In my
previous post on this topic…
http://sharpelvessociety.blogspot.com/2013/02/jane-austens-carpet-sharade-on-james.html
….I
made the case for the 15-year old Jane Austen’s “Carpet”
Sharade as a deliberate, learned, sly allusion to the famous gay sex scene in
Cleland’s Fanny Hill. In a nutshell, Jane Austen picked up on rumors that had swirled around King James I and his intimate
relationships with at least three of his
courtiers for nearly two centuries, and connected them to the controversial passage in Cleland’s controversial masterpiece, and
showed her extraordinary erudition at
such a very young age, and also her sophistication to formulate out of
those two sources her own extraordinary original, witty wordplay.
Those
who’ve been reading along in this blog
for a while will recall that this is not the first time I have claimed
that Jane Austen alluded to Cleland’s notorious novel in her own writing.
Here are some of my earlier essays on
this general topic, which, collectively present a multi-faceted, powerful
cumulative argument that Fanny Hill was very much on Jane Austen’s mind while
writing Emma at age 39:
What
I am writing in my two post now show
that Jane Austen’s interest in Fanny Hill dates back to when she was only 15,
and continued until she was 39. I’d say that was a lot of interest, and
therefore this subject of Cleland’s influence on Jane Austen’s writing should
be a pretty big deal in Austen studies, and I
hope to entice other Austen scholars to look into it!
But
change does not come easily and so the rest of this post is about a challenge
to my claims, and how I rebutted it.
My
favorite friendly adversary, Nancy Mayer, refusing to believe that the 15 year
old Jane Austen could have had access to Fanny Hill, but also to information
about the historical rumors about James
1st's homosexual behavior, wrote the following:
"I
would like to have the name of some book written before Jane was 14 in which it
states definitely in plain words that Car was the king's lover and not just a
favorite. Even in the 20th century, some grew up in less than ideal conditions
without ever learning that homosexuals existed."
At
first, I replied as follows:
Nancy,
you know your wish is my command. Plus, whenever I hear the sound of a
challenge being tossed on the ground in front of me, I simply cannot resist
rising to the bait.
And
it took me, literally, 40 seconds, to generate a very promising lead pointing
toward what you demanded. Courtesy of Wikipedia, here it is--I really couldn't
have made this up if I had tried to design a more perfect validation of the
claim that historically knowledgeable, enlightened English people living in the
late 18th century were perfectly well aware of King James's "complicated"
attitude toward his own bisexuality:
"James
adopted a severe stance towards sodomy using English law. His book on kingship,
Basilikón Doron, (Greek for "Royal Gift") lists sodomy among those
horrible crimes which ye are bound in conscience never to forgive. He also singled out sodomy
in a letter to Lord Burleigh giving directives that Judges were to interpret
the law broadly and were not to issue any pardons, saying that "no more
colour may be left to judges to work upon their wits in that point….."
And
here's the kicker!
"…However,
nearly two centuries later, Jeremy Bentham, in an unpublished manuscript,
denounced James as a hypocrite after his crackdown: "[James I], if he be
the author of that first article of the works which bear his name, and which
indeed were owned by him, reckons this practise among the few offences which no
Sovereign ever ought to pardon. This must needs seem rather extraordinary to those
who have a notion that a pardon in this case is what he himself, had he been a
subject, might have stood in need of." END QUOTE
[Me
again] So Bentham believed, in no uncertain terms, that James I was a monstrous
hypocrite when it came to male
homosexuality, he was as would say today, a self-hating gay man.
Now,
if Bentham had published his thoughts, I would have already honored Nancy’s
wish. I'd say that what he wrote, above, clearly meets the test of plain
English she set. And Bentham was extremely
famous.
And, curiously, Bentham wrote those words in his journal a scant six years before the teenaged Jane Austen
wrote her Sharade. So the timing is perfect, too.
But...apparently,
Bentham didn't dare publish his enlightened thoughts about the barbarism of
homophobia in his own country, for fear of himself being accused in the general
witchhunt and being hung. And yet, Bentham found out about that hidden history
in some way, didn't he?
I
finished responding to Nancy at the time
with this challenge of my own:
So,
what do you think the chances are that I will be able, in the next week, to figure
out a plausible connection between Bentham's private impassioned screed in
favor of what we today would call 'gay rights', and some published material
about James I's sexuality (because surely Bentham did not manufacture that
history about James I out of thin air) which
would have been accessible in a decent English home library in 1791? As another
Arnold said, I'll be back (when I have the smoking gun in hand)!
That
was Monday, and by Wednesday, I had
actually found that published
source, and I will tell you all about it
(or should I say, her) in Part Three…..
http://sharpelvessociety.blogspot.com/2013/02/jane-austens-carpet-sharade-on-james_8453.html
Read
on…..
Cheers,
ARNIE
@JaneAustenCode
on Twitter
1 comment:
Thankyou author for sharing your work. The internet need more of this. Very well explained and informative. Meanwhile, if you are in need and looking for a carpet cleaning, feel free to message us or visit our website. We offer you this at a very affordable price. Thank you and Godbless!
Post a Comment