Michel Foucault is relatable not only to our modern day constructions of sexuality, but to the coded language and repression seen in our Victorian texts. Sexuality and power have a complicated and oddly paradoxical connection, especially in the production and reproduction of power, silence, and sexuality. The act of speaking about sex “has the appearance of deliberate transgression” because of the carefully maintained silence and disappearance of all non-normal sexuality (Foucault, 6). This idea that sex is both invisible yet everywhere, and that language or speaking is extremely significant, really reminded me of Goblin Market. The fruit, “sucked and sucked and sucked the more”, seem to have a strong sexual imagery (Rossetti, 476). If eating the fruit represents a sex act, then it’s even more interesting that they are sold. The goblins become more othered by their vocal and enthusiastic speech about sex. They sell and give voice to what Lizzie and Laura aren’t supposed to even look at- nothing to see, look away from sexuality. While Laura actively goes to the goblins wanting fruit, Lizzie speaks to the goblins- acting against the normal mode of sexuality, silence- but does not want fruit. Foucault also looks for “who does the speaking, the positions and viewpoints from which they speak, the institutions which prompt people to speak about it and which store and distribute the things that are said” (Foucault, 11). The goblins, as an “institution which prompt people to speak about it”, exchange sexuality for some self/identity/part of you. The poem seems reinforces this idea with references with Jeanie. Because of her transgression-eating the fruit- her identity becomes synonymous for sexual transgression. This reciprocal and strange process seems to also happen to Laura. In the last stanza of the poem Laura is the only name said and is tied to a warning about sexual transgression. The “institution” of goblins prompted speech about sex and seem to make Laura and Jeanie ‘others’ for eating the fruit. However Lizzie does not feel this same stigma. She speaks about sex, or perhaps enters into the realm of sexuality, but does not eat the fruit. The absence of the sexual act seems to let her identity remain normal or unidentified. I wonder then, why the goblins attacked Lizzie and in the way they did. Does her being covered in fruit translate to the way sexuality is being assigned by society whether you consent or not? I’m not sure where these connection might lead, or if they’re fruitful (pun intended), but I think they’re interesting.
3 thoughts on “An Institution of Goblins”
Comments are closed.
I am posting this comment for Currer Bell:
You did a nice job of succinctly explaining Michel Foucault’s argument in relation to your analysis. One component that you did not explore that could add a significant layer to a future paper is the portrayal of the men. We often talk about how women are sexualized and the repercussions for that, but I wonder why the sex-sellers are men. Have these goblin men decided to sell sex for their livelihood or have they, too, become othered by their role in the sex market and, therefore, banned from the normative society? Are they “goblins” solely because they sell sex?
I’m really interested by the public-versus-private aspect of sexuality in Victorian society that you pointed out in “Goblin Market.” Foucault’s essay highlighted the hypocrisy of keeping silent about something that, supposedly, doesn’t exist at all, and this theme emerges in other poems that we’ve read. In particular, I drew the connection to Sonnet 23 of “Modern Love:” “…rooms are full: we can but get / An attic-crib. Such lovers will not fret / At that, it is half-said.” Here, we see the assumption that a married couple should not shrink from physical intimacy with each other, but the word “half-said” implies that the topic is, to some degree, forbidden from being said outright. It is interesting that, in this case, the very absence of sex is another example of “non normal sexuality.”
You have a great point. I find your post so interesting. I wonder if we should consider the girls’ age and gender more (you definitely started to do this already). Both Laura and Lizzie are younger girls, probably not old enough to get married at the time the events of the poem take place. Being females and children they “should be” unaware of sexuality yet there seems to be an innate knowledge that the goblin market (sex) is a bad thing and some general understanding as to why it’s bad (via Jeanie). You make a lot of connections in this piece, you should consider expanding it.