> I think Prof.
> Hamilton was only talking about sexual *biography* of our authors;
> certainly his interpretations of Lust in IV.vii exhibit no squeamishness
> about sex in *literature.*
Ah, of course. I apologize for misreading his posting. We may be a bit
sensitive here, because we just had a parent complain to the dean about a
new faculty member who taught a Joyce Carol Oates story that the dad
thought was setting up his daughter to be sexually harassed.
Happily, the incident is now resolved, but it shook us all up a little and
made us think hard about what we say do with literary sex in the
classroom.
I have to say, though, that I do think that sexual biography can be a
relevant topic. I am constantly amazed by the number of students who do
not realize that so many of Shakespeare's sonnets are written to a young
man. Somehow that fact must be dealt with, and exploring the possibility
that Shakespeare was gay or bisexual is one method of doing so. We also
do "sexual biography" with Sidney when we wonder how his relationship with
Penelope Rich shaped _Astrophil and Stella_, with Spenser when we read
the _Amoretti_ and "The Epithalamion" in light of Spenser's marriage to
Elizabeth Boyle or with Chaucer when we consider the treatment of rape in
_The Wife of Bath's Tale_ in light of Chaucer's indictment for the "rape"
of Cecily Champagne.
I'm not aware of any information or passages in his work that indicate
seriously that Spenser's sexual orientation was anything other than
heterosexual, but I would be willing to consider such evidence if someone
could convince me that the evidence was valid and that it truly helped me
and my students to understand better the Spenserian literature that we
study.
Susan Oldrieve
Baldwin-Wallace College
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|