@saintjustitude / saintjustitude.tumblr.com
"You stupid yaoi fangirls are making it up"
Meanwhile, Thomas Crow, Art Historian, in 1994:
And a few pages later:
Unfortunately the next page is not available for preview. Boo. But if anyone wants to find the full book, please do.
'Behind the Scenes': an 1838 print by Paul Gavarni, showing an actress playing a male role telling her assistants to hurry up (Rijksmuseum). I enjoy the look at her neckwear being tied (and the shirt frill, although this is the twilight of frilled shirts in menswear).
Aside from fancy dress balls, which seemed to be full of women wearing male costumes and Turkish trousers, the stage was where a Romantic-era woman could be found in masculine attire. Many popular actresses were male impersonators.
Madame Vestris (Lucia Elizabeth Vestris) as Little Pickle in The Spoiled Child, ca. 1830 (V&A)
Mary Anne Keeley as Jack Sheppard the notorious highwayman, 1838 (British Museum).
Maria Foote as 'The Little Jockey', 1831 print of leading ladies (detail). (V&A) This particular character seems to have a lot of merchandise and prints.
Madame Vestris again (V&A), in a circa 1830 print, reminding us that there was also a contemporary song about her legs.
Finally—if you remember the uh, very creative play about the arctic adventures of Sir John Ross and his nephew, which appeared in a toy theatre kit in the mid-1830s (hat tip to @handfuloftime), the role of "Clara Truemore", love interest of the captain's nephew James Clark Edward Ross, is a breeches role, and Clara spends most of the play disguised as "Harry Halyard."
I feel like there is something inherently queer about this, despite the long tradition of "Sweet Polly Olivers" in male drag pursuing their lovers in ballads and broadsides. I wonder how the audience perceived these characters.
I didn't want to do this, but since there is now a version of this post in wide circulation with a lot of snarky added commentary, here is the
"You stupid yaoi fangirls are making it up"
Meanwhile, Thomas Crow, Art Historian, in 1994:
And a few pages later:
Unfortunately the next page is not available for preview. Boo. But if anyone wants to find the full book, please do.
Some of you really need to do more studying and some self-reflection on how much the AIDS crisis (re-)shaped homophobic discourse and how it obviously has an impact on the way Robespierre and Saint-Just were depicted and talked about in the 1980s and after, especially when it comes to denying they could have been "like that".
Do you really think Bernard Vinot would write that Saint-Just was mlm in a positive way in 1985 when gay men were seen as a "scourge on society" and the "carriers of a deadly plague" "deserving of persecution and exclusion" because surely it must have been "God's punishment"?
Be for fucking real for one minute.
Some of you really need to do more studying and some self-reflection on how much the AIDS crisis (re-)shaped homophobic discourse and how it obviously has an impact on the way Robespierre and Saint-Just were depicted and talked about in the 1980s and after, especially when it comes to denying they could have been "like that".
All of these are by @mattxiv on Instagram.
Here’s to all the shockingly single bachelor uncles or the two very close friends who just happened to be girls and are only living together until one of them finds a man (they lived together for forty two years).
On a slightly upbeat note: One of the things that I find super hopeful about history is how people came together to protect each other. Straight women marrying gay men. People marrying their gay friends for social benefit. Partners not quite understanding why their spouse likes to cross-dress but supporting it and loving them nonetheless. Culture at large has always sought to repress queer people and women, and the times when we can work together to play the system are wonderful.
Yeah so some of these couples are jokes and only "ships" in the fandom way. But you're wrong if you believe there wasn't any kind of special relationship between Robespierre and Saint-Just, Carnot and Prieur, Barère and... a lot of men. Yes, Carnot and Barère were married. Carnot loved his wife. Barère had several female lovers. Prieur had a long-term relationship with an older woman (who was married to someone else). But um... Did you forget bisexuality exists? Or homoromanticism? Or are you just de facto implying those aren't "real"? Have you internalized that they aren't real maybe? Because trust me some men love other men as much as women, as much as their wife, maybe more than their wife. David loved Drouais more than his wife - and no it wasn't "fatherly love". It was a teacher's/mentor's love with all of the ambiguity this involves when you remember they were artists and what the subjects they preferred to paint were. This culture offered a convenient pretext where you could blur the lines. And no, you'll likely never know the truth. You'll never know if they fucked other men, or how, or what positions they preferred, or if David actually fathered his own children. And honestly it's kinda creepy to take it beyond mere speculation and actually really want to know that far as if it was a fact you were owed to? You don't need to know those details. You can just know when there's obviously a loving relationship going on. That's just as true for living breathing beings you know btw. You'll never really know what kind of loving relationship they have unless they choose to tell you... or someone forcibly outs them, which is gross.
Maybe we should be happy they had the chance to live in a brief period where all loving relationships between men weren't automatically seen as "scandalous" and "depraved", that men were allowed to love each other without it being always perceived as "suspicious" and "illicit".
Barère's thoughts about Saint-Just aren't creepy because they're about another man - they're creepy because he clearly sounds jealous of Robespierre and, you know, the whole Thermidor thing and all the nasty things he said about both. But it's actually quite special that we get to read his obviously non-straight non-normative thoughts so openly. It's not "subtext" or our "fevered deranged imagination". It's just there. Your denial isn't my problem to deal with.
I'm pretty sure the term "homosociality" was invented by experts who were getting pissed off that their colleagues would always accuse them of "projecting the gay".
Homophobic historian: Can you stop calling them homosexuals? You're projecting a modern view of sexuality onto them thank you :)
Expert who's about to invent the term homosociality: I am not calling them "homosexuals". I have specified already that it's different from our concept, as the term of homosexuality was only invented in the 19th century.
Homophobe: Ok but you keep saying they do gay stuff.
Expert who's about to lose it: What do you mean by "gay stuff"?
Homophobe: Well their great friendships and stuff. They were just really great friends ok. But you keep saying they loved each other and it makes them sound gay.
Expert who's about to lose it: They did love each other.
Homophobe: Ok but like... not in a gay way... Like, they weren't having hardcore anal sex.
Expert who's about to lose it (and who's likely queer IRL btw): Why do you immediately think about the hardcore anal sex? You know men attracted to men are capable of loving each other? They don't literally all just go into hardcore anal sex and never switch or whatever. This isn't a porno. There are many ways to love and have sex.
Homophobe: Like what? Lol.
Expert: You know the invention of heterosexuality really screwed up your understanding of love, affection and sexuality too?
Homophobe: I don't know what you're talking about. I'm straight, dude.
Expert: Ok, well... To come back on the topic... I'm talking about social bonds.
Homophobe: Well then say that.
Expert who's about to revolutionize the field: Alright then. Homosocial bonds. That's what they are.
Homophobe: Still sounds like you're trying to say they were all f*gs though...
Expert: *sighs*
It's very important to check what they mean when they say "effeminate". They're following the Classical meaning as set by the Ancients: for example, the Spartans were virile (yes even when they braid their hair with pretty boys); the Persians were effeminate (for different reasons that are most likely racist but this is Antiquity, it's literally the birth of Orientalism).
I remember Couthon has a long rant against effeminate men somewhere but once you read more of the speech to see what he means... um... this isn't what we'd call effeminate. At all.
For men who kept the ethos of Year II, the Directoire is effeminate. Hence Prieur's rant about the "fake" CSP having fancy meals and bringing women to their offices. Hemce David's art being increasingly less popular and Girodet's extremely petty bitchy gay art of Mademoiselle Langes. Effeminacy is corruption of the senses by excess - excess of food, wine, money and, yes, women. Effeminacy means you're more interested in fucking women than hanging out with your bros. It's the rejection of fraternal bonds in favor of women.
So, yes, of course it's still gendered but not necessarily the same way we understand it. Because gender is cultural, etc.
Another word they use often is to call someone a "Sybarite". Example from Vilate's break-up call-out pamphlet:
Tous les matins, l’antichambre de Barère était remplie de solliciteurs, avec des pétitions à la main, attendant l’heure de son heureux réveil. Il se présentait enveloppé de la robe d’un sybarite (59), recueillait, avec les manières et les grâces d’un ministre petit-maître, les placets qu’on lui présentait, commençant par les femmes, et distribuant des galanteries aux plus jolies. Il prodiguait les promesses et les protestations ; puis rentrant gaiement dans son cabinet, à l’exemple du honteux cardinal Dubois, il jetait au feu la poignée de papiers qu’il venait de recueillir. Voilà ma correspondance faite. J’ai vu cette horreur. . . . était-il le seul ?. . .
59. Désigne les habitants de « Sybaris », ville de la Grande Grèce dont les habitants sont réputés être le peuple le plus corrompu et le plus amolli de l’Antiquité. Par extension, désigne ceux qui sont mous, efféminés et corrompus par les plaisirs de la luxure.
Context: in the post-Thermidor fight, they are still working with the Year II ethos and trying to prove that the CSP was "effeminate" therefore "corrupt", "despotic" (like the "Orient") and "just like aristocrats and the Ancien Régime". That's the point. Aristocratic = effeminate. (And "aristocratic" as an insult/political category does not necessarily mean noble-born. That's also important.)
Any Orientalist comparison also joins this lexicon of words/images with similar meanings. Hence the way Georges Duval (who was a member of Fréron's jeunesse dorée) describes Saint-Just.
I remember SJ talking about effeminate men and Hérault did, too, and I was never sure what they meant. It was clear that SJ's rant was political. Hérault was trying to be a smartass but oh well. I am still not sure what either of them ranted about so if anyone wants to translate to 21c language, I'd be grateful (and will give sources where they say that if it's not well-known).
I’m tired but here… and the shift towards “not effeminate” is based in homophobia/biphobia and also Victorian typical “practicality.” <- to justify eugenics etc.
You are right. I will read through these more in depth later!
A note that may or may not relate:
I’ve noticed (as in started to study) that the wave of imperialism that transformed gender and sexuality in colonies first started in Europe. Other gender and sexual identities, other family and communal structures existed and were suppressed by the rise of capitalism (splitting communities is most beneficial) and that of the “patriarchal (*) nuclear family”, and the “invention” of homosexuality as a pathology in the mid-19thc, contrasting previous understandings of sexuality.
(*) I’ve studied how the French Revolution has a completely different understanding of the term “patriarchy”. While they are obviously still misogynistic, they prefer a society of brothers (that might include sisters someday - there are varying degrees here) over one where an all-powerful father figure rules because that’s monarchy and how the Ancien Régime used to be.
That’s fascinating thank you, this may come up in my wip, as related to Valmont and Danceny and how they excercise their ancien régime power over the none male, and none ancien régime characters.
Also, cause I’m brown and I made this blog initially to yell about brown history, cultures aren’t monolithic, androgyny as an attractive feature outside of Europe is not new. Case in point, this bi-polyam androgynous pretty boy divinity (in the canon text that H.indu n.ationalists willfully ignore), fits that definition.
Plus, I’m taking a gender and sexuality throughout the world and culture course this semester, what I just said is the antithesis of the entire class.
Also I’ll include this.
I suggest reading through this blog that's no longer updated unfortunately but has a lot of material: @unspeakablevice
I'm trying to study (among many other things lol) homosociality during the French Revolution and how it blurs with homoromanticism and homosexuality. I have some stuff about this in the tags below.
On the topic of androgyny...
(Cut because this post is already very long and picture heavy.)
It's very important to check what they mean when they say "effeminate". They're following the Classical meaning as set by the Ancients: for example, the Spartans were virile (yes even when they braid their hair with pretty boys); the Persians were effeminate (for different reasons that are most likely racist but this is Antiquity, it's literally the birth of Orientalism).
I remember Couthon has a long rant against effeminate men somewhere but once you read more of the speech to see what he means... um... this isn't what we'd call effeminate. At all.
For men who kept the ethos of Year II, the Directoire is effeminate. Hence Prieur's rant about the "fake" CSP having fancy meals and bringing women to their offices. Hemce David's art being increasingly less popular and Girodet's extremely petty bitchy gay art of Mademoiselle Langes. Effeminacy is corruption of the senses by excess - excess of food, wine, money and, yes, women. Effeminacy means you're more interested in fucking women than hanging out with your bros. It's the rejection of fraternal bonds in favor of women.
So, yes, of course it's still gendered but not necessarily the same way we understand it. Because gender is cultural, etc.
Another word they use often is to call someone a "Sybarite". Example from Vilate's break-up call-out pamphlet:
Tous les matins, l’antichambre de Barère était remplie de solliciteurs, avec des pétitions à la main, attendant l’heure de son heureux réveil. Il se présentait enveloppé de la robe d’un sybarite (59), recueillait, avec les manières et les grâces d’un ministre petit-maître, les placets qu’on lui présentait, commençant par les femmes, et distribuant des galanteries aux plus jolies. Il prodiguait les promesses et les protestations ; puis rentrant gaiement dans son cabinet, à l’exemple du honteux cardinal Dubois, il jetait au feu la poignée de papiers qu’il venait de recueillir. Voilà ma correspondance faite. J’ai vu cette horreur. . . . était-il le seul ?. . .
59. Désigne les habitants de « Sybaris », ville de la Grande Grèce dont les habitants sont réputés être le peuple le plus corrompu et le plus amolli de l’Antiquité. Par extension, désigne ceux qui sont mous, efféminés et corrompus par les plaisirs de la luxure.
Context: in the post-Thermidor fight, they are still working with the Year II ethos and trying to prove that the CSP was "effeminate" therefore "corrupt", "despotic" (like the "Orient") and "just like aristocrats and the Ancien Régime". That's the point. Aristocratic = effeminate. (And "aristocratic" as an insult/political category does not necessarily mean noble-born. That's also important.)
Any Orientalist comparison also joins this lexicon of words/images with similar meanings. Hence the way Georges Duval (who was a member of Fréron's jeunesse dorée) describes Saint-Just.
I remember SJ talking about effeminate men and Hérault did, too, and I was never sure what they meant. It was clear that SJ's rant was political. Hérault was trying to be a smartass but oh well. I am still not sure what either of them ranted about so if anyone wants to translate to 21c language, I'd be grateful (and will give sources where they say that if it's not well-known).
I’m tired but here… and the shift towards “not effeminate” is based in homophobia/biphobia and also Victorian typical “practicality.” <- to justify eugenics etc.
You are right. I will read through these more in depth later!
A note that may or may not relate:
I’ve noticed (as in started to study) that the wave of imperialism that transformed gender and sexuality in colonies first started in Europe. Other gender and sexual identities, other family and communal structures existed and were suppressed by the rise of capitalism (splitting communities is most beneficial) and that of the “patriarchal (*) nuclear family”, and the “invention” of homosexuality as a pathology in the mid-19thc, contrasting previous understandings of sexuality.
(*) I’ve studied how the French Revolution has a completely different understanding of the term “patriarchy”. While they are obviously still misogynistic, they prefer a society of brothers (that might include sisters someday - there are varying degrees here) over one where an all-powerful father figure rules because that’s monarchy and how the Ancien Régime used to be.
This is absolutely killing me because:
1) You're a dandy yourself bordering on muscadin, B.
2) You like them dandy boys especially when their name is Vilate.
3) That "hermaphrodite" thing... Is it to root out girls in soldier drag? But you Bertrand specifically wouldn't mind whether you're getting a bj from a boy or a girl. Also Collot assigned those girls male by virtue.
Man, the CSP is gay as fuck.
— The Origins and Role of Same-Sex Relations in Human Societies, by James Neill · 2011
For some reason the article isn't linking normally but this is amazing! I do not like that the author does not mention Hirschfeld being Jewish early enough in the article, but it's awesome this has been restored!
For those who do not know Hirschfeld was a gay doctor who ran the first trans clinic in the world in Germany. He helped so many transition and was a great advocate for LGBT rights.
so this is an extremely cool resource
What is your favorite occupation? “Reading my own sonnets.”
it is just astonishing how many of the conventional 19th century European mlm culture beats this hits
Like, you want to live in the Renaissance, you like St. Sebastian, Achilles, and Alexander the Great? Really?
Anonymous love letter between two twelfth-century nuns, Translated by Peter Dronke in Medieval Latin and the rise of European Love-Lyric, II.
So Louis-Sébastien Mercier has an "untitled" chapter (1782) that's about sodomy and the "shameful vice". You have to guess it's about sodomy because it is not clear at all. He references how Montesquieu's l'Esprit des Lois dares to mention it though of course he doesn't say what passages he means.
So I'm looking for Montesquieu. I don't find anything directly but I find this harsh critique on the Ancient Greeks' "shameful habits" from 1862.
So then I look up the passage from Montesquieu that's quoted. It's about the Cretans:
Plutarque nous dit[20] que, de son temps, les Romains pensoient que ces jeux avoient été la principale cause de la servitude où étoient tombés les Grecs. C’étoit, au contraire, la servitude des Grecs qui avoit corrompu ces exercices. Du temps de Plutarque[21], les parcs où l’on combattoit à nud, & les jeux de la lutte, rendoient les jeunes gens lâches, les portoient à un amour infame, & n’en faisoient que des baladins : mais, du temps d’Epaminondas, l’exercice de la lutte faisoit gagner aux Thébains la bataille de Leuctres[22].
Could be what Mercier alluded to...?
I look a bit more about Montesquieu, and find this 1867 book that go from the Ancien Greeks to the "Muslim countries" all being "ravaged" by this "vice". What's actually most relevant here is that you discover Plutarch rambled about Aristides and Themistocles fighting over a pretty young man, and it was the source of their discord:
Aristide fut l'ami particulier de Clisthène, celui qui, après l'expulsion des tyrans (05), rétablit le gouvernement d'Athènes. Il avait aussi une estime et une admiration particulières pour Lycurgue, le législateur de Lacédémone, qu'il mettait au-dessus de tous les autres politiques : aussi, le prenant pour modèle, favorisait-il de tout son pouvoir l'aristocratie; mais il eut, à cet égard, un adversaire redoutable dans Thémistocle, fils de Néoclès, qui tenait pour l'état populaire. On dit même qu'élevés ensemble dès leur enfance, ils furent toujours divisés de sentiment et dans les affaires sérieuses et dans leurs jeux mêmes, et que cette division continuelle fit bientôt connaître le caractère de l'un et de l'autre. Thémistocle était prompt, hardi, rusé, et se portait à tout ce qu'il voulait faire avec la plus grande activité. Aristide, ferme et constant dans ses moeurs, inébranlable dans ses principes de justice, ne se permettait jamais, même en jouant, ni mensonge, ni flatterie, ni déguisement. Ariston, de Chio, dit que leur inimitié avait pris sa source dans l'amour, et qu'elle devint irréconciliable. Épris tous deux du jeune Stésiléus de Céos, dont la grâce et la beauté effaçaient, par leur éclat, tous les jeunes gens de son âge, ils furent extrêmes dans leur passion; et, après même que la beauté de Stésiléus fut passée, leur jalousie subsista toujours : elle parut n'avoir été qu'un essai de leur rivalité en administration politique, dans laquelle ils se jetèrent, tout échauffés encore de leurs disputes précédentes.
Now hold on a fucking minute.
Alright so they (you know who) have to know that. (Even though that's not the translation they used, so let me find that too later.)*
Let's look more into this Stésiléus.
Starting to understand how I'm lost confused?
Because they (you know who) must have been so damn confused themselves.
"Ok so those guys are our heroes and models of virtue but... they're also perverts... but we still are reading about their beautiful love, uh, friendship for pretty young men...?"
And you thought being queer now was hard.
Oh dear gods, here Stésiléus is a child.
Then again we know that they also think that a 26 year old is a child in 1794 France SO WHAT DO I KNOW ANYMORE???
