Author: barely spicy

The biblical Eve is regarded as the temptress, the mythical whore who created sin.  As “the inventor of female sexuality,” she is responsible for the world’s first sexual acts (Tumanov, 507).  Well-known from Genesis, she ate the “pleasing… and also desirable” fruit giving into the “obvious phallic” serpents’ seductions (Genesis 3.6) (Tumanov, 513).  This created sin.  After being punished and outcast from Eden, Adam “made love to his wife” and “made love to his wife again” populating the Earth (Genesis 4.1, 4.25).  What makes sexual acts in Eden ‘bad’ and those afterward ‘good’?  Eve is expected to be the “mother of all the living,” and yet is also considered the “embodiment of the whore” (Genesis 3.20) (Tumanov, 507).  Why?  The sin in the garden is not sex in and of itself, but specifically the sin of woman’s sexual agency and desire.  “Because she is the first one to disobey the divine interdiction, Eve represents not just female sexuality but specifically female sexual choice—the real source of masculine anxiety” (Tumanov, 512).

The erotica poem “The Origin Species” uses the characters Adam and Eve to imagine the first sexual encounters.  In a deviation from the times sexual norms, the poem depicts Eve not as the recognized sinner; instead, it supports her sexuality and depicts her as Adam’s equal.

In the poem, Eve is the first to engage in a sexual act, with Adam following immediately after (line 9-10).  He does not have more authority than she does.  The first time they have sex happens before they both eat the fruit, which occurs in the fourth stanza.  Any actions prior to eating the fruit would be considered innocent and pure; they are not yet able to sin.  The poem presents pleasurable, non-penetrative sex as something that is sinless.  This goes against the Victorian and Biblical ideals of ‘good’ sex, as previously mentioned.  The Victorians would see the only good sex as “productive” sex.  Bluntly, penetrative intercourse for the purpose of pregnancy.  The final stanza again positions men and women as sexual equals.  All Eve’s children are “filled with desire” for men (line 25-26).  Adam’s sons have a similar lust: “For where is the man who can live without cunt” (line 28).  Typical of the genre, the sexuality of the characters is supported.  In perhaps the poem’s most notable alteration, Adam is described as being made for Eve.  Genesis tells the story of Eve’s origin, where she is created to be an ideal companion for Adam.  “The Origin Species” modifies this story, adding that “Adam’s thing was just formed any maiden to please,” (line 7).  Additionally, his penis is referred to in the poem as “Adam’s root” (line 14).  This word choice links Adam’s penis to his origin or source (Root).  Just as Eve was created for Adam, Adam was created for Eve.  The poem presents Eve’s autonomy and sexuality as equally valued.

“The Origin Species” frames pleasure and women’s autonomy positively, deviating from the sexual norms of the time.  With the use of well-known characters and stories from Genesis, this deviance is brought to the forefront of the reader’s attention.  Because the poem exists in the pornographic genre, these deviant ideas can be discussed.  Works of this genre do not have to meet the same standards as something more mainstream; it is already condemned.  But this also condemns any content discussed.  Including concepts of women’s autonomy in pornography associates these ideas with the perverse or obscene.

 

 

Works Cited

NIV The Holy Bible. New International Version, 2011 Edition.

“Root.” Merriam Webster Dictionary, 30 Apr. 2025, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/root.

“The Origin Species.” The Pearl, July 1879.

Tumanov, Vladimir. “Mary Versus Eve: Paternal Uncertainty and the Christian View of Women.” Neophilologus, vol. 95, no. 4, 2011, pp. 507–21, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11061-011-9253-5.

“Make me in marble after I am dead;”

This is the opening line to Eugene Lee-Hamilton’s poem “At Rest”.  In this poem, Lee-Hamilton writes of his wishes for a memorial statue to be made of him.  He asks that he be made “as they knew me” (line 4).

In another one of his poems, “To the So-Called Venus of Milo”, Lee-Hamilton once again refers to marble statues, specifically Venus de Milo.  She is beautiful, regardless of her physical differences.  The Venus de Milo is a Hellenistic style statue depicting a half-covered Aphrodite made in about 150 BC.  It was recovered in pieces and reconstructed, but its arms were never found (“Venus de Milo”).  Ancient Greek statues like this one were idealized and perfected, any ‘imperfections’ would be removed and replaced in favor of constructing an ideal, unattainable body.  Hellenistic statues are mainly dynamic and express movement in their posing.  In “At Rest”, Lee-Hamilton expresses his desire to become a marble figure, one of the famed classics.  However, unlike the classic statues he references, his memorial will not be ‘perfected.’

Here, he has the opportunity to imagine his statue however he wants, yet he chooses to keep his disability.  The statue is to be “recumbent,” just as he was (line 2).  He does not want or envision his perfect self with a “fixed” body.  Instead, he wants to be made into art.  He wants to be admired and respected; most importantly, he wants to be noticed.

By turning himself into a piece of artwork to be observed, Lee-Hamilton takes on a role similar to nude women in art.  Through the Victorian period, as interest in beauty grew so did the popularity of the nude.  Women’s bodies were something of fascination, an unparalleled kind of beauty to be portrayed by skilled artists.  But this admiration of the female figure did not come without constraints.  The viewers of these artworks feared the “dangerous sexual powers” of women (Lee).  To control this fear, and to control women the “women are rendered decorative, depersonalized…women are reduced to an aesthetic arrangement of sexual parts, for male fantasies” (Lee).  Stripped of their identity, the women portrayed in art are not people; they are no more than a collection of carefully arranged color and line (Lee).

To allow the nude body to be shown publicly, and to evade the onslaught of the Victorians, artists had to distance the figure from reality.  This was often accomplished by relating the artwork to myth or by abstracting elements to remove the body from reality.  This created distance allowed the spectators to look without consequence.  This can be seen in the Venus de Milo.  The statue depicts Aphrodite: a goddess, not a woman.  She is allowed to be nude because she is not real.  This makes a dissonance that allows the viewers to enjoy the sensuousness of the body while denying any lust.  Additionally, she is not fully uncovered, the lower half of her body is draped with cloth.  In the most accepted theory of its original form, her right arm is believed to be reaching for the draping (Kousser, 239).  This pose justifies her nudity while still maintaining sensuality.  Even with the prudish nature of the period, Venus de Milo was regarded in the 19th century as “the embodiment of concepts such as Tradition and Taste” (N.).

This distance is applied by Lee-Hamilton towards his marble body in “At Rest.”  However, this distance is not from nudity or sex, but from his disability.  With the use of a marble statue Lee-Hamilton’s disability is removed from anything real.  Onlookers can admire it without having to face reality.  The statue is lifeless and feels no pain:

            Save that the motionless and marble head

            Will never ache with hope forever vain;

            And down the marble limbs the waves of pain

            Will never race, but all be peace instead. (line 5-8)

There are no consequences of Lee-Hamilton’s disability on the statue, so effectively it is not disabled.  Viewers are able to gaze without having to confront the real-life hardships of disability.  It is no longer something ‘ugly’ or uncomfortable.  As with the female nude, Lee-Hamilton’s disability is now something to be admired.

And this admiration is welcomed.  Lee-Hamilton in statue form is depicted sleeping, literally “At Rest.”  This is a common pose for memorial statues, but it also invites a voyeuristic gaze.  Being “safely asleep” welcomes spectators and provides further comfort (Lee).  It allows viewers to look without confrontation; they don’t need to think about their role in the fetishization of the subject.  Lee-Hamilton wants his body to be enticing, he wants people to look.

With his desire to be made a marble statue, Lee-Hamilton indicates a desire for attention and appreciation.  He becomes a subject of voyeurism and he loses respect as a result.  Like the nude woman, Lee-Hamilton becomes “dismembered [from his] body and [his] identity” (Lee).  But he is willing to make this sacrifice.  Lee-Hamilton allows, and perhaps even participates in, his own emasculation.  In exchange, however, he regains agency.  “The victims of this voyeurism still retain a certain amount [of] power over the viewer, who is enthralled with fascination” (Lee).  The viewers are enticed by him, with his disability.  He will not be excluded for being other, his differences will be the subject of admiration.  Perhaps the reality of disability is too much for the Victorians, but Lee-Hamilton can receive their captivation.

 

 

Works Cited

Kousser, Rachel. “Creating the Past: The Vénus de Milo and the Hellenistic Reception of Classical Greece.” American Journal of Archaeology, vol. 109, no. 2, 2005, pp. 227–50. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40024510. Accessed 21 Apr. 2025.

Lee-Hamilton, Eugene. “At Rest.” Sonnets of the Wingless Hours, 1894, pp. 21.

N., A. A. “Venus de Milo.” The Classical Tradition, edited by Anthony Grafton et al., 1st ed., Harvard University Press, 2010. Credo Reference, https://search.credoreference.com/articles/Qm9va0FydGljbGU6MTIzMzM5NQ==?aid=104013.

“Venus de Milo.” Encyclopædia Britannica Online, Encyclopædia Britannica Inc, 2020.

When we first meet Anne Catherick, at this time still only known as “the woman in white,” Hartright dedicates a paragraph to describing her.  It is a longer paragraph, focused on her physical appearance.  Hartright describes her features and the clothes she is wearing, but pays special attention to pointing out her modesty.  He says, “there was nothing wild, nothing immodest in her manner” (Collins 26).  The sentiment of Catherick’s modesty, while not explicitly mentioned, is carried throughout the rest of Hartright’s description.  He uses words and phrases like “meagre,” “youthful,” “quiet and self-controlled,” and “free” (26).  Again, these words are not in direct reference to the woman’s sexuality (or lack thereof), but they reaffirm Catherick’s modesty to the reader.  The paragraph ends with Hartright directly assuring the reader, yet again, that the woman’s intentions are honest, “even at that suspiciously late hour and in that suspiciously lonely place” (26).  

Why repeatedly mention her modesty?  Why does Hartright include this detail so painstakingly in his narrative?

An obvious answer might be that this feature stood out in Hartrights memory as he recounted the story, and he deemed it essential for the reader to know.  But I ask again, why?

The opposite of sexuality is the absence of it, not modesty.  The repeated mentions of Catherick’s modesty call the reader to think of sexuality in the novel.  If Willkie Collins did not intend for the reader to have thoughts of sexuality in regards to the woman and how Hartright views her, he would not have brought it up.

I do not think that the reader is meant to view Catherick as a sexual figure or to believe that Hartright sees her sexually.  But I do think we are meant to pay attention to what this could mean going forward.  Hartright falls desperately in love with a woman who looks eerily similar to Catherick.  At the same time, he is being haunted by thoughts of Catherick and her possible connections to his life.  I’d be interested to see what comes of Hartright’s sexual mentions as the story continues, and what other repetitions might reveal.