageas an eccentricpoetics,censorsoverlookit.Con-
versely,determined to recoverwhathas been hiddenbehindthe
legitimizingveilofaesthetics, feminist
critics-particularly critics-
read Barnes'sobscenityforsignsofforbidden being;they"out"a
wholecarnival oftransgressiveand/orabjectsexualities-lesbianism,
homosexuality, sadomasochism, vampirism, bestiality,
transvestism,
pederasty, Someofthesecriticsgo so faras tolobbyforwhat
incest.'3
theyhave outed,callingforcelebration or condemnation depending
onhowtheyidentify The recuperation
theirevidence.'4 ofNightwood's
sexualoutlawry bya politicsofrepresentationtends,however, to be

172 American
Literature
rhetorical,notbecause thereare no lesbiansor sadomasochists or

incestsurvivors orpractitioners ofbestiality inthetext,norbecause
Barnesshowsnosympathy forthesexuallydisqualified,'5 butbecause
hernarration doesnotvoicethestruggle ofanemerging subculture so
muchas foreground theduplicitous-"obscene"-frame ofspeechin
whichanyunbecoming sexuality mustbe livedandthought.'6 Instead
ofspeakingouton lesbianism in cryptic modernism, Nightwood seri-
ouslychallengestheepistemological andontological claimsofsexual
discoursein generaland the categoryof "inversion" in particular.
Discursivity, as muchas prudery, is thetargetofhertransgression.
What,then,arethespecificmaterials andtechniquesofNightwood's
obscenity?
To answerthisquestionI drawon a theoryoftransgression that
takesthe art of profanation, notthe law of obscenity, as its point
ofdeparture. And sinceI need a theorythatdoes morethanpoint
to the dark,as does Foucault'sprefaceto Bataille,I refermyread-
ingofNightwood to WalterBenjamin's"profane illumination." As a
contemporary ofBarnes,as a foreigner livingand writing in Paris,
and as an astutereaderofmodernity and the Frenchavant-garde,
Benjamin sharesBarnes'scultural geography andartistic orientation.
His writing on Frenchsurrealism presentsa particularly timelycon-
junctionofavant-garde shocktactics,Baudelaireanerontology, and
criticaltheoryforthrowing dialecticallighton Barnes'smystifying
obscenity. Thisis thelightofthehistorical materialist-ultimately, a
politicalillumination thatderivesitstacticsofengagement fromthe
techniqueoftheartittheorizes.'7
ForBenjamin, theSurrealist methodofprofanation is notmerely
an aestheticor eroticmatter. Itstrickis to document a case of"eso-
tericlove"and captureitsuncanny drift againstthecity'sindustrial
wasteland, recastingthe"outmoded" Parispassagesand arcadesof
nineteenth-century splendor withan auraofdegradedexperienceso
as to shockreaderlyconsciousnessintoa "nihilistic" awarenessof
capitalism's devastating progress.'8 Surrealism is notthefirstartis-
tic movement to deploya subversiveeroticism, but it outdoesits
Romantic andSadeanprecursors byusingerosto invokeandrelease
therevolutionary energiesconcealedin thedetritus ofindustrialist-
capitalistsociety.
In considering th-ecriticaldifferencethatartbringstothequestion
of obscenity, I makeit myprimary purposeto understand the ob-

ofDjunaBarnes 173
Illumination
The Profane
scenetechniqueofDjunaBarnes'sNightwood andthetransgressive
functionithas playedinthehistory ofmodernculture. Towardsthis
end,I distinguishmyreadingfromthosethatexaminethe discur-
effects
siveand disciplinary ofNightwood's I workwith
legalization.
Walter Benjamin'smodernism, but ratherthan oppose it to Michel
Foucault'spostmodernism, conjunction.
I seek a fruitful Rereading
Nightwood betweentheinsights ofBenjamin's "Surrealism" andthose
ofthe firstvolumeof Foucault'sHistory ofSexuality affords a rap-
prochement between the historicalmaterialistandthe genealogist,a
methodofadvancing sexualpoliticsthatcombinesdialecticalimage
withdiscursivecritique.Privilegingthetraditionofavant-garde nihil-
theerosnoirofsurrealism
ism,in particular inwhoseshadowglows
thedefeatofrevolutionarylibertinage,myreadingwillbe morequeer
thanlesbian.19
ofNightwood
The"Non-case"
Thoughherbest-known workwas neitherseizednorbanned,Barnes
was no strangerto obscenity action.In 1928Ryder was publishedin
expurgated form,and in thesame yearBarnesand friends hawked
copies ofLadies Almanackon the streetsof Paris and eventually
smuggledit intoAmericaafterher Europeandistributor, Edward
Titus,backedoutoftheiragreement forfearofthebook'sconfisca-
tion.Nightwoodwas editedandpublished nearlytenyearslaterwith
thethreatofcensorship stillin theair.In spiteofJudgeWoolsey's
1933rulingthatendedthe ban on Joyce'sUlysses in the U.S., the
campaignagainstobscenity inliteraturecontinued.In fact,thefocus
onAmerican(rather
was intensified thanforeign) works,specifically
thosethatpresented themesofhomosexuality, incest,and prostitu-
tion.20
Nightwood tolegalobscenity's
reactstacitly jurisdiction,switching
fromtheup-front
dramatically tacticsBarnesused to protesttheex-
purgationofRyder.As she explainsin her foreword to the earlier
work,Barneswas forcedto deleteseveralpassages,whichshe re-
placedwithasteriskstoindicatewherethetexthadbeencorrupted.2'
Nightwood,on theotherhand,suffers no omissionsto whichtheau-
thordidnotagree.ButwiththislatertextBarnesdoesnotresignher
protestso muchas avoidlegalproceedings withtacticsofa differ-
notclearlypredictable
ent,notreadilyidentifiable, obscenity.Inplace

174 American
Literature
ofa hortatory foreword denouncing thelaw'sbarbaricintrusion, and

in place ofboldlyflaggededitorialcuts-self-conscious tacticsthat
alertthe readerto the impotence ofthe creativewriterconfronted
bypublicpower-thereappearsattheclimactic endingofNightwood
a convulsive and disturbing imagethatthenarrator quixotically de-
scribesas "obsceneand touching."22 WhereasRyder'sobscenity is
purgedand markedto reflectand accommodate the sociallydomi-
nantdiscursiveorder,Nightwood's obscenity resiststheproprieties
ofspeechwithan uncanny declaration of"touching" profanation. In
legalterms,Nightwood is a "non-case";yetitis defiantly obscene.
A Foucaultian readermightarguethatin presenting a "non-case"
oflegalobscenity, Nightwood functionsall themoreeffectively as an
undercover agentintheproduction andpolicingofmodernidentities.
In a recentarticle,LeighGilmourastutely arguesthatNightwood is
theartful issuenotmerely oftalented craftsmanship but,more impor-
tantly,ofeditorialmanipulation designedtocircumvent legalaction.23
She contends thatthismanipulation has hada handininstituting and
safeguarding theheterosexual identityofhighmodernism. Editorial
stepstakento ensurethatNightwood wouldescape legalcondemna-
tioncan be shownto deployan aestheticizing strategy thatpurges
the morerealistand populisthomosexualcontentthatthreatens to
abusepoeticlicense,whilelegitimizing themorerarified inscriptions
ofhomosexuality as literary eccentricity.The shapersofNightwood's
receptionare thusinstrumental in producing a categoryofliterari-
ness thatformally distinguishes "high"from"low"modernism and
thatlegitimizes eroticpoeticizing attheexpenseofhomosexual politi-
cizingandthepushforrepresentation.
In explaining theprocessby whichmodernist (sexual) identities
are formed and disciplined, Gilmour followsan argument developed
by Foucaultin TheHistory ofSexuality. According to Foucault,the
medicalandlegaldiscoursesthatcomposethebodyofknowledge of
scientiasexualisassumean ontological foundation onwhichadminis-
trativepowersrelyforclassifying, regimenting, anddisciplining what
areonlyepistemological typologies ofdeviance, pathology, andcrimi-
Thussexualtypesandbehaviors
nality. acquirethe"reality" ofsexual
identity,whichoccasionsin turna "real"needformedical,juridical,
and pedagogicalregardand regulation. The exampleFoucaultout-
linesis the procedureby whichthe medievalsodomite,forwhom
sodomywas onlya sinorbreachofconduct, is displacedbythemod-

The Profane ofDjunaBarnes 175
Illumination
ernhomosexual, forwhomdevianceconstitutes thecoreofbeing.24 By

the1920stheregimeofscientiasexualisexpandeditscapacitytorec-
ognize,pathologize, andcriminalize sexualtypesthrough theinstru-
mentation ofobscenity law and,in particular, theHicklindoctrine.25
Radclyffe Hall'sWellofLoneliness (1929),havingbeenpronounced ob-
sceneunderHicklinforitsunrepentant lesbianism, becamethecause
ce'lebreof"lesbianwriting":26 "whenTheWellofLoneliness wasbanned
it was hypostatized as an obsceneand lesbiannovel."27 Gilmourar-
gues that,in view of these and otherlegal precedents,28 Barnes's
editor,T. S. Eliot,tookcareto scriptan introduction andmakeedito-
rialcutsthatforegrounded the"poetic"insteadofthe"psychopathic"
features ofthenovel(Nightwood, xv). In colluding withthelaw,Eliot
producesa "modernist" (as opposedto a text,
realist) andhe legiti-
mizesa "modernist" (as opposedto a homosexual)identity.29 Eliot's
Barnesis a "modernist writer" whosetreatment ofperversematerial
is literary-not deviant.30
Gilmour is convincing onthepointthatNightwood, evenas a "non-
case" oflegal obscenity, stillhas a constitutive roleto playin the
production andlegitimization ofmodernism. Butherclaimthatlegal-
izingforcesobscureanddelaytherecognition ofwhat,decadeslater,
is nowbeingreceivedas a lesbiannovelbegs thequestionofNight-
wood'sstatusas a homosexual text.Why,she asks,was theformally
less adventurous WellofLoneliness ableto cultivate a lesbianidentity
whenthe artistically moreradicalNightwood was not?Whydidthe
criminalization ofWellinstantly prompt a lesbianfollowing insteadof
thelegally sanctioned Nightwood, "which was not banned" and "would
have to waitfora latergeneration of readers"?Gilmourcontends
that"Barnes'sreadersdidnot'see' thelesbianism ofNoraandRobin
[Nightwood'sprimarylovers] ... because it was presentedneither
through a medicaldiscoursenorintermsofnarrative realism."The
lesbianism is allegedlyob-
is evidencedin thetext,butitsvisibility
scuredbythedeployment of"thecategoryoftheliterary" to avoid
prosecution.3'
But ifBarnes'slesbianismis notlegibleunderavailable,patholo-
ifitbearsnoidentifying
gizingrubrics, signsofmedicaltaxonomy or
narrative
realism,howthenis ittobe recognizedas such?Whatis les-
bianismifnota discursivecategoryoroperation?Howdoes Gilmour
"see" thelesbianismbehindthisstrategic obscu-
literary/legalizing
rity?Whydoes she insist
on readingthe characters ofNightwoodas

Literature
176 American
lesbian(oras representing sexualidentity) whenshe concedesthat

the writingdepartsfromthe practiceof narrative realism?32 Why
readeroticrealismbackintoan avant-garde texttoimplythattheau-
thor,incollaboration withtheeditor, intended torepresent lesbianism
surreptitiously?Is thefunction ofavant-garde literariness limited-
in thisor anyotherwriting-toobscuring theartofrepresentation,
thatis, ofmakingvisibleandidentifiable, hencereal,thediscursive
categoriesofscientiasexualis?
The claimthatNightwood shouldbe perceivedas thetortured and
mutedexpressionof a lesbianrelationship is critically misleading.
Barnes'snoveldoesnotvoicethecauseofthemaligned invert, andit
displaysnoneofthesentimental plottingofforbidden lovethatdistin-
guishesthenarratives ofRadclyffe Hall.33
Ontheotherhand,thenovel
doesbeartracesoftheBeardsleyesque decadenceofBarnes'sBookof
Repulsive Women (1915),theElizabethan bawdinessofLadiesAlma-
nack(1928),andthebohemianpandemonium ofRyder(1928).Each
ofthesebooksis an exampleoftheextravagant, hard-edged writing
thatBarneshad beenperfecting sinceherdaysas a Greenwich Vil-
lage journalist.Butthereis a darknessin Nightwood thatcombines
Barnes'saffection forBurton'sAnatomy ofMelancholia(1621)with
a flirtatious
appreciation ofSurrealism's De Sade. I proposethat,far
fromwriting a "narrativeoflesbianism,"34 whether poeticorpsycho-
pathic,Barnesstrongly resiststhetendency thatanimated heramazo-
niancontemporaries toelaborateandglorify "inversion"; instead,she
flauntsa queerscepticism concerning sexualliberation anditsbohe-
mianmilieux,profaning theillusionsoftheir"reversediscourse."35
Barnesdoestackleobscenity lawbutnotwitha proclamation, latent
orimplicit,ofhomosexual rights.
One ofBarnes'smoreextravagant tacticsis theuse she makesof
thenotorious DoctorMatthew O'Connor, whosegarrulity is peppered
withenough"Irish"to have in itselfbeen sufficient reasonforthe
booktofailtheHicklintest."AmI thegolden-mouthed St.JohnChry-
sostom,the Greekwho said it withthe othercheek?"she has the
Doctorask rhetorically; "No,I'm a fartin a gale ofwind,an humble
violetundera cow pad" (96). The Doctor'sspecialization is gyne-
cologyandobstetrics, andyethis dilatory meditations on thenature
oferoticsuffering omitordefytheimplementation ofdiagnostic cate-
gories:"maymydilator burstandmyspeculumrust,maypanicseize
myindexfinger beforeI pointoutmyman"(Nightwood, 32). Instead

Illumination
ofavailinghimself ofone ofthemostpowerful strategies ofhis pro-

fession,the Doctorpanicsat the thoughtofactuallydeploying his
authority to name,categorize, and pathologize. The term"lesbian"
neverappearsinhis speech(oranywhere else in thetext),although
thecategory"invert"is subjectto muchriddling and demystifying
speculation. His musingsrevealthatthetruthofinversion is to be
foundnotintheritesofconfession orthediagnosesofsexology butin
thearchivesoffantasy, whereitenthralls withtheauraofa romantic
lie:"whatis thislovewe havefortheinvert, boyorgirl?It was they
whowerespokenofineveryromancethatwe everread.... Theyare
ouranswerto whatourgrandmothers weretoldlovewas,andwhat
itnevercametobe; theythelivinglie ofourcenturies. Whena long
lie comesup,sometimes itis a beauty;whenitdropsintodissolution,
intodrugsand drink,intodisease and death,it has a singularand
terribleattraction" (Nightwood, 136-37).It is theDoctor'sunwitting
fatetobe interminably engagedinrelieving hisfriends ofa romantic
theysuffer
religiosity as a formofenlightenment. His primary tactic
ofdemystification is his shockinguse ofobscenity. It is has a lim-
itedeffect on BaronFelixvonVolkbein, a figureoftheressentiment
ofdecayingEuropeanaristocracy, and evenless on Nora,a chimera
ofnewwomanhood, bohemia,andfrontier puritanism. The Baronis
"troubledby obscenity" butinterprets the Doctor'sdisgustingness
as a projectionofmelancholia. The struggleto resistthe Doctor's
volubleand prolific profanity is moredrawnoutin Nora'scase, but
thestubborn pietythatcharacterizes herquestto knowandconfess
thetruth aboutsexuality vanquisheseventhemostbrilliant dialogical
maneuvering in his pornological investigations. She is consequently
unprepared fortheclimactic"obsceneandtouching" encounter and
collapsesfromtheshock.
Whatis thisobscenity thatis unobtrusive yetcrucialto theerotic
playandplotofBarnes'stext?Whatis theartofBarnes'sobscenity
and whatare the politicsofher erotics?How does she affectthe
reader's,ifnotthe character's, moralsensibility? These are ques-
tionsthatGilmouroverlooks, since her focus is on thelegalization
ofNightwood and its effects. Forthe criticwhofocuseson thepro-
ductivealliancesoflegality, sexuality, andpoetry, Nightwood presents
a case of artisticcomplicity withlegitimizing forces.But Gilmour
missesthe techniquethe artistuses to historicize and expose the
socialreproduction ofdiscursive sexuality.

Literature
178 American
That Nightwood does notdeploythe tacticof reversediscourse,

voicingand celebratinghomosexuality withthe same scientificvo-
cabularyused to condemnit, is no moreproofthat Barnes colluded
withEliotin censoringobscene-whichis to say,homosexual-pas-
sages thanthatshe had difficulty expressingher lesbianism.The
targetsofBarnes'sobscenedoctor(ing) are preciselythecategories
ofinversion thatcomprisethesexologicalconfession,
andperversion
categoriesthatnarrativerealismso richlyelaboratesand thatboth
EuropeandecadenceandAmerican bohemianism readilyabsorb-de-
spitetheirconscientious
liberalism.ThoughEliot'seditorialactions
anticipate(andperhapsadvance)theinteractionoflawandliterature
in theUnitedStates-theydo notpurgeNightwood or itsmodernist
BarnesmayhaveendorsedEliot's
legacyofantisocialtransgression.
editorialcutsnotbecauseshe sharedhis prescientprudenceor aes-
thetictastebutbecausethecutssharpened hertextwithout weaken-
I
ingherobscenedevice.To getto theheartofthisdevice, turnto
WalterBenjamin.
"Profane
Illumination"
In an attempt to theorizethe practiceofSurrealism, Benjaminex-
plainsand defendsits artisticmethodas a politicalstrategy. His
"Surrealism" appearedin 1929,36 whenthe movement was entering
a crucialphaseofits history, "a momentwhentheoriginaltension
ofthesecretsocietymusteitherexplodein a matter-of-fact, profane
struggle forpowerand domination or decayas a publicdemonstra-
tionandbe transformed."37 Benjaminforgesreflectionsthatcatalyze
artistic as ifbyclarifying
self-recognition, thetechniqueofSurrealist
activism he couldalso catalyzeitstransformation.Chiefamongthese
is hisnotionof"profane illumination."38
tookupthe"passionate
The Surrealists revoltagainstCatholicism"
ledbyRimbaud, Lautreamont, andApollinaire (Benjamin, 179).They
aimedtoovercome thenarcosisof"religious illumination"bydispens-
inga morepotentanddangerousintoxicant, a "profaneillumination"
whosesourcesof"inspiration" were"materialistic,anthropological."
Hashish,opium,and otherhallucinogenic drugsfacilitate an "intro-
ductory lesson"tothis"profane sincethe"loosening
illumination," of
theselfbyintoxication is atthesametime,precisely thefruitful,living
experiencethatallowed[thesurrealists] to stepoutsidethedomain

ofDjunaBarnes 179
Illumination
The Profane
ofintoxication." Profaneillumination is a visionary demystification,

"butthetrue,creativeovercoming ofreligiousillumination certainly
does notlie innarcotics." The activeagencyis notmystery, ecstasy,
oranyoftheinducements itis anuncanny
ofreligiosity; trompe l'oeil,
a "dialecticaloptic" (Benjamin, 190) displayed againsta backdrop
of spiritualenlightenment and industrial progressthatthrowsinto
luminous reliefthewreckageandobsolesenceofmaterial life.
The intoxicant in Breton'sNadja, the centraltextof Benjamin's
meditation on profaneillumination, is "esotericlove,"butthe lady
herselfis notintoxicating. Eros loosensthe structure ofbourgeois
perspective, allowingnarrator andreaderto beholda shockingly de-
gradedworld.Abandoning lovemaking to thestrangeautomatism of
the unconscious, Breton follows Nadja on her somnambulent excur-
sionsaboutParis.He is carriedby theireroticdriftintowhatfirst
strikeshimas a shadysideshowofdereliction andmadnessbutwhat
turnsouttobe (as he andwe areshockedtodiscover)justtheevery-
daystreetlifethatNadjanavigates withtheingenuity ofthehomeless.
Howbizarrethatesotericlove shouldbe the galvanizing vehicleof
dialecticalmaterialism. Andyet,it is an erotictransport thatmedi-
atesthepassagefromaestheticnostalgiato "revolutionary nihilism":
"BretonandNadjaaretheloverswhoconvert everything thatwehave
experienced onmournful railway journeys(railways arebeginning to
age), on godforsaken Sundayafternoons in theproletarian quarters
ofthegreatcities,inthefirst glancethrough therain-blurred window
ofa newapartment, intorevolutionary experience, ifnotaction.They
bringtheimmenseforcesof'atmosphere' concealedin thesethings
tothepointofexplosion"(Benjamin, 182).
The "trick"ofthisconversion, Benjaminspeculates,"consistsin
the substitution of a politicalfora historicalview of the past."39
Bretonuses esotericlove as a deviceto distractthe senses from
theirutilitarian preoccupations and to inducean experiential break
withthecommercial present.He charts, withintimate familiarity,the
venuesand artifacts ofpre-industrial Paristo whichhe and Nadja
unconsciously gravitate,witnessing hisownconvulsive horror at the
transmutation ofoncevibrant andcultivated lifeintothe rubble and
routineoftoday'smechanical metropolis. He is overwhelmed bythe
imageofmaterialdestitution, whichcapitalism, because ofits pro-
gressivism, failsto recognizebutwhichtheexperienceofdegraded
lovemakesdevastatingly clear.

Literature
180 American
The profaneillumination relies on the devicesof esotericlove

to effectits "conversion" withoutglorifying eroticmystique.It is
the interpenetration of the mysterious and the everydaythatdis-
tinguishes Surrealism fromRomanticism. Benjamincautionsserious
readersnotto place"histrionic orfanatical stresson themysterious
side of the mysterious" since it "takesus no further": "we pene-
tratethe mystery onlyto the degree that we recognize it in the
everydayworld,by virtueof a dialecticalopticthatperceivesthe
everyday as impenetrable, theimpenetrable as everyday" (Benjamin,
189-90).The profane illumination deploys,moreover, a "moralexhi-
bitionism, whichwe badlyneed."Nadja demonstrates that"to live
in a glasshouseis a revolutionary virtueparexcellence"(Benjamin,
180).Finally, Breton'sesotericloveaffords notofa sub-
us a revelation
limepsychology butofa moralstructure thatbindscreativity to an
oppressive politicaleconomy. Insteadoftheoptimism thatenthralls
thepoetsofbourgeoisreform, theimagesoftheprofane illumination
organizetheaffective energiesofan uncompromising pessimism.40
Benjamintellsus thatBretonthought ofNadja as "'a bookwitha
banging door"' (Benjamin, 180).WecouldsaythesameofNightwood:
withBarnes'somniscient third-person narrator we enterthevarious
chambres a coucher ofhercharacters, tuningintotheirmostintimate
negotiations as ifplayingtheroleofvoyeur-voyants. We are over(t)ly
exposedto theeroticlifeofprivatebeingsandgrantedmorethana
keyhole(butless thana panopticon) to viewtheirnocturnal haunts
andhabits.
Nightwood paradesa "moralexhibitionism" withmorescopeandin-
tensitythanNadja.Wefollow thenightwalk ofNadja-clone RobinVote
through thepissoirsofParis,theslumsofMarseilles,thewaterfront
ofTangier,and theportobassoofNaples.The techniqueby which
she, or ratherthe phantasmagoria ofmodernsexualcommerce, is
exposedcompareswithSurrealism's dialecticaloptic.We "see" the
Janus-faced morality thatstructures Robin'sdomesticinteriors and
publicstagesbutonlyas illuminated bytheprofane in
Doctor dialogi-
cal conflictwithRobin'sdisenchanted lover,the"progressive" Nora
Wood.Muchofthenovelis setina bohemiawherea classlesssociety
paradesitselfwitha boundlessdecadencethatis indeedintoxicating,
especiallyas distilledin Barnes'sdescriptive opulence.But revolu-
tionarynihilismgathersgreatestforcein the private,sacred,and
ruinousdomainsofbedroomandchapel,wherewe see erosstruggle
uncannily witha stateofdestitution.

ofDjunaBarnes 181
Illumination
The Profane
The narrative anddialoguesofNightwood focuson themysterious

affairbetweenNoraand Robin.Their"esotericlove"animatestheir
everyday liveswitha troubling incommensurability thatderivesfrom
a difference notofclass,race,gender,or sexual orientation but of
modeofsexuality. Robinsleep(walk)sherwaythrough the streets
and slumsofEurope'sgreatcommercial citiesand,formorethan
oneenlightened character, existsas a romantic cipherofwhatNadja
personified forBreton: "thegreat living,sonorous unconscious thatin-
spires[his]onlyconvincing acts"(Breton,quotedinBenjamin, 176).
ForNora,whomeetsherat a circus,Robinsignalsa primevalani-
mismthatNorahad notknownshe was missingand thatshe tries
obsessively to domesticate and possess.Forthe Baron,who meets
herwiththeDoctorduringone ofhernarcoleptic seizures,4'Robin
recallsa figurestraight fromthejunglesof HenriRousseau (35).
Bothvisionsareerotically mesmerizing, andbothlendthemselves to
profane illumination.
The Baronis so enchantedby his initialimageofRobinthathe
aspirestomarry her,believing hersleepingfitstobe a divineenigma
andherAmerican impressionability an idealremedy foran exhausted
Europeanaristocracy, whosepatrilineage he fraudulently assumes.
Bourgeoispretentiousness, proppedup by religious illuminationand
moraloptimism, blindshimtothewreckagethat"progress" bestows
uponhistory, including the acceleration offascistnationalism. But
hisaspirations areupsetwhenhisromantic projections areobscenely
shattered byanother, morepotentimage.
A yearintotheirmarriage andthenightbeforesheis duetodeliver
herchild,theBaronreturns to theirParishometofindRobinasleep
in a chair,herhandon a booklyingopenon thefloor.To his aston-
ishment, he notesshe has beenreadingDe Sade's memoirsandhas
underscored thefollowing passage:"Et lui rendit pendant sa captivite
lesmillesservices qu'unamourdevoueestseulcapablederendre" (47).42
Whileshe maybe druggedwitha Sadeandream,theBaronsuffers
thetermination ofhis eugenicillusions:"andsuddenly intohismind
camethequestion, is
what wrong?" (47).4
It is notthepassagefromDe Sade as suchbuttheimageofRobin
"sleepingwith"De Sade thatmomentarily rousestheBaronfromhis
romantic stupor. The imageaccomplishes whata simplerecitation of
De Sade could not:an anachronistic coupling ofthe most antithetical
momentsofEuropeanmodernity. Appearing beforethe Baronas a
ghostofhistory pastand seemingto impregnate theBaronesswith

Literature
182 American
libertinage,
notionsof revolutionary De Sade darkensthe Baron's
phantasy
genealogical ofaristocratic The "moralexhibi-
restoration.
tionism"ofthisimagealertsus notmerelyto therepressedsexual
ofthenew-woman-cum-nouvelle-noblesse
restlessness butmorepar-
oftheancienregime,
tothesurvival
ticularly whosesenseofpropriety
liveson,despiteDe Sade, in the virulent ofthe bour-
ressentiment
geoisie.
The progressively reactionarymodernturnsto the mostprime-
val sourcesofinspiration, believingthemtobe forward-looking. The
Baronis such a modern.He findssolace in the ancienregime, but
sinceitis nota tangible he frequents
reality, thesalonsandcircusesof
bohemia, theonlyplacesleftwherehe canstillrecovera semblance of
nobilitytowhichhe can"bowdown."44Hisothersourceofinspiration
is eroticmysticism, foundabundantly in Catholicismand symbolist
painting, whichhe "sees" in Robin.Capitalismaffords the middle
classesthechanceto with
flirt aristocracyandallows them toforget
theworkstilltobe donetocomplete therevolution.The Sadeanimage
ofRobindoes notawakentheBaronto his responsibility to political
history,butitdoesshockhisregressive senseofprogress, alteringhis
perception ofher(the modern American woman's) rolein culturalre-
production, making him"see" herdifferently-as a problematic agent
andmoralobstacleratherthanan impressionable vessel.
Thereareotherinstances wherebourgeoissentiment andfalsecon-
sciousnessare exposed,butnotquitewiththeeffect oftheprofane
illumination.The Doctor's"obscenity" at timesupsetsthe Baron's
pretension to claimsofnobility,45 butithas noneofthepowerofthe
imageto shockan enterprising moralunconscious. The mostpotent
instanceofprofane illuminationoccursatthecloseofNightwood. The
entirenarrative the
seemsto lead up to it,though way is indirect.
Muchspaceis givento theDoctor'squeermeditation on thenature
oferoticaffliction,justas Nadja givesspace to Breton'smusingson
desireandmadness.Butthebrutalimageat theendofNightwood is
all themoreclimactic forthedetoursthatprecedeit.
Howdoesprofane illuminationwork?Whatis theplayof"esoteric
love"?The climactic imagehas an instantaneous impact, butitseffect
has a history: the chronicleofamourfouentredeuxfemmes. After
Robingivesbirthto theBaron'sfeeble-minded son,she is delivered
ofherroleas Baroness;butshe is less a freespiritthana haunted
soul,drivendestructively towardstheirrational,themysterious, and
theecstatic,whichshe findsin frenzied boutswithbooze,women,

ofDjunaBarnes 183
Illumination
The Profane
Catholicism, andbeasts.A cipherofunconscious automatism, Robin

possessesas littlecommunicative agencyas Nadja.She slumsabout,
thoughshehas no obviouseconomicreasonto do so. Hereroticdrift
is strangely anchoredin Nora.We are deprivedof a pornographic
accountoftheirlovemaking butsparedno detailsoftheirsordides-
trangement. Thereare manybangingdoors,andmostopenontothe
night.Norafollows Robinintodimlylitstreetsandshadowyinteriors,
hopingto see herand save herfromthedarkthingthatdrivesher
butlosingherin a penumbra ofwantonness. NorabelievesRobinis
possessed,knowing no otherwayto explainRobin'scompulsion to
profane theirromanceat everyturn,to expressjoy at raremoments
ofdomesticpeace in "songslikea practicedwhorewhoturnsaway
fromnoonebuttheonewholovesher"(57).
Despiteherprogressive leanings,Norasees Robinin themystify-
inglightofreligiousillumination. Norahoststhe "strangest 'salon'
in America"46 and frequents the bohemiancirclesof Europe.Nora
is a freelance journalistand a full-time fidneur, butshe also shares
rootswithSeventh-Day Adventists (52) and thebrandofAmerican
puritanism thatforgedthe westernfrontier (50-51). Such occupa-
tionsandbeliefsare strangebedfellows forbohemiabutnotunlikely
soulmatesforthe ecumenicalspiritof capitalism.Like the Baron,
Noraconjuresup sourcesofprimeval inspiration bourgeois
to satisfy
longingsformoralreassurance.She "sees" in Robina naturaland
exoticanimality butonlyinblindreaction totheindustrial bleakness
ofeveryday life.She cultivates herromantic illusionsin bohemia,a
retreatfrom"progress" masquerading as ultramodern. Atthesame
time,she drawson the repositories of her religiousmemory. The
space forhysterical conflict is great,butthe embattled ideologies
(romanticism, puritanism)aremobilized bythesamemoraloptimism
ofbourgeoisself-deception.
Nora is attractedby Robin'swildness,whichshe is temptedto
domesticate likean enterprising circusmanager.She followsRobin
through thegutters, doggedas muchby herneed to knowRobin's
"shame"as by herdesireto recovertheirrelationship. Her pursuit
drivesRobinaway.Robinresiststhesecolonizing affectionswithab-
ject beastliness, whichNora,in turn,triesto recuperate withpity.
Robinescapesintorecklessvagrancy, finding homelessness moredig-
nifying thanthe demoralization of domesticity. It is onlyNora's pious
hounding thatmakesRobinfeelfilthy (143).
So thestorygoes.Nightwood presents manyinstancesofmoralex-

Literature
184 American
hibitionism,butwhereis theprofane illumination?Benjaminfindsit

inthewaySurrealism castslightonthe"outmoded" objectsandbuild-
ingsofcapitalism. Barnesalso casts such a Things
light. thatstand
outwithuncanny emotional valueexposethemoralimpoverishment
ofpoliticaleconomy. One ofthesethingsis thedollthatRobingives
to Nora:a lifelessfetishofaborteddesire(147) butnotan icon,as
Norasupposes,ofthe devilryofinversion(148). The doll,likethe
Baron'sfeeble-minded son,allegorizesthebarrenness ofbourgeois
culturalreproduction, forwhichbohemianperversity offers no cure.
Newwomen, nolessthandecadentaristocrats, arehauntedbymoder-
nity'sdestruction ofpastformsoflifeand its failureto createnew
ones.Robinand Noraharbornightmarish dreamsoftheantiquated
family (149)whilepursuing themarginal freedoms ofa modern"les-
bian"lifestyle.
Seeingone ofRobin'sdollsin anotherwoman'sbed is whatfinally
breaksNora'sheart.47 Atthesametime,theincident intensifiesher
relianceon a moraldelusionthattheDoctorattempts to treatwith
obsceneprovocations: "'Stop it!Youwerea "goodwoman,"and so a
bitchon a highplane,theonlyone able to killRobinandyourself"'
(146).Buttheshockofprofane speechhas noneofthepowerofthe
imageinthefinalscene.To recallthesituation: Norais athercountry
homeinupstateNewYorkwhenshe is alertedbythebarking ofher
dogto something in thenightoutside.She followsthedog,running
andbreathless, tothe"decaying chapel"onthetopofthehill.Plung-
ing intothejamb ofthe doorshe beholdsRobin,dressedin boys'
trousers,ina frozen pose ofworship beforea "contrived altar"(169).
At"themoment thatNora'sbodystruckthewood,Robinbegangoing
down"(169). "Slidingdownshe went;down,herhairswinging, her
arms held out.... And down she went" (169) untilshe has sunk to
all fours,andturnedon Nora'sbewitchedhound:"thenhead down,
dragging herforelocksin the dust,she struckagainsthis side. He
letloose one howlofmiseryandbitat her,dashingabouther,bark-
ing.... Then she began to bark also, crawlingafterhim-barking in
a fitoflaughter,obsceneandtouching" (170).
We do notknowhowNoraexperiencesthisscene,or evenifshe
remainsconscious.(Has sheknockedherself out,strikingthewood?
Does she faintfrom the shockof seeing Robin and strikethewood
as she falls?)In anycase, she is a vehicleof uncannyperception;
physicallyandemotionally tormented bysomething atthelimitofher

ofDjunaBarnes 185
Illumination
The Profane
conscience, sheleadsus tothesiteofa grotesqueepiphany. Wemight

notbe surprised thatherhounding pietyshouldleadto a chapel,that
she shouldbe doggedbyherowndoggedness, orthatthefinalscene
shouldrevealthejam(b) theyare in.Butwe are shockedbyRobin's
conversion and the sacredand profanearchitectonics. Like Breton
and Nadja,Nora and Robin move through the space of a historical
moment wherethepresentframeofpastlifeis madeluminously de-
crepit.It is notjustthedeterioration ofbuildings thatwe see butthe
degradation ofthe humansubjectas well.Fromthe doorjambwe
witnesstheimpactofexterior, objectiveforces-thematerial decline
ofsociallife(embodiedin thedecayingchapel)-on the subjective
interior(Robin'spsychosis), andthehaunting ofboth(the
dereliction
chapel,Nora,andRobinareallfalling apart).
The imageofRobin"goingdown"on herkneesbeforethe altar,
butdownso faras to surpassall limitsofreligioussupplication, de-
volvingintoa speciesofthelowestmoralorder(morebeastlythan
Nora'sdog,and morehounded)is a surrealprofanation. The sur-
realpresentstheinvisibly image.Justas the
realin an all-too-literal
chapelfallsintoruin,so too does the humansubject.It is the cor-
porealand emotional ofthehumanthatmakesus see the
ruination
ruinousprogressof socialand psychological lifefroma materialist
pointofview.A gothicor naturalist presentation woulduse thede-
vicesofsymbolandmetaphor to implya fallfromgraceor a return
oftherepressed.The surrealimage,however, deploysa dialectical
opticwhichkeepsthepoliticaland thepsychotic simultaneously in
view.A psychoanalytic focuswouldobscurethepoliticalcomponent
byhighlighting thesymptomatology thatsignifiesthetranshistorical
warbetweencivilization andlibido.
Nightwood's chapelis notgothic;itsmostterrible featureis thatit
is a "weather-beaten white"(169). It sitson a hillabovethehouse
whereNorahostsher bohemiansalonsbut,unlikethe house,has
nothelda congregation forages. It has notbeentorndownbutleft
to rot.The chapeland theconjugalbedroom(theotherruinedsite
ofNightwood) lookbackto an age ofconstruction whensocietywas
organized bytheChurch and an aristocracyof blood.Theyhavebeen
erodedbyrevolutionary progress,especiallyindustrialrevolutionary
progress; thebourgeoisie, especiallythebohemianbourgeoisie, treat
themas outmodedwithout, however,constructing something new.
Robinoccupiesthisantiquearchitecture withthesavageryofa home-

Literature
186 American
less nomad.Modernism behindtheliberalfa,ade,

breedsbarbarism:
goingtothedogs.
itis literally
ErosNoir
Nightwood unleashesfeelings thatareso incommensurable ("obscene
and touching")thattheytestthe limitofrationalperception. It is
betweennarrator and reader,notbetweencharacters, thatthisriot
ofsensibility is communicated. Exposedto theviolentcollapsethat
Barnes'sestranged loversunconsciously anduncannily embody, we
participate in a negativetransference whose primalscene is less
tragicthannihilistic. The profaneillumination is the politicaltech-
niqueofthistransference, and it is notintendedas catharsis.Dis-
pellinganyliberalillusionswe mayhave cultivatedaboutmodern
sexualityand progressive society,it is deployedas thewrenchthat
jamstheworksofsocialreproduction.
The imageofRobinand Nora's"goingdown"(sadly,noton each
other)is provocative buthardly Morepessimistic
titillating. andmore
obscenethanBreton'samourfou, Barnes's eroticism sharesBataille's
vulgarmaterialism. But Nightwood is not pornographic. Nor does
BarnesproducewhatsomeFoucaultian criticsreferto as "eroticlit-
erature,"48thenarrative ofreversediscourseinwhicha scandalized
homosexuality attempts to speakandactinitsownname.
It is possibleto read Radclyffe Hall as the producerofa reverse
discourse.Criticshavedemonstrated thatherWellofLoneliness uses
eroticrealismtoaffirm and"authenticize" thecategory "lesbian"and
thusto overrulethe pejorative taxonomy ofmedical,judirical,and
theologicaldiscoursesfromwhichit derives.49 But Barnes'serotic
surrealism deploystechniquesmorecomplexthanthoseofreverse
discourse.Nightwood neithernamesnorcelebrateslesbianism.In-
stead,itarticulates a queerantidiscourse, which,voicedbythemelan-
cholicDoctor,confounds the confessions ofmodernsexologywith
ejaculationsoflibertine gourmandise.
Nordoes Barnesreacttothediscourseofobscenity byproducing,
likeD. H. Lawrence,a literature thatclaimsto be erotically healthy.
If Lawrencesoughtto purge modern love of"pornography and ob-
scenity" witha redeeming vitalism andwholesome heterosexuality,50
Barnesimaginesan eroticdecrepitude beyondgood and evil.Law-
renceralliesagainstobscenity in theguise ofsexualliberation, but

ofDjunaBarnes 187
Illumination
The Profane
withhis charismatic reversalofthetacticsofprohibition he in fact

advancesthehygienic regime.51 Hiseroticexhibitionism concealsand
reproduces hissexualconservatism.52 Thatis whytheauthorofLady
Loveris so easilyco-optedbypubliceducation:thepro-
Chatterley's
gramofsexualself-enlightenment in Lawrence'sdidacticfiction is a
readytoolforeliteconsumption, as itis laterfora populistpedagogy.53
Ministriesofhealthand welfarediscoverthatteaching,insteadof
banning, Lawrenceis byfarthemoreeffective methodofmanaging
bodiesina modernliberaldemocracy.
Nightwood offers poormaterial fortheconsultant ofsexualhygiene,
and withrespectto eroticfulfilment it teachesnothing, not even
hownotto proceed.AgainstLawrence'sphallicoptimism, Barnes's
eroticism is grotesquely pessimistic: he guideshis readerthrough
dionysiacpassages to ecstaticsexual self-understanding, whereas
she riddlesand shockswithexcremental speechandunconsumable
images.Despiteeditorialcare,Nightwood functions as an obscene
aberration in"progressive" culture.
Barnesuses a tacticdifferent fromLawrence'stoprotest obscenity.
Insteadofpurging sexuality,shemagnifies itsauraofprofanity.Night-
woodreorganizes the devicesof"obscene"literature. Thereare lit-
eraryantecedents as well as legal precedentsforher avant-garde
obscenity. Critics frequently pointout thatthe garrulity of Doctor
"Mighty-grain-of-salt-Dante-Matthew-O'Connor" (80) owesitspunch
toJamesJoyce'sfour-letter "Irish." Barnesalsopeppershernarrative
withthe imageryand scenography ofFlaubert,Boccaccio,and De
Sade, authorswho,likeJoyce,werebannedinAmericain thetwen-
ties and thirties.Forinstance,thereis a passage in Nightwood that
adaptsthefamouscarriagesceneinMadameBovaryforwhichFlau-
bertwasarraigned bytheFrenchcourts.Nightwood's chapter4,"The
Squatter,"also features seductionin a horse-drawn carriage,though
Flaubert'sloversare hiddenbehindtightly sealedblindsas the car-
riagecirclesRoueninbroaddaylight, whileBarnes'srideinan open
hackas theycircumnavigate thewoodsandlowerquartersofParisat
night(Nightwood, 71-76).
The sceneinNightwood is as erotically charged,as mysterious and
intoxicatingas Flaubert's.Butwhatscandalizesthereaderofthenine-
teenthcentury-thepublicadulteryofa bourgeoiswife-has been
replacedbya blasphemy moreappropriate tothetwentieth: deranged
love.The scenefollows an eveningofentertainment hostedbyJenny

188 American
Literature
Petherbridge, one ofthenouveauxricheswhosuffers fromcreative

poverty. She conspires toseduceRobinandtakeforherself theobject
ofNora'sdesireandinspiration. Herplanofa midnight ridethrough
thePariswoodsin antiquecarriagesis a lavish,ifcliched,tacticof
avariciousromancing. Robin,however,disdainfully ignoresJenny's
attentions untilJenny, crazedwithfrustration, attacksher.Bleeding
andbattered, Robinfallsforward, "herkneeson thefloor... so that
whenthewholeofthegesturewas completed, Robin'shandswere
coveredbyJenny's slightandbendingbreast,caughtinbetweenthe
bosomand theknees"(76). Intoxicated withtheirownhistrionics,
theyareprofane dervishes whostageanunfulfilling whirlofseduction
andsupplication.
We have seen thisgestureofRobin'sbefore:it is the gestureof
"goingdown." She makesitwhenshekneelstoprayontheprie-dieu,
troubling thetrulypenitent withherphysicalintensity "as ifsome
inscrutable wishforsalvation, something yetmoremonstrously un-
fulfilled
thantheyhad suffered, had thrown a shadow"(46). We see
it againin thefinalscene in the chapel.In each case, thisgesture
circumscribes a motionthatis paradoxically sacredandprofane, ob-
sceneandtouching. Butthetrickofprofane illuminationis theoptic
ofhistorical materialism, notmoralconundrum.
For all its sophisticated construction,bohemiais a collapsible
fa,ade.The architecture ofthe scene betweenRobinandJennyis
designedto showthe eroticsofdestitution. The carriageis a fash-
ionablepropin an outmodeddreamofcourtship. To get to the en-
chantedwoods,itmustbe driventhrough thesqualorofworking-class
suburbs. Jenny is richenoughto hirehacksandhorsesbutshemust
highjackdesire,havingnoneofherown.Herattraction to Robinis a
simulacrum ofpassion.Movingin on RobinwhileRobinis stillbeing
accommodated byNorabutnolongeranywhere athome,Jenny takes
possessionnotofa womanbutofan abandonedresidence, a derelic-
tion.Behindtheclassyromancer we see thesordidartifices of"the
squatter."
Nightwood is set in theParisofSurrealism, notFlaubert'sprovin-
cial nineteenth-century France.Barnes'scharactersare the street-
addicted"paupers"ofmodernurbanlife,"thedetraques,"54as are
thoseofNadja and Aragon'sPaysande Paris (1924/25).Whilethe
arcadesofthe previouscenturysupplythe materialconditions for
theflourishing ofthefidneur, the industrial
postwarrecovery ofthe

ofDjunaBarnes 189
Illumination
The Profane
1920sand 1930ssetsthesceneforthedetraque. Thefidneur andthe

detraqueare late developments ofthe boheme, whomBenjaminde-
scribesas one who conspiresagainstthe statusquo butmerelyas
an agentprovocateur lackingpoliticalconviction and likelyto swing
inany"revolutionary" direction forloveofspectacle.55 Theyare also
paupersinthattheyresisttheindustriousness ofthemodern megapo-
lis but notits intoxication. Whatdistinguishes the detraqueas an
evenlaterdevelopment ofthe boheme is the meansofintoxication:
thefidneur getsdrunkonthecommodity, thedetraque on refuse.The
fidneur strollsthrough themerchandise thatfillsthearcades,enrap-
turedwiththesame "aura"ofcommodity fetishism thatenraptures
thecrowd,thoughit is thecrowdfromwhichhe remainsheroically
andpoetically detached.56The detraque retreats fromthecommercial
spotlighttopoorlylitdistricts wherehe spendshislibidinal economy
on the depreciated artsofthe circusand thetheater.57 The fidneur
embodiestheperspective ofthe commodity itself,or so we might,
withBenjamin, understand Baudelaire'sreference to "theholypros-
titutionofthesoul."58The detraque is likewiseobjectified, buthe is
intoxicatedwiththeprocessofdegradation bywhichhe becomes"in-
communicable" (Nightwood, 52) and unconsumable. "The Detraque"
couldbe the last chapterin the historyofbohemianconspiracy. It
wouldoutlinethefailure ofabjectresistance tomarketforcesdespite
Surrealism'sattempt toconvert abjectionintorevolutionary nihilism.
The novelsofSurrealism are guidesto Paris'sdemimonde, to the
obscuresalons,theaters, and circuses where the detraques cultivate
andcirculatetheiresotericarts.59 AttheoutsetofNadja,Bretonde-
scribesthepassagehe takesto thedemimonde, wherehe discovers
thelatesthauntsofParisianphantasmagoria. His firststepis to fol-
lowa methodofexposureto anychanceeventthatalertsthepublic
censor.This takeshimto the Thedtre desDeuxMasques,wherehe
watchesa "nearlybanned"production ofLes Detraqueeswith"un-
boundedadmiration. "60 Featuring a strangeentanglement between
theheadmistress ofa girls'school,a fashionable mademoiselle, a stu-
dent,and hergrandmother, theplayprepareshimto meetNadja,a
truedetraquee withwhomhe proceedstohavea madaffair. He follows
her throughthe city,documenting her clandestinestreetwalker's
habitsandamusements withtheinspired detailofa distracted physi-
cian.61
butshe fallsforRobinlikean addict
Norais alreadya detraquee,

Literature
190 American
seekinga morepowerful narcotic.She takesRobininlargedosesbut,

likeBreton, she has a limit.When Robinbeginsstrolling thestreets
at nightinsteadofcominghome,Norapursuesherwithdreadand
shame.A worldly American, withFrenchdecadenceinbad
sheflirts
faith.UnlikeBreton,she is unprepared to be exposedto theseedier
sideofthecityand itsnocturnal To dispelthenight-
transfiguration.
mareshe has entered, she seekstheDoctor'senlightenment. Butof
all thedetraquees theDoctoris themostextravagant. He openshis
doorontoanotherviewofthecity,morewastedand degradedthan
theslumsthrough whichRobindragsNora.
Late one nightNoracalls on theDoctorforan emergency ttet-a-
tete,butwhattranspires is a profane
illumination.The locationand
size ofhis residencecomeas a shockto Nora,"whohad notknown
thattheDoctorwas so poor"(78). He occupiesa singleroomthat
wouldimpressanyvisitorwithitsdisconcerting couplingofinterior
and exterior and its queerassemblageofbedchamber, surgery,and
closet.We can see thegravestateofmodernity in thedisorderand
decayofthethingsthatfillthisroom:
A pile of medicalbooks,and volumesof a miscellaneous order,
reachedalmosttotheceiling,water-stained andcoveredwithdust.
Justabovethemwas a verysmallbarredwindow, the onlyven-
tilation.On a mapledresser,certainly notofEuropeanmake,lay
a rustypairofforceps, a brokenscalpel,halfa dozenodd instru-
mentsthat[Nora]couldnotplace,a catheter, sometwenty perfume
almostempty,
bottles, pomades,creams,rouges,powder boxes and
puffs.Fromthe half-open drawersof thischiffonierhunglaces,
ribands,stockings,ladies'undergarments andan abdominal brace,
whichgave the impression thatthe femininefineryhad suffered
venery.A swill-pailstoodat thehead ofthebed,brimming with
abominations. There was something degradedabout
appallingly
the room,like the roomsin brothels, whichgive eventhe most
innocent a sensationofhavingbeenan accomplice.(78-79)
It is specifically
thedestitution
ofsexualmodernitythatis revealed
in theDoctor'sprivateand professionalwrackandruin.A flamboy-
antcross-dresser sodomite(91-94),he is reducedto
and gourmet
entertaining inthemuckofhisboudoir-urinoir.The confusionof"for-
ceps"and"feminine implythathe has beenforcedtochoose
finery"
gynecology conduittothepleasurehe takesin
as theonlylegitimate

ofDjunaBarnes 191
Illumination
The Profane
playingthewoman'spart.But,as the"rusty"and "broken"toolsof

his tradealso testify,gynecology is a poorinstrument forservicing
eros.A survivor ofthispoliticaleconomy, his practiceofeverynight
lifebearswitnessto theperversion ofsodomyand thewreckageof
libertinage.In theclutter we can see thematerialwasteofscientific
progress.
The profane illumination,Benjamin observes,"bringstheimmense
forcesof'atmosphere' concealedinthesethingstothepointofexplo-
sion."Barnesbringstheimmenseforcesofatmosphere concealedin
thisroomto thepointofexplosion, notonlyin thisone devastating
imagebutagainandagainintheensuingdialoguebetweentheDoctor
andNora.Though"dismayed" (79) bytheDoctor's"extremity" (80),
Norapersistsin her questforguidance.But insteadofdoctrineor
knowledge, theDoctordispensesa radicalheterodoxy, compiledofa
multitude offolkwisdoms-Irishblarney, queenlydrollery,anecdotal
gossip-mixedwithlooseallusionstoBurton's Anatomy ofMelancholy
(1621)62and othertextualsources,mostof them"obscene."Nora
wrestleswiththeDoctor'simplications, contestinghis "alchemical"
(80) eruditionwithsourcesofherowninNewWorldpuritanism. Itis
a matchmadeinhell.
The dialoguebetweentheDoctorandNorathattakesup theentire
chapterof"Watchman, WhatoftheNight?"andmuchof"Go Down,
Matthew" hasoftenbeenreadas a parodyofthescenebetweenFreud
andDora.63 Butitmightalsobe viewedas a modernadaptation ofthe
indoctrinating dialoguesplayedoutinDe Sade'sPhilosophy oftheBed-
room.The dialogueinNightwood literallytakesplaceintheDoctor's
"chambre a coucher" (79). Nora'srequestthathe tellhereverything
he knowsaboutthenight(79) cues himto takeup suchincendiary
Sadeanthemesas theliberty ofsodomy, theenslavement oflove,and
thepromiscuous Nature ofthe she-beast.64
The DoctortakesNora'scue in a direction differentfromtheone
sheexpects.He prompts hertoimagineanother wayoflife-a "night
life"-usingintoxicating andprovocative devicesreminiscent ofthose
deployedbyrevolutionary Surrealism. When she turns her thoughts
obsessively to Robin,he tellsherto thinkof"Frenchnights"specifi-
cally,cueingherinturnto dreamofwhatshe,inharboring a puritan
imaginary, findsimpossible to conceive. In doingso he follows the
who
Surrealists, with theirsleeping automatic
fits, writing,seductive
dreaming, and round-table recherches surla sexualitecontrive to ex-

Literature
192 American
periencelifebeyondthelimitsofbourgeoisanthropology. His direct-

ingherto conjureup "thenight"is itselfa surrealist which
tactic,66
he embellisheswiththemesmerizing excrementalityofa Boccaccio
orPasolini:
"Have you thoughtofthe night,now,in othertimes,in foreign
countries-inParis?Whenthestreetsweregallhighwiththings
youwouldn't havedonefora dare'ssake,andthewayitwas then;
withthepheasants'necksandthegoslings'beaksdangling against
thehocksofgallants,andnota pavement in theplace,andevery-
thingguttersformilesandmiles,anda stenchtoitthatpluckedyou
bythenostrils andyouweretwenty leaguesout!The crierstelling
thepriceofwineto sucheffect thatthedawnsawgoodclerksfull
in side streetswheresome
ofpiss and vinegar,and blood-letting
ofvelvethowledundera leech;notto
wildprincessina night-shift
mention thepalacesofNymphenburg echoingbacktoViennawith
thenighttripoflatekingslettingwaterintoplushcans and fine
woodwork! No,"he said,lookingathersharply, "I cansee youhave
not!"(81-82)
The Doctor's dialogicaldoctoringof theirreparteeundercuts
Nora'smoralinquisitionintoRobin'sinexplicablevagrancy.He ac-
quaintsher witha body
carnivalesque and
politic its shamelesscor-
"The French,"he says,"havemadea detourof
poreality. filthiness-
Oh,goodthedirt!Whereasyouare ofa cleanrace,ofa too eagerly
washingpeople.... Be like the Frenchman. . . -he can trace him-
selfbackbyhissediment, vegetableandanimal,andso findshimself
in theodourof winein its twotravels,in and out,packeddownbe-
neathan airthathas notchangeditspositionduringthatstrategy"
(84-85). The Doctoralso introduces whatGeorgesBataillein 1929
heraldsas "theheterological"-the wasteproductsofthe intellec-
tualprocess67-intoNora'swhitewashed Like Bataille's
liberalism.
heterology,theDoctor'smostshocking makes
intervention use ofDe
manifestos.
Sade's libertine
BetweenBarnes's interlocutors a libertinewisdomof the past
battleswitha Protestantsexologyofthepresent. Againstthepatholo-
gizingdiscourseofinversion, whichaffects Doctorno less than
the
Nora,theDoctorobservesthenaturalness ofsodomyin bothsexes:
as naturally
"I hauntthepissoirs as HighlandMaryhercowsdownby
theDee-and by theHobs ofHell,I've seen thesame at workin a

ofDjunaBarnes 193
Illumination
The Profane
girl"(91).He recallsDe Sade's demagogicDolmance,who,reeducat-

ingthenaiveEugenie,exclaims,"Ah!farfromoutraging Nature,on
thecontrary-and letus be wellpersuadedofit-, thesodomiteand
Lesbianserveherstubbornly from whoseresultant
a conjunction pro-
geniturecan be nothingbut irksometo her."68An epicurean,like
Dolmance,theDoctorcan distinguish one fuckfromanotherin the
dark,declaring histastefordemocratic "Do I knowmySod-
variation:
omites?. . . Andthoughyournormalfellow willsayall arealikeinthe
dark,negroor white,I sayyoucan tellthem,andwheretheycame
from, andwhatquartertheyfrequent, bythesize andexcellence-"
(94). Furthermore, theDoctorcanreadilyidentify the"bestport"for
cruising-the"Placede la Bastille"(92),namingthesitefromwhich
De Sade launchedhisrevolution.
ButtheDoctordoes not,likeDolmance,hailwomen'slibertinage
tobe theprincipal weaponagainstuniversal enslavement to Enlight-
enmentmorality,69 thoughhe insiststhatunderthepresentregime
women,justas men,are damnedfortheirpleasurein same-sexcou-
pling.Ofthecity'sdetraques, the"sodomites" arethemostdownand
out.Oncemodelrepublicans oftheFrenchRevolution, theyare now
"excommunicated" spectersofpost-Revolutionarydecadence.70Since
it is religiousilluminationNoraso earnestly and so blindlysolicits,
theDoctorobligesherwitha blastofSadeanblasphemy:
lookforthegirlsalso inthetoiletsat night,andyouwillfindthem
kneelinginthatgreatsecretconfessional cryingbetweentongues,
excommunication:
theterrible
"Mayyoube damnedtohell!Mayyoudie standing upright!May
yoube damnedupward!Maythisbe damned,terrible anddamned
spot!Mayitwitherintothegrinofthedead,maythisdrawback,
lowridingmouthin an emptysnarlofthegroin!Maythisbe your
torment,maythisbe yourdamnation! Goddamnedmebeforeyou,
andaftermeyoushallbe damned,kneelingandstanding awaytill
we vanish!Forwhatdo youknowofme,man'smeat?... Mayyou
pass fromme,damnedgirl!Damnedandbetraying!" (95)71
In thedarklightofmelancholic reason,we see pleasure'sdisciples
betraythemselves intheactofconsummation. These arethedescen-
dantsof the firstsexual revolution
and contemporized versionsof
Baudelaire'slesbians,thosefemmesdamnees, who,havingno revolu-
tionarycontextfortheirtransgression,manageonlyto burnthem-

Literature
194 American
selves.Througha spiralofmoralprogressandbourgeoisliberation,
theybecometoday'smostabjectheretics.
Justas DolmanceimpressesuponEugeniehis observation that
"love... devours, consumesus,without affordingus otherthanmeta-
physical joys,whichbearsucha likenesstotheeffects ofmadness, "72
the Doctor triesto impress uponNora thatno sacrificeoflove will

save herand Robinfromthefetters ofpleasure.Love,in thispost-
Revolutionary age,is theprogenitor andguardianofvice.Sade's sod-
omiteembodiesthecreedofpleasureforpleasure'ssake,butin this
politicaleconomyhis nonreproductive embracesare indulgedwith
moraldespair.He survivesbygoingunderground, takinganguishfor
hisecstasy, trappedinhisescapefrom thesentiments ofdesire."'And
do I knowmySodomites?' theDoctorsaid unhappily, 'andwhenthe
heartgoes bangup againstit ifitlovesone ofthem,especiallyifit's
a womanlovingoneofthem?"'(93). ButNoramakesa poorEugenie.
She resiststheDoctor'sprovocations andacceptsherestrangement
withsuffering devotion. "Love,"sheconcludes, "is death,comeupon
withpassion;I know,thatis whyloveis wisdom.I love heras one
condemned toit" (137).
BarnesdeploysDe Sade without revolutionaryoptimism. Norasuc-
cumbsto sentimenal The Doctorreacheshis wits'end
slavishness.
trying tofindtherightdevicetoeffect Nora'sde-indoctrination.Robin
is lostto thenight.In herwe see nottheresidueoftheSadeanlib-
ertinebutthefailureoftheSadeanrevolution. That she makesher
waybackto thedecayingchapelsuggestsher"excommunication" is
notyetcomplete.Is notherfinaltransfiguration a reiterationofthe
Sadeanwisdomthatthehistory ofsexualliberation has so savagely
twisted?: "Woman'sdestinyis to be wanton, likethe bitch,theshe-
wolf;shemustbelongtoallwhoclaimher.Clearly, itis tooutragethe
fateNatureimposesuponwomentofetter thembytheabsurdities of
a solitarymarriage."73
* * .
Benjamin's ofthe"profane
formulation illumination"helpsus under-
standhowBarnes'sobscenedeviceworks.It worksas a "dialectical
optic"thatrevealsthethingsofthepresentin a politicizedhistori-
cal lightso thatwe can see theprogressivedecayofmodernization.
We see thedeterioration ofchurchandconjugalhouseholdintheage
ofbourgeoissecularization, andwe see an appallingresurrectionof
these ruinsin thebohemian to
reaction the of
spirit We
capitalism.

ofDjunaBarnes 195
Illumination
The Profane
also see the degradation of sodomyin the age of sexologicalcon-

fessionand sexualliberation. Barnes'sobscenedeviceworksmost
poignantly as "moralexhibitionism," illuminating, behindthefa,ade
oferoticliberalism, thefailure oftheFrenchRevolution todestroy the
shacklesofsentimental humanism. Using Benjamin's optic to reread
Nightwood, we can see a crackinFoucault'spanopticon, placedthere
bythepressuresofa revolutionary nihilism. Nothing shouldbe more
revolting to progressive culturethanto see De Sade stillin chains:
Barnes'sobsceneinsight is inciteful profanation.
Far fromcolludingwiththe mechanisms oflegitimization which
aestheticize andneutralize theradicalelements ofherwriting, Barnes
alignsherself withwriters, pastandpresent, whoseworkshad been
banned, and she forges her offensive language and imageryintoa
collectivetechniqueofsocialnegation. Nightwood workslikea Trojan
horse,constructed outofa vastbattery ofobscenematerialsandin-
sertedintojuridical,sexological, andtheological discoursewhereit
clearsexplosivequeer space forradicallyrethinking the historyof
sexuality.
Insteadofviewing thisauthorofAmerican modernism as an unwit-
tingagentin theproduction and legitimization ofdominant culture,
we mightsee heras theartificer ofan obsceneresistance, laboring
in tacitsolidaritywithherSurrealist contemporaries. We mightre-
considertheviewofNightwood as a lesbiannovelwhosereception as
suchhadtobe deferred untilitfoundan audienceamonglesbianand
gayreaderswhoknewhowto recoveritslatenthomosexual content.
We mightreadNightwood as a minor, insteadofminority, eroticism,
an erosnoirthatspotlights thelimboofsexualcommunity sharedbe-
tweenbourgeoiscultureandsapphicbohemiainan advancedstageof
capitalism. Whatever gaietyBarnessignifies, itis noteasilyrecuper-
ated.4Nightwood 's eroticsdeploysan ethicsofpessimism. Itspolitics
is notthepoliticsofidentity. The carnival ofcharacters, the detraques
whohauntthisnovel,is a heterogeneous figureofabjectionin the
finalfrontagainstrationalization andembourgeoisment. Thatthisfront
is presented as thelastdismalcycleofla comedie humaineis nottobe
takenas encouragement bygayradicals.WhatBarnesprovokes is the
realization thatiftheprogressive destruction ofmodernity is to be
diverted, a differentset oftechniquesandtacticsmustbe practiced
inplaceofreversediscourseandotherfoiblesofressentiment.
ofAlberta-Edmonton
University

Literature
196 American
Notes
1 and Law (Carbondale:

See Felice Flanery Lewis, Literature,Obscenity,
IllinoisUniv.Press,1976).
Southern
2 See RobertA. Jacobs,"DirtyWords,DirtyThoughtsand Censorship:
Law
University
ObscenityLaw and Non-PictorialWorks,"Southwestern
ofliterary
Review21 (1992):155-83.Forrecentdiscussions in
obscenity
Problemsin the
the UnitedStates,see Susan Stewart,CrimesofWriting:
Containment ofRepresentation(New York:OxfordUniv.Press, 1991); and
Edwardde Grazia,GirlsLean Back Everywhere:TheLaw ofObscenity and
theAssaulton Genius(New York:RandomHouse, 1992).
3 On Pornog-
See Ian Hunter,David Saunders,and DugaldWilliamson,
Law (New York:St. Martin's
raphy:Literature,Sexualityand Obscenity
Press,1993).
4 See RichardEaston,"CanonicalCriminalizations:
Homosexuality, Art
History,Surrealismand Abjection," 4 (fall1992): 133-75;
differences
CarolynDean,"Pornography, andtheRedemption
Literature, ofVirility
5 (summer1993):62-91;LindsayF.
differences
in France,1880-1930,"
Watton,"Constructsof Sin and Sodomin RussianModernism, 1906-
1909,9JournaloftheHistoryofSexuality4 (January1994): 369-94.
5 in itselfhas neverqualified
Obscenity see
protection;
forconstitutional
AmyN. Adler,"WhyArtIs On Trial,"JournalofArtsManagement,Law
andSociety22 (winter1993):322-34.
6 commitment
Foucault's tothetextualstrategies ofavant-garde eroticism
peakedintheearlysixties,mostnotably inhisHomagea Georges Bataille
(MichelFoucault,"Prefaceto Transgression," in Language,Counter-
Memory, ed. DonaldF. Bourchard,
Practice, trans.DonaldF. Bourchard
andSherry Simon[Ithaca,N.Y.:CornellUniv.Press,1977]).Bytheseven-
tiesFoucaultrejectedtheprojectofmodernist negation thatTelQuel's
in poeticlanguagehad revived,
revolution turning his attentioninstead
tothepositive, mechanisms
discursive ofsocialorder.Volonte desavoir,
volumeofHistoire
thefirst examinestheproduction
de la sexualite, and
management oferoticsubjectsthrough themedico-juridical authoriza-
ofsexual (self)knowledge.
tionand distribution The critiqueofpower
posesa categoricalimperative forthegenealogist: "Wemustdefinethe
ofpowerthatareimmanent
strategies inthis willtoknowledge. As faras
is
sexuality concerned,we shall attemptto constitutethe econ-
'political
omy'ofa willtoknowledge" (MichelFoucault, History vol.1,
ofSexuality,
trans.RobertHurley[NewYork:Vintage,1990],73). Fora superbac-
see JohnRajchman,
countofthistransition, "The EndsofModernism,"
in his MichelFoucault: The FreedomofPhilosophy(New York: Columbia
Univ.Press,1985),9-42.
7 "To conceivethecategoryofthesexualintermsofthelaw,death,blood
andsovereignty-whatever toSade andBataille,andhow-
thereferences

The Profane
Illumination
ofDjunaBarnes 197
everonemightgaugetheir'subversive' influence," Foucaultwrites,"is

inthelastanalysisa historical 'retro-version.'Wemustconceptualize the
deployment ofsexuality onthebasisofthetechniques ofpowerthatare
contemporary withit" (History ofSexuality,150).
8 See MichelFoucault,"Sexual Choice,Sexual Act,"in FoucaultLive
(Interviews,1966-84),ed. SylvereLotringer, trans.JohnJohnston (New
York:Semiotext[e], 1989),211-32.
9 Frenchliterary criticsrecognize "flaneurrealism" tobe oneofthegenres
ofoppositionality availabletonineteenth-century middle-classBohemia,
whilelesbian(and)feminist literary criticsrecognize"lesbianrealism"
tobe a twentieth-century genreofcounter-disciplinary narrative,citing
RadclyffeHall's WellofLoneliness as theground-breaking text.
10 In thisessayI use thetermqueerto distinguish Barnes'santagonistic
sexualityand sexualnihilism from"lesbian"sexualityand its positive
historical
andutopianinstancesofidentity andsolidarity. Thatis tosay,
whileBarnes'sprimary loversare indeedtwowomenwhosechiefen-
tanglement is eroticandsexualandtherefore "lesbian"inthemostbanal
sense,thefocusofNightwood's gaze fallson the dark,unsymbolizble
thingortheunbridgeable voidthatnegatesanddevastates theiraffair.
11 EmilyColeman, quotedintheintroduction to DjunaBarnes,Nightwood:
TheOriginalVersion and RelatedDrafts,ed. CherylJ.Plumb(Normal,
Ill.:DalkeyArchive Press,1995),xxi.
12 Nightwood: TheOriginalVersion andRelatedDrafts, 210.
13 In herretrospective ofBarnes,MaryLynnBroepointstoJaneMarcus's
revolutionary rereadingof Nightwood, whichbringsto lightBarnes's
rendering ofthemodernpoliticalunconscious, including therepressed
differences ofrace,class,gender,and sexuality. In linewithMarcus's
findings,Broe adds that"Barnes'splays,stories,and earlynewspaper
essaysinterrogate conventional or publicsexualideologies,"and that
"Barnesaloneamongthe'newwomen'playwrights daredto introduce
vampirism ('The Dove'), incest('ThreeFromEarth'),andvariousradi-
cal sexualideologiesin her work."Broe also noteswithoutelaborat-
ingthatBarnes"examinesthefailuresofrepresentational realityand
also theasymmetries ofage andpowerandthecontradictions inherent
in genderdefinitions thatundercutfamilyintimacies, encodingcom-
plexmodesoferoticism forwhichwe as yethaveno literary typology"
("DjunaBarnes[1892-1982]," in TheGenderofModernism, ed. Bonnie
KimeScott[Bloomington: IndianaUniv.Press,1990],19-45). See also
SilenceandPower:A Reevaluation ofDjuna Barnes,ed. MaryLynnBroe
(Carbondale, Ill.:Southern IllinoisUniv.Press,1991).
14 See, forexample,AnnB. Dalton,"'This is obscene': FemaleVoyeurism,
SexualAbuse,and MaternalPowerin TheDove,"ReviewofContempo-
raryFiction33 (fall1993):117-39.Daltonidentifies thestrangeerotic
interactionbetweenfemalecharactersin Barnes'sone-actplay"The

198 American
Literature
Dove" as cryptic testimony, buttheclearestliterary evidencewe have

ofthesexualabuseBarnesallegedlyenduredas a youngwoman.She
tracesbiographical evidenceof grandmother-granddaughter incestin
Barnes'searlycorrespondence, arguing ittobe theprojected latentcon-
tentofNightwood's symptomatic obscenity.See conversely, BonnieKime
Scott'schapter"BeastsTurning intoHumans"inRefiguring Modernism:
Postmodern FeministReadingsofWoolf, West,andBarnes(Bloomington:
IndianaUniv.Press,1995),71-122.Scottuncovers thebestiality ofNight-
wood,urgingthatthefinalshockingscenebetweendogandwomanbe
hailedas therapeutic: "theextendedactionsofdogandwomanare sug-
gestiveofritualhealing.Bothbeastandhumanhavea therapeutic run
through theemotions, fullofgesture, movement, andevenpain"(117).
15 Nightwood: TheOriginalVersion andRelatedDrafts, xviii.
16 I takeparticular exception to theargument putforward byJodeyCas-
tricanoin "RudeAwakenings: orWhatHappensWhena LesbianReads
the'Hieroglyphics ofSleep' in Djuna Barnes'sNightwood," WestCoast
Line 15 (winter1994-95):106-16.Presupposing that"sinceNightwood
confronts andengagesthereaderwitha lesbianpointofview,andsince
thatviewis markedbylesbiandesire,"Castricanourgesus to decode
the"lesbianImaginary" oftheshockinglastchapter(106,112).In her
focusonthe"hieroglyphics" ofthis"Imaginary," sheoverlooks Barnes's
avant-garde arsenalofobsceneartisticdevices.In fact,she overlooks
Nightwood's legal,historical, and modernist
artistic, textsand contexts
altogether, readingexclusively inlightofdeconstructive andpsychoana-
lytictheories.
17 Inturning fromFoucaulttoBenjamin, I do notmeantoimply thatnoone
comesafterFoucaulttotakeup theliterary artofsexualtransgression.
GillesDeleuze,forinstance, developsa "pornological" method ofanalysis
forreadinganddistinguishing theobscenemaneuvers ofDe Sade,Von
Sacher-Masoch, and PierreKlossowski.Butpornology focuseson the
transgressive techniquesspecificto pornographic literature or philoso-
phy.Benjamin's "profane illumination" is moreappropriate to Barnes's
obscuretransgression, whichlies somewhere betweentheobsceneand
theprofane; unlikepornology, italsoshedslightonhertacticofhistorical
pessimism.
18 WalterBenjamin, "Surrealism," Reflections:Essays,Aphorisms, Autobio-
graphical ed.PeterDemetz,trans.Edmund
Writings, Jephcott (NewYork:
Schocken, 1978),181-92.
19 Itwillquicklybecomeapparent thatmymethodofqueerreadingis one
ofreadingforminor, as distinctfrom marginal orminority, literaryprac-
tice.I emphasizeBarnes's"deterritorialization of,"or nomadicexodus
from, traditionaland urbansocialspaces,hermakingvisible(through
imaging)thesocietyofimpoverishment
dialectical sharedbybourgeois
cultureand sapphicbohemia.Hence myapproachis closerto Gilles

The Profane
Illumination
ofDjunaBarnes 199
Deleuze and FelixGuattari's"minorliterature" thanto Eve Kosofsky

Sedgwick'sorJudith Butler's"queertheory" anditstactical, deconstruc-
tivefocusonthedoublebindsandduplicitious framing ofsexualminority
andmarginality.
20 See Lewis,126-28.
21 "Thisbook,owingtocensorship, whichhas a vogueinAmericaas indis-
criminate as all suchenforcements oflawmustbe,hasbeenexpurgated.
Wheresuchmeasureshavebeenthought necessary, asterisks havebeen
employed, thusmakingitmatter forno speculation wheresense,conti-
nuity,andbeautyhavebeendamaged"(DjunaBarnes,Ryder[NewYork:
BoniandLiveright, 1928],xi).
22 DjunaBarnes,Nightwood (NewYork:NewDirections Press,1937),170.
This is the secondAmericanedition,the one restoredby DalkeyAr-
chivesPress.Quotations from Nightwood aretakenfromthiseditionand
willhereafter be indicated inthetext.
parenthetically
23 LeighGilmour, "Obscenity,Modernity, Identity:LegalizingTheWellof
Loneliness and Nightwood," JournaloftheHistory ofSexuality 4 (April
1994):603-24.
24 Foucault, History 43.
ofSexuality,
25 The Hicklindoctrine, fashionedin 1868bytheQueen'sBench,became
thelegalstandardbywhichthefreedom ofauthorsand publishers in
theUnitedStateswas measureduntil1933,whenitwas temporarily but
notdefinitively overruled.The doctrineset outto judge"whether the
tendency ofthematterchargedas obscenity is to depraveandcorrupt
thosewhosemindsareopentosuchimmoral influences, andintowhose
handsa publication ofthissortmayfall"(QuotedinJacobs,164).
26 Employing theHicklintest,theEnglishmagistrate, Sir CharlesBiron,
foundHall's WellofLoneliness criminallyobscene,pronouncing thebook
as one "whichwouldtendto corruptthoseintohandsit mightfall."
He decidedthat"actsofthemosthorrible, unnatural anddisgusting ob-
scenityare describedin themostalluringtermsin thisbookandthat
noneofthewomeninvolvedare treatedas in the leastblameworthy.
Characters livinginfilthysinaretreatedas attractive peopleandputfor-
wardwithadmiration. Indeed,theresultis described bytheauthoress as
givingthesewomenextraordinary rest,contentment andpleasure;and
notonlythat,butitis actuallyputforward thatitimproves theirmental
balanceandcapacity"(QuotedinDe Grazia,191-92).
27 Gilmour, 614.
28 In addition to therulingon Radclyffe Hall's WellofLoneliness, Gilmour
citesthebanonHavelockEllis'sSexualInversion as a "legalprecedent"
motivating theeditorialtransmutation ofNightwood.
29 Inherintroduction toNightwood:TheOriginal Version andRelated Drafts,
Plumbobservesthat"all in all,theeditorialhandwas light;certainly
because he anticipated withcensors,Eliotblurred
potentialdifficulty

200 American
Literature
sexual,particularly homosexual, references and a fewpointsthatput

religionin an unsavory light.However, meaningwas notchangedsub-
stantially,
thoughthecharacter oftheworkwas adjusted,thelanguage
softened." Still,sheconcurswithGilmour inaddingthat"Eliotusedthe
prefaceforthefirst American editionto settheworkas a philosophical
examination ofuniversal humannature, leadingattention awayfromits
homosexual theme"(xxiii-xxiv).
30 "WhereasBarnes's'deviance'was strictly a matter ofliterarystyle,Rad-
clyffe Hallwas perceivedas boththelesbianinthetextandthelesbian
writing thetext.... BecauseBarnes'slegalidentity was primarily liter-
ary,hernovelwas notsubjectinthesamewayas Hall'stotheintersec-
tionofliterary andlesbianthatidentifies obscenity" (Gilmour, 623).
31 Gilmour, 614,623.
32 Gilmour welcomesDonnaGerstenberger's argument that"Nightwood's
complexity hasbeenconsistently evaded,itsthematics puzzledoverbut
its narrative experimentalism neglected,"and thatEliotwas "thein-
augurator ofthistrend," butshe concludesthat"thecriticalresponseis
comprehensible as theproliferationofan interpretation ofinvisibility,
a
reproduction ofEliot'searly,strategic evasionoftheobsceneon behalf
ofNightwood" (Gilmour, 617).
33 Barnesresistedidentifying herselfand her writingas lesbian.Susan
SniaderLanserreportsthatBarnes"apparently fearedherlesbianad-
mirerswouldmakeher famousforLadiesAlmanackratherthanfor
Nightwood, whichshe consideredhergreatbook"and thatshe didn't
"wantto makea lot of littlelesbians"(SusanLanser,introduction to
LadiesAlmanac[NewYork:NewYorkUniv.Press,1992],xv). Despite
disappointment thatNightwood was notbetterknown, Barnes"nonethe-
less seemstohaveresentedtheintrusion ofcritics('idiots')anddispar-
agedthefeminist, lesbian,andgayscholarswhowerehelpingtosecure
herplaceinmodernliterature. She claimedtobe shockedbythesexual
moresoftheseventiesandinsistedrepeatedly, 'I'm nota lesbian,I just
lovedThelma"'(xvii-xviii).
34 Gilmour, 616.
35 The term"reversediscourse"is Foucault's:"Thereis no questionthat
theappearanceinnineteenth-century psychiatry, jurisprudence,andlit-
eratureofa wholeseriesofdiscourseson thespeciesand subspecies
ofhomosexuality, inversion,pederasty, and 'psychichermaphroditism'
madepossiblea strongadvanceofsocialcontrols intothisareaof'per-
versity';butitalso madepossibletheformation ofa 'reverse'discourse;
homosexuality beganto speak on its ownbehalf,to demandthatits
legitimacy or 'naturality'be acknowledged, oftenin the samevocabu-
lary,usingthesamecategoriesbywhichitwas medically disqualified"
(HistoryofSexuality, 101).

ofDjunaBarnes 201
Illumination
The Profane
36 Thisessaywas originallypublishedas threeinstallmentsinDie Litera-

rischeWeltinthelatewinterof1929.
37 Benjamin,"Surrealism,"173.Subsequentreferences to thisessaywill
appearinthetext.
38 PeterDemetzobservesthatBenjamin's essayis "amonghismostcryptic
and importanttexts"and that"thekeyconceptofthe'profane illumi-
nation,'whichemergeshereto characterize Surrealist
vision,suggests
Benjamin's ownwayofunveiling, in his materialist
hermeneutics, how
historyresidesin some ofthethingsoftheworldand institutions of
Essays,Aphorisms,
toWalterBenjamin,Reflections:
society"(introduction
Writings,
Autobiographical xxx-xxxi).Fora detailedstudyofthis
vii-xliii,
to Benjamin'sengagement
conceptand its centrality withSurrealism,
see MargaretCohen,ProfaneIllumination:WalterBenjaminand theParis
ofSurrealistRevolution(Berkeleyand Los Angeles:Univ.ofCalifornia
Press,1993).
39 "It is moreproperto speakofa trickthana method"(Benjamin, "Sur-
realism,"182).
40 "Whatis theprogram ofthebourgeoisparties?A bad poemon spring-
time,filledto burstingwith metaphors.... And the stock imageryof
thesepoetsofthesocial-democratic associations? Theirgradusad par-
nassum?Optimism.... Surrealism has comeevercloserto theCom-
munist answer. Andthatmeanspessimism all alongtheline.Absolutely.
Mistrust mistrust
in thefateofliterature, in thefateoffreedom, mis-
trustin thefateofEuropeanhumanity, butthreetimesmistrust in all
betweenclasses,betweennations,
reconciliation: betweenindividuals"
(Benjamin, 190-91).
"Surrealism,"
41 RobinarrivesinParisfrom Americain1920.According toAndreBreton,
theParistwenties hostedthatphaseofSurrealism knownas the"sleep-
Nadja,trans.Richard
ingfits"or"NapPeriod";see Breton, Howard(New
York:GroveWeidenfeld, 1960),31.
42 That Robinshouldbe readingDe Sade in Parisin the early1920sis
notsurprising giventhatDe Sade was enjoying a revivalamongliterary
spearheadedthisrevivalbypublishing
circlesat thattime.Apollinaire
a selectionofDe Sade's work,proclaiming himto be "thefreestspirit
thateverlived";see thepublisher'sprefacetoJustine, Philosophyin the
ed. and trans. Richard Seaver and Aus-
Bedroomand Other Writings,
Wainhouse
tryn (NewYork:GroveWeidenfeld, 1965),xix.Between1926
fourofDe Sade's manu-
and1935,MauriceHeineeditedforpublication
de la Vertu(the originaldraftofJustine)
scripts,includingLes Infortunes
and Les 120Journeesde Sodome,ou l'Ecoledu Libertinage(the"lostmanu-
script"oftheBastille).BarneswouldalsohavehadaccesstoLa Philoso-
phiedansle boudoir, and
whichDe Sade saw publishedin his lifetime,
ineditdu Marquis de Sade de ses procheset sesfamiliers
Correspondance

Literature
202 American
published in 1929(perhapsthe"memoirs" towhichNightwood alludes).

De Sadewasnotas fashionable amongEnglishmodernists, though Swin-
burneprinted anApologie in 1906.Justine
de Sade forprivatecirculation
andJuliettewerethefirstofDe Sade's writings tobe publishedintrans-
lationintheUnitedStates,in1965and1968,respectively.
43 The Baronhad been "wrecking himselfand his peace of mindin an
effortto acquaintherwiththedestinyforwhichhe had chosenher-
thatshemightbearsonswhowouldrecognizeandhonourthepast.For
without suchlove,thepastas he understoodit,woulddieawayfrom the
world"(45).
44 See thefirstchapterofNightwood, "Bow Down."Barnesinitially used
BowDownas a working titleforthe novel;see Paul Bowles,Without
(New York:Ecco Press, 1972), 167.
An Autobiography
Stopping:
verywell,butwhatis it?'The Baronstartedto answerhim,
45 "'Nobility,
butthedoctorheldup his hand.'Waita minute!I know-thefewthat
themanyhaveliedaboutwellandlongenoughtomakethemdeathless.
So youmusthavea son,'he paused.'A kingis thepeasant'sactor,who
becomesso scandalousthathe has to be boweddownto-scandalous
inthehighersensenaturally. Andwhymusthe be boweddownto?Be-
cause he has been set apartas theone dog whoneed notregardthe
rulesofthehouse,theyare so highthattheycan defameGodandfoul
butthepeople-that'sdifferent-they
theirrafters! are church-broken,
nation-broken-they drinkandprayandpissintheonepot.Everyman
has a house-brokenheartexceptthegreatman.The peoplelovetheir
churchandknowit,as a dogknowswherehe has toconform, andthere
he returnsbyinstinct.Butto thegraverpermission,theking,thetsar,
theemperor, whomayrelievethemselves onhighheaven-tothemthey
bowdownonly"'(39).
beggars,
46 "Itwasthe'paupers'salonforpoets,radicals, andpeople
artists,
Protestants,
inlove;forCatholics, dabblers
Brahmins, inblackmagicand
50).
medicine"(Nightwood,
47 "'We givedeathto a childwhenwe giveit a doll-it's theeffigy and
theshroud,"'Noraconfessesto theDoctor."'Whena womangivesit
to a woman,it is thelifetheycannothave,it is theirchild,sacredand
so whenI sawthatotherdoll-"' (Nightwood,
profane; 142).
48 See Hunteret al.,92-134.
49 See JonathanDollimore, "FromInversionto Authenticity: The Wellof
" in his SexualDissidence:AugustinetoWilde,FreudtoFoucault
Loneliness,
(Oxford: Univ.Press,1991),48-52.
Oxford
50 In 1929,Lawrencepublished andObscenity"
an articleon"Pornography
that"wastobecomea definitive statement ofliberaland
forproponents
positionson obscenity
libertarian (Hunter,
lawandliterature" 97). See
D. H. Lawrence,"Pornography and Obscenity," ThePosthu-
inPhoenix:
mousPapers,ed. EdwardD. McDonald(1936;reprint, Harmondsworth,

The Profane
Illumination
ofDjunaBarnes 203
U.K.:Penguin,1980),170-87.Usinga duplicitous argument, Lawrence

deploresbothpornographic obscenity and obscenity law fortheir"at-
tempt toinsultsex,todirtonit"(175).He attacks"emancipated bohemi-
answhoswankmostaboutsex"forbeing"stillutterly self-conscious and
enclosedwithinthe narcissus-masturbation circle"and contendsthat
"theFrench, whoaresupposedtobe so openaboutsex,willperhapsbe
thelasttokillthedirtylittlesecret"(184).
51 He callsforan endtothe"insult... tosex andthehumanspirit"("Por-
nography," 175) andfor"freedom fromlies ... thelie ofpurity andthe
dirtylittlesecret"(185). Denouncing the"sneakingmasturbation por-
nography ofthepress,thefilm, andpresent-day literature," hecelebrates
instead"thecreativeportrayals ofthesexualimpulsethatwe havein
Bocaccioor theGreekvase-paintings ... whichare necessaryforthe
fulfilment ofourconsciousness" (187).
52 "Lawrenceand [Theodore] VanVeldewho,inwriting, respectively,Lady
Chatterley'sLoverandIdealMarriage: ItsPhysiology andTechnique (1928)
can bothbe viewedas marriagereformers.... Literaryeroticspro-
videdthemeanswhereby thoseindividuals equippedwiththeapropriate
cultural abilities
couldconstruct themselves, through a detailed,continu-
ous problematising ofpleasures,as thesubjectsoftheirownsexuality"
(Hunteret al.,124).
53 Lawrence'sliterary anddidacticrecuperation ofpornography follows a
processthatbeganwiththeRomantics. "Inthisprocess,ontheonehand,
literary aestheticsannexedvarioustechniques ofpornographic writing
and... ontheotherhand,employed a critical andmoralising strategy,by
submitting theeroticmaterials toaesthetic interpretation andjudgment.
In so doing,ittransformed thetechniques ofpornography bycombining
themwithliterary devicesused intheseriousnovel.Thisbalancing act
dependedon the'dialecticalabilityofthewriterand reader'-thatis,
theabilityto treatautoerotic excitation as a necessarymoment ofde-
repression andat thesametimetoreconcileitwiththeintellectual and
moralimperatives ofeducativeliterature" (Hunteretal.,109).
54 "Thosewholovea city,in itsprofoundest sense,becometheshameof
thatcity,thedetraques, thepaupers;theirgoodis incommunicable, out-
witted, beingtherudiment ofa lifethathas developed, as inman'sbody
arefoundevidencesoflostneeds.This condition had struckeveninto
Nora'shouse"(52).
55 WalterBenjamin, "The Bohe'me," in CharlesBaudelaire: A LyricPoetin
theEra ofHighCapitalism, trans.HarryZohn (1973;reprint, London:
Verso,1983),11-34.
56 Benjamin, "TheFldneur" in Charles Baudelaire, 35-66.
57 The last halfofNightwood's firstchapteris set in the bohemiancir-
cus ofan androgynous trapezeartist,theDuchessofBroadback(Frau
Mann),wheretheBaronandtheDoctorfirstmeet.(NorameetsRobin

204 American
Literature
at theDenckmancircusin NewYorkin thefallof1923.)Amongthe

actresses,acrobats,andsword-swallowers areclasslessbandsofnomads
who,like"PrincessNadja,"seize ontitles"merely to dazzletheboysin
town,to maketheirpubliclife(anditwas all theyhad) mysterious and
perplexing" (Nightwood,11).
58 Benjamin, "TheFldneur," inCharles Baudelaire, 56.
59 "The trajectory ofBreton'sNadja is ... amongthepromenade routes
thattheGuidestoMysterious Parisrecommends" (Cohen,3).
60 Breton, 40.
61 Bretonoriginally trainedas a physician. His medicalstudieswereinter-
ruptedby WorldWar I, duringwhichhe "foundhimselfworkingin
the latterhalfof 1916at the neuropsychiatric centerof Saint-Dizier
underRaoulLeroy,one ofCharcot'sformer fromwhomhe
assistants,"
learnedofFreudandforwhomhe felt"'an extra-medical admiration"'
(Cohen,57).
62 Allegedly Barnes'sfavoritebook;see Lanser,xxxi.
63 Gilmour, 616.Gilmour arguesthatNora's"effort toarticulatea recogniz-
ablenarrative oflesbianism,so reminiscent ofDora'sowncircumvented
therapeutic is repeatedly,
project," thwarted
persistantly bytheDoctor.
64 The Surrealists carriedDe Sade's incendiary ideas intothetwentieth
century. "Everything remainsto be done,everymeansmustbe worth
trying,inordertolaywastetheideasoffamily, country, " Breton
religion,
declaresintheSecondManifesto. " [TheSurrealists]intendtosavourfully
theprofound sorrow,so wellacted,withwhichthebourgeoispublic-
inevitablypreparedin theirbase wayto forgive thema few'youthful'
errors-greetsthesteadfast and unyielding needtheydisplayto laugh
likesavagesin thepresenceoftheFrenchflag,to vomittheirdisgust
inthefaceofeverypriest,andtolevelat thebreedof'basicduties'the
long-range weaponofsexualcynicism"; quotedinDawnAdes,afterword
to InvestigatingSex:Surrealist Discussions1928-1932,ed. JosePierre,
trans.MalcolmImrie(London:Verso,1992),192-93.Unfortunately, they
fallshortofhisideasconcerning sodomy;see Investigating Sex,5.
65 "'But,' Norasaid,'I've neverthought ofthenightas a lifeat all-I've
neverlivedit-why did she?' 'I'm tellingyouofFrenchnightsat the
moment,' theDoctorwenton,'andwhywe allgo intothem"'(82).
66 Nightwood mayalludeto thedistraction thatso preoccupies Breton:"I
havealways,beyondbelief,hopedto meet,at nightand in a woods,a
beautifulnaked woman.... I adore this situationwhichof all situation
is the one whereI am mostlikelyto havelackeda presence ofmind"
(Breton, 39). The Parisnightis a prominent
motif ofPhilippeSoupault,
one ofthefounders oftheSurrealist movement (see hisLast Nights
of
Paris,1928)andofRobertDesnos,theSurrealist famedforhis sleeping
fits.DesnosprefaceshisLiberty orLove (1927)withRimbaud's "Night-
Watch"and includesa chapteron "Depthsof the Night."(Barnes's

Illumination
chapters"Nightwatch" and"Watchman, WhatoftheNight"invitecom-

parison.)His chapter"Roll,DrumsofSanterre" resurrects De Sade as
"herooflove,ofgenerosity and ofliberty"with"eyesshiningin the
darkness, facebarelylitbutvisiblein theclearnightofParis,"whom
Desnosproposestofollowintotheabyss;see RobertDesnos,Liberty or
Love,trans.TerryHale (London:Atlas,1993).
67 Dialogismandheterology are different movements in criticalmaterial-
ismthattargethomogenous systemsofsocialdomination. Like Benja-
min,Bataillelocatesrevolutionary forcesin thedetritus ofcapitalism's
imperialistprogressandlaunchesan anti-Hegelian dialectic:"Aboveall,
heterology is opposedto anyhomogeneous representationoftheworld,
inotherwords,toanyphilosophical Thegoalofsuchrepresenta-
system.
tionsis alwaysthedeprivation ofouruniverse's sourcesofexcitation and
thedevelopment ofa servilehumanspecies,fitonlyforthefabrication,
radicalconsumption, andconservation ofproducts. Buttheintellectual
processautomatically limitsitself
byproducing ofitsownaccorditsown
wasteproducts, thusliberating in a disorderedwaytheheterogeneous
excremental element.Heterology is restricted
to takingup again,con-
sciouslyandresolutely, thisterminal process,whichup tonowhas been
seenas theabortion andtheshameofhumanthought" (GeorgesBataille,
"The Use Value ofD. A. F. De Sade," in VisionsofExcess:SelectedWrit-
ings,1927-1939,ed.AllanStoekl,trans.AllanStoekletal. (Minneapolis:
Univ.ofMinnesota Press,1985),91-104,96.
68 De Sade, "Philosophyin the Bedroom,"Justine,Philosophyin theBed-
room,and OtherWritings,276.
69 De Sade,322.
70 The Doctorexpoundson thispointin a passageEliotdeletedthattells
thestoryofhisobscenity trial.He recalls"thenightI poppedTinyout
to relievehimofhis drinking, whensomething withdarkhandsclosed
overhimas ifto strangle thelife'sbreathoutofhimand suddenly the
other,less pleasinghand,thehandofthelaw,was on myshoulderand
I was hurledintojail,intoMarieAntoinette's verycell" (Barnes,Night-
wood:The OriginalVersionand RelatedDrafts,26). Caught in a double-
vise,the doctoris gropedby the sodomite's"darkhands"onlyto be
grippedby the "less pleasing"strong-armofthelaw whichhe likens
totheheavy-handed sectorofMarat'srevolutionary histiny,
rearguard;
beingflungintoa prisonfitfora queen.
nobility
natural,
71 An earlierdraftofthispassage reads: "Lookforthegirlsalso, in thetoilets
ofthenight,and you willfindthemkneelingin thatgreat second confes-
sional,theonetheCatholicchurchforgot-overthedoor"Dames," a girl
standing backoneonone,whilebetweenthe
beforeher,herskirtsflung
columnsthehandsomehead ofthegirlmadeboybyGod,bendsback,
thepostureofthatheadvoltsforth betweenonewoman
thedifference
and another-crying betweentongues,theterrible
softly excommunica-

206 American
Literature
tionof the toilet" (Nightwood:The Original Versionand RelatedDrafts,

262 [deletionsin roman]).Barnescutsthebutch-femme scenography
and heightens thedramaofprofanation. It is no less clearin thefinal
versionthatitis thewomen'stoilet"Dames,"nottheNotre Dame,where
thisnocturnalloveis "confessed,"andthatthemodeofconfession, "cry-
ingbetweentongues," Whatis evenmoreclearis thatit
is cunnilingus.
is thewomenthemselves who,excommunicated firstbytheChurchand
againbyprogressive, post-Revolutionarysociety, damnandbetrayeach
otherwithbrute,irredeemable pleasure.
72 De Sade,285.
73 De Sade,219.
74 The word"gay"appearsneartheendofthedialoguebetweenNoraand
theDoctor.Norauses itinrecalling oneofthefewverbalexchangesshe
has had withRobin.Butin wishing"'everyoneto be gay,gay"' except
Nora,thus"driving [Nora]insanewithmiseryandfright" (155),Robin
wieldsthewordvindictively, actingouta ferocious ressentiment.


Chisholm 1997

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chisholm 1997

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chisholm 1997

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Obscene Modernism: Eros Noir and the Profane Illumination of Djuna Barnes

Author(s): Dianne Chisholm

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

Fromthemoment thatSade delivereditsfirstwordsand

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

JamesJoyce'sUlysses, D. H. Lawrence'sLadyChatterley's Lover,Rad-

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

Howdoesartforgeobscenity? Whatmaterials andtechniques does

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

to be posed in the termsofa discoursethatdelimitsand hyposta-

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

rhetorical,notbecause thereare no lesbiansor sadomasochists or

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

ofa hortatory foreword denouncing thelaw'sbarbaricintrusion, and

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

ernhomosexual, forwhomdevianceconstitutes thecoreofbeing.24 By

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

lesbian(oras representing sexualidentity) whenshe concedesthat

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

ofavailinghimself ofone ofthemostpowerful strategies ofhis pro-

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

That Nightwood does notdeploythe tacticof reversediscourse,

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

ofintoxication." Profaneillumination is a visionary demystification,

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

The profaneillumination relies on the devicesof esotericlove

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

The narrative anddialoguesofNightwood focuson themysterious

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

Catholicism, andbeasts.A cipherofunconscious automatism, Robin

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

hibitionism,butwhereis theprofane illumination?Benjaminfindsit

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

conscience, sheleadsus tothesiteofa grotesqueepiphany. Wemight

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

less nomad.Modernism behindtheliberalfa,ade,

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

withhis charismatic reversalofthetacticsofprohibition he in fact

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

Petherbridge, one ofthenouveauxricheswhosuffers fromcreative

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

1920sand 1930ssetsthesceneforthedetraque. Thefidneur andthe

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

seekinga morepowerful narcotic.She takesRobininlargedosesbut,

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

playingthewoman'spart.But,as the"rusty"and "broken"toolsof

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

periencelifebeyondthelimitsofbourgeoisanthropology. His direct-

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

girl"(91).He recallsDe Sade's demagogicDolmance,who,reeducat-

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

the Doctor triesto impress uponNora thatno sacrificeoflove will

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

also see the degradation of sodomyin the age of sexologicalcon-

This content downloaded from 192.231.202.205 on Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:14:17 AM

1 and Law (Carbondale: