This article traces one aspect of how Lister understood her gender and sexuality, that is, as a “natural” variation that was to some extent unique to her. Rather than projecting modern identity concepts back in time onto Lister, Shannon locates this understanding within the past and present philosophies of Lister’s own time with respect to the concept of “nature.”
England
Covering topics relating specifically to England or generally to the region equivalent to the modern United Kingdom. Sometimes lazily and inaccurately used generally for the British Isles, especially when articles don’t specifically identify the nationality of authors.
LHMP entry
Foreword by Emma Donoghue
This is the collection of papers based on material from the Lister archives, approached from a variety of angles. [Note: Not all of the material touches on her sexuality, but I will blog everything, though some coverage may be briefer than others.]
The front matter includes a forward by Emma Donoghue, an introduction by Chris Roulston (one of the editors), and a conversation between Carolyn Gonda (the other editor) and Helena Whitbread.
The appendices consist of several types of information. The first section covers technical reference data:
This section, naturally, sums up the author’s purposes and results. Lister’s records had multiple functions. [Note: One hesitates to call them “purposes” as the functions likely emerged from the practice, rather than being a design feature.] The detailed and structured record of her activities, thoughts, and experiences create a type of autobiography, while at the same time not being designed as a literary work or coherent narrative. The function of her correspondence was to create and maintain a social network that included family, friends, and lovers.
Lister’s habit of using code phrases for meaningful events and concepts is particularly evident in language around desire. One especially colorful expression was “going to Italy.” Whitbread interpreted this as indicating a fully sexual relationship, but Orr opines that the evidence for this is not included in the excerpts in No Priest But Love, and that the meaning is more nuanced. The other method of signifying especially noteworthy progress in the relationship was with a triple Silcrow symbol.
This section uses Listers discussion with Barlow of her sexual history to lay out both that history and the context in which she shares it, and how that reflects the progression of the Barlow romance. Some of the filtering of the information is marked by how Lister describes her sharing as “the story,” “nearly the whole story,” “nearly the real story,” and similar qualifications. “Story” did not imply a fiction but simply referred to a communication. Such stories were shared with a gradation of specificity.
The chapter opens by reviewing Lister’s several purposes for the Paris trip. A primary one was to seek specialized medical advice and treatment for her venereal disease (More on which later). But other reasons were to improve her French, and to get away – in several senses – from some emotional upsets of a year before.
As noted previously, the proprietor Madame de Boyve loved matchmaking and spent a lot of effort trying to set Lister up with Mr. Franks. But initially, Lester interpreted de Boyve’s attentiveness to her as more personal. Lister recorded that she “seems to have taken a fancy to me” and Lister responded with “something of flattery of manner she is not used to from ladies.” Franks departed with nothing to show for de Boyve’s efforts, after which de Boyve turned toward trying to drive a wedge between Lister and Barlow.
There were a lot of romantic goings-on at Place Vendôme. As noted previously, de Boyve was an enthusiastic matchmaker, and as will be discussed later, her housekeeper was said to procure less formal arrangements for the male guests.
[Note: Orr uses Lister’s abbreviation “Melle de Sans” for M[ademois]elle de Sans, which had me confused at first that “Melle” was a given name! I’m shorthanding her simply as “de Sans.”]
Pages
