Seduction and Theory: Readings of Gender, Representation, and Rhetoricxsxn by Dianne

Hunter
Review by: Nancy S. Leonard
Journal of the History of Sexuality, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Jul., 1990), pp. 180-183
Published by: University of Texas Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3704482 .
Accessed: 22/06/2014 23:30

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 support@jstor.org.

University of Texas Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the
History of Sexuality.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:30:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
180 B o o K R EV I EWS

EvenamongtheRungus,forwhom3according to Appell3s account,:

men-
struation
is an"unmarked catewryr'(p.94),it "simply is notconsidered a
matterfordiscussion33
(p.109))andrepeatedly wearetoldthatinformation
washardforfieldworkers to obtain.Despitetheirlimitations,thesestudies
demonstrate thatpersistencein thefieldmd sharpanalyticskillscannever-
thelessbe hugelyrewarding in theircontribution
to discussions that,at
leastamongscholars,showno signof abating.
TERENCE E. HAYS
DepartmentofAnthropolo,gy
axd Geo,graphy
RhodeIslandColleye

Seductionand Theory:Regdin,gsof Gender,Representation,

oundRhetoric.
Editedby DIANNE HUNTER. Urbana:Universityof IllinoisPress,
1989.Pp.250.

Thiscollectionof essaysdemonstrates the maturityof Americars critical

theoryaboutsexuality in atleasttwoways.First,thebookshowsthatthe
multidisciplinary character of theoretical workon sexualityis no longer
justanavowalor a namegivento thehopefora broader hearing.Thede-
sign of the book and most of the essaysshow that being historical,
philosophical,literary)orsociological is no longera determined pursuitof
disciplinaryautonomy-likeswimming inalappool-but aparticipation,
whichis alsoa politics,in a rigorous,oftenhistoricized mappingof social
semantics andsubjectivities.Towritewithinthetheoryof sexuality hasbe-
comecontinuously to readandreflect"against thegrain"of one'straining,
whilereturning thebenefitsof suchworkto anincreasingly sophisticated
politicalandintellectual culture.
Second,thevolumeshowstheextentto whichthepoliticalself-mobili-
zationof academic feminismhasgivenwayto a complexunderstanding of
the displacements of genderexposedby culturalcritiques.The figured
fcmalebodyon the bookcoveris Manet?s Olympia, revealinglysplit:here
posedas an absence,a pinksilhouetteframedby a rectangle,andthere,
above3 a variantlikea "positive3'print,ridingserenely abovethetitle.The
witandsubtletyof theopposedimagesis aspoststructuralist asthe C'nup-
tials"of FrenchandAmerican theory tO adaptan Irigarayarl phrase-
whichthistimeprivileges neitherparmer. Theessaysin thevolumer while
oftenengagedwiththe speculations of Barthes,Derrida,Lacan,Irigaray,
andBaudrillard, areateasewithtrarlsatlantic thinking,andtheircontribu-
tions show the continuedvitalityof the Frenchinflucncein this new,
"nuptial?'form.
DianneHunterhasdoneanexcellent job of assembling anintriguing
collectsonof essays.I)rawnfromthe visualarts(especially film),literary

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:30:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 BookReviews 181

criticism,psychoanalysis, and postmoderntheory,the essaysintendto

showthe rangeof fieldsin whichthe playof poweranddesire of seduc-
tion,asatropeof relationengagedwiththefeminine holdssway.Butthe
volumeis notamiscellany; theessaysallbear,to somedegree,onseduction
asanidea,asanaspectof rhetoric,asa modeof resistance, asourceof meta-
phor,orasasiteof philosophical speculation. It iswithsomestrainthatthe
introduction seeksto unitethesecompetingideasof seduction.Certainly,
alltheessays"radiate" from"acoreoffeministcommitment" (p. 1),butso
do mostworksin the proliferating listsof anthologiesof feministcritical
theory.Whatdistinguishes thevolumeis notso muchthefocuson seduc-
tion,whetherFreud's seductiontheoryor contemporary awareness of the
eroticsof writing.Rather,the bookstandsout for the seriousnesswith
which it takesthe multidisciplinary imperative,for the sophistication
aboutgender,history,andculturalformations ofthe bestofthe essays,and
forthehighqualityof thevolume's scholarship asawhole.Historians, liter-
arytheorists,psychoanalytic critics,andtheoristsof popularcultureandof
filmandthe visualartswilldiscovernot onlya fewessaysof specificrele-
vanceto theirworkbuta broadlyinterestingvolume.Specialized workis
demandingyet accessiblypresented,with useful,disciplinedfootnotes,
andthebookasa wholehasaneffectiveorganization andindex.
Thebook'sfourpartsbeginwitha sectionon filmandpaintingentitled
"ThePoliticsofthe Gaze."CharlesBernheimer's essayon Manet's Olympia
effectively
joinsLacanian andFoucauldian perspectives on thegazeto dis-
closehowOlympiafunctionsasa fetishforthemaleviewer,"forcinghim
to respondto thescandalous lacksherepresents inhisunconscious" (p.24).
Thepsychoanalytic readingof the receptionof Olympiatellinglysuggests
thecritic'sparticipationin thehistoryof thegaze.EssaysbyJudithMayne
on MarleneDietrichandTheBlueAn,gelandby SharonWillison popular
cinemaareevenmorerichlydetailed.Mayne'sanalysisrevealsthe contra-
dictoryandcomplexnarratives, pointsof view,andmodesof addressin
TheBlueAngel.ThatDietrichbothabsorbsandresiststhe appropriations
of the malegazelinksherto Manet'sOlympia;here,seductionbecomesa
modeof entryintoananalysis of filmthatis itselfseductively layered,com-
bining Bakhtinianattentionto carnivalesque strategieswith Irigaray's
conceptof "mimicry." Willis'sessayon two popularfilmsof the 1980s,
AmericanGi,golo andToLiveandDie in L.A., brilliantly anatomizes theam-
bivalentconstruction of sexualdifference, the spectacleof the malebody,
andthecaptivations of consumer space.Willisisequallyadeptin theanaly-
sis of subjectconstructionin ideologyand the observationof specific
featuresof popularcinema "luxuriously abundant in simulacra,asserting
thecomfortingreproducibility of reality. . . in consumable form"(p.51).
In hermappingof socialspace,sheexemplifies the mostimportantdirec-
tion that this conjunctionof psychoanalytic, feminist,historical,and
culturalanalysisis currently taking.

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:30:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
182 B OOK REVI EWS

Thesecondsectiondealswiththedynamics of seductionwithinFreudts
development of psychoanalysis, specificallywithFreud's turnfromchild-
hood sexualabuseto patientfantasyas the explanation of hysteria.The
writersmostlyresistJeffrey Masson's effortto simplifyandvilifythiscrit-
icalpsychoanalytic turn.However,MarthaNoelEvansandShirleyNelson
Garner merelyrecuperate clinicaltermssuchashysteria, homophobia, and
seductionformetaphoric use.Evans'sattemptto showFreud's writingof
theoryas a regressive movemostresembles an actof projection.Garner
attentively pliesNewCriticalpractice to alargelyunsurprising end,theun-
derliningof FreudSs attachtnent to Fliessanditshomoerotic, homophobic
components. Thebestessayin the sectionis Lawrence Frankws informed
andexcitingstudyof theseductiontheory,theFreud/Fliess relation,and
theDoracase.Thecomplexities ofthefriendship withFliess,Frank argues,
blindedFreudto thestrongpossibility thatDorahadbeensexually abused
byherfather,thatis, thatthe Doracaseexemplifies theseductiontheory.
Ofthethreeessaysin thesectiononliterary criticism,Gabriele Schwab's
pieceon seductionbywitchesandHawthorne's TheScarletLetteris surely
the mostimpressive. Schwabcarefully detailsthe culturalcodesof witch-
craftintheirEuropean, colonial,andretrospective versionsandshowshow
thetermsof seduction the "witchfamilyromance"informthedynam-
icsof literarytraditionsandthehandlingof narration andcharacter in the
text.The changingepistemological frameworks of the visible,of subjec-
tion, and of the femininearereadwith an impressive psychohistorical
dexterity andgrasp,andseductionisarilly shownatworkin Hawthorne's
relationto his own text. Like Willison film and AndrewRoss on
postmodernism, Schwabon witchesdeploysa culturalanalysisof social
spaceenrichedbyfeminismandpsychoanalysis, onethatexcitinglydemar-
catesa culturalimaginary. NeitherClaireKahanenorAliciaOstriker aims
thathigh;theircredibleessayson ConradandFord,andon AnneSexton,
willappealprimarily to thoseinterested in theauthors.
Thefourthsection'sessaysconcern"masculine" and"feminine" in the
rhetoric of Frenchtheory.SusanDavidBernstein proposesagendereddif-
ferencein the confessional modeperformed by StuartSchneiderman and
JaneGallopin theirreadingsof Lacan.Persuasive on Schneiderman's dis-
playof malemasteryin appropriating Lacan'sauthorityas a personal
prerogative, BernsteinpursuesGallop's sinuousrhetorical maneuvers less
fullyandanalytically thantheywarrant.CarolynBurkeintriguingly ex-
poundsLuce Irigaray's recentphilosophical work,not yet translated;
Irigaray counters themarginalization ofthefemininewithinphilosophy by
"havingafling"withthephilosophersNietzsche,Levinas,Heidegger
andthusseekinga reconstructive senseof mutualityaswellas a disman-
tlingof philosophical enterprises.AndrewRossreadsJeanBaudrillard (De
la se'duction[Paris:Galilee,1979]) as a culturalprophet,theoristof the

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:30:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 BookReriews 183

postmodern"simulacrum" and the "reversibility

of signs,"but simul-
taneously asanantifeministthinkerwhoundoesfeministpolitics-indeed,
anypolitics by an endlessfissionof categories, hypes,andhyperboles.
Rossis properly suspiciousof Baudrillardts
indifference
to ideology,histo-
ry, and politics.One might even take Baudrillard to exemplifythe
intellectualpositionthatthebestessaysin thisbookseekto overturn. The
bookis mostrewarding preciselywhenit exemplifies
ananalysis of culture
thatis itselfbothseductionandtheory:multidisciplinary, feminist,con-
testatory,andhistoricallyspecific.
NANCY S. LEONARD
DepartmentofEn,glish
Bard Collesge

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.245 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 23:30:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions