Lady Chatterley and the Case of Meenakshi Kumari

Holliday Grainger and Richard Madden as Connie and Mellors 

in the BBC's Lady Chatterley's Lover. 

Photo: Josh Barratt/BBC Pictures/Hartswood Films (2015)

The BBC is soon to broadcast a new adaptation of Lady Chatterley's Lover, written and directed by Jed Mercurio, starring Holliday Grainger as Connie and Richard Madden as Mellors. 

The story, as most people know, is one of social division and sexual politics in post-War England, in which a gamekeeper fucks, impregnates, and runs off with his upper-class employer's wife. Connie thus abandons (and brings shame upon) not only her husband, Clifford, but her own class; more than merely a private act of infidelity, hers is a public scandal that challenges convention, authority, and the old order.

Clifford is not surprisingly upset and outraged at her betrayal of him and her wilful attempt to destroy the very fabric of civilized society. In his view, she ought to be "wiped off the face of the earth!" He then goes on to tell Connie that she's abnormal and not in her right senses: "You're one of those half-insane, perverted women who must run after depravity".

Interestingly, Clifford also holds Connie's sister, Hilda, partly to blame, and informs his runaway wife "I have no doubt she has connived at your desertion of your duties and responsibilities, so do not expect me to show pleasure in seeing her".

But what Clifford doesn't do is demand that Hilda be raped and paraded naked through the streets with her face blackened, which is the fate that has befallen Meenakshi Kumari and her fifteen-year-old sister, following the decision of an all-male village council of elders in India.

The girls face this disgusting punishment because their brother eloped - à la Mellors - with a married woman from a higher caste. Such decrees, made by unelected council members, are illegal, but punishments are often carried out regardless of the law of the land. 

 

I would encourage readers of this post and viewers of the forthcoming BBC drama to sign Amnesty International's petition demanding that the Indian authorities intervene and offer protection to Meenakshi, her sister, and their family. Click here to go to the relevant page of the Amnesty website. Or text SAVE3 to 70505 with your full name.

         

Note: The quotes from D. H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover, can be found on pp. 296 and 293 of the Cambridge University Press edition (1993), ed. Michael Squires. It's amazing how this novel remains vital and culturally relevant almost ninety years after it was written and first published.     

Planet of the Apes and the Negro of Banyoles

 El negre de Banyoles (1916-1997)

One of the more shocking moments in Planet of the Apes (1968) is when Taylor - attempting to escape from his simian captors - finds himself in the Natural Science Museum and encounters the stuffed corpse of his fellow astronaut, Dodge, mounted on public display. 

But the question is: why was Dodge sent to the taxidermist and displayed in this manner? Why Dodge and not Landon? 

The answer is given in the novelization of the sequel, Escape from the Planet of the Apes (1971), where it's revealed that the apes - having never seen a black man before - were intrigued by Dodge's skin colour. This adds an interesting further level of complexity and controversy to a franchise that is already often viewed in terms of racial politics. 

I recalled this scene after recently reading about the Negro of Banyoles, a stuffed human figure which, for many years, was exhibited at the Darder Museum, Spain. 

The striking and rather fearsome-looking piece was produced by the Verreaux brothers; famous 19th century French naturalists, collectors, and dealers of exotic specimens. It was acquired by the small museum in Catalonia in 1916 and soon widely became known as el negre de Banyoles - much loved by locals and tourists alike.

However, in October 1991, the mayor of Banyoles received a letter from Alphonse Arcelin demanding that the figure be permanently removed from display. Arcelin, a doctor, originally from Haiti, thought the figure an unacceptable relic from a colonial era steeped in racism and argued that its continued display was an affront to humanity (and particularly to persons of colour, such as himself).

Unfortunately for Snr. Arcelin, the mayor, the council, the museum staff, and the townspeople all disagreed with him and so he was forced to take things further. The subsequent hoo-ha attracted extensive media coverage and political reaction. Eventually, the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, became personally involved with the case and also wrote to the mayor of Banyoles to express his outrage and disappointment with the town's refusal to remove the figure. 

Other African heads of state also contributed to the debate and pressed for the Negro to be allowed to return to his homeland where he might finally be allowed to rest in peace. The fact that no one really knew where this homeland was and that he was actually an it didn't seem to deter them. 

Finally, in 1997, after six years of international pressure and wrangling, the figure was stripped of its loincloth and feathered headdress and sent to the National Museum of Anthropology in Madrid, where all artificial components were removed, including the wooden spine, glass eyes, artificial hair, and fake genitals. What remained - basically just dried skin and bone - was then placed in a coffin and shipped over to Botswana, for ceremonial burial in a national park.

Whether this constitutes a moral victory and a dignified end to the story of the Negro of Banyoles, is debatable. Obviously, like Dodge, the figure was displayed as an oddity and no one cared about the fact that it had once been a living man with a name. But then we don't care either about Egyptian mummies, or the bodies of saints preserved and displayed as religious relics ...

   

Ultimately, the question is whether corpses retain their human status and identities and should, therefore, share the same rights as the living. Personally, I don't quite see it. For whilst the living might be construed as very rare and unusual objects, it's a stretch to think of the dead as genuine subjects (particularly bodies that have been artificially preserved and turned into rather creepy exhibits).           

On Synthetic Biology (With Reference to the Case of the Spider-Goat)

Illustration by Benjamin Karis-Nix

As regular readers will know, I've long been fascinated by molecular bestiality and the creation of interspecies hybrids. 

And, thanks to astonishing advances in what is known as synthetic biology, the perverse fantasy of all organisms being able to promiscuously swap genes with one another - and not just fuck with their own kind - is fast becoming a reality.

Indeed, we can already marvel at the fact that we live in a world in which spider-goats are producing large quantities of incredibly strong silk in their milk thanks to a transplanted gene from an orb weaving arachnid. 

Such a procedure - described by opponents as Frankenstein science, or a crime against Nature - works because of the convenient truth that all life rests upon the same fourfold protein molecule arranged in various sequences. Thus the genetic code for making silk in a spider is written in exactly the same language as the genetic code for making milk in a goat. Since we now know the language, we can splice bits of code from one species to another.  

This effectively enables us not only to rewrite old forms of life, but to create previously unimagined new forms - things that Nature failed to conceive of despite having millions of years to do so.  

Now, it might be the case that there are important questions concerning this issue which deserve to be carefully and intelligently addressed. But I would invite those with moral concerns and anti-scientific prejudices to examine the facts, think of the potential, and dare to become just a little more bio-curious. 

     

Invasion of the Giant House Spiders

 The Spider at the Top of the Stairs (2015)

Photo by Stephen Alexander

Apparently, thanks to a wet, warm summer in which food has been plentiful, there's been a boom in numbers and an accelerated growth in size of giant house spiders.

The newspapers sensationally speak of UK homeowners facing an invasion which, of course, is overstating the case, but I can report having to confront four of these eight-legged nightmares, including the one pictured at the the top of the stairs, in the past couple of days.

Despite their name, giant house spiders usually prefer to live outside and it's most often sexually mature males who venture indoors, driven in search of a mate. Sadly, this erotic quest is ultimately a tragic one, as the lovesick spiders, having abandoned their webs, stop feeding and so are destined to starve to death - perhaps without ever locating the object of their desire.

I have to admit, I can't help admiring this mad devotion to Eros. But, on the other hand, I don't share the affection for monstrous house spiders that David Sedaris claims to feel and it certainly doesn't deter me from killing them if they creep too close.   

Note: Those interested in reading the humourous essay in which Sedaris expresses his love for April, a giant house spider, can click here for a link to the March 24, 2008 issue of The New Yorker in which it first appeared.    

The Case of Asifa Lahore

Courage comes in many forms, including that of gay drag queen Asif Quaraishi - more widely known as Asifa Lahore - who has bravely taken on the role of spokesperson for those within the British Asian community who want the right to openly express their queer sexual identities without being ostracized, or living in fear of violent repercussions.   

But naivety also comes in many forms and it seems to me that Quaraishi, whilst clearly a sensitive and intelligent individual - not to mention an amusing performer - is being naive in his demand that he not only be accepted as gaysian, but also recognised as a devout Muslim. This is probably not going to happen anytime soon and does rather suggest he wants to have his cake and eat it.

For I think Islam - like Christianity - is very clear on where it stands on the practice of homosexuality: it doesn't much care for it. Based on teachings in the Qur'an, Islamic scholars condemn sodomy as an obscene act (al-fahsha') and as an abnormality (shudhudh) which is contrary to God's will and the natural order, thereby likely to lead to the destruction of humanity.  

Unfortunately, not everything is open to personal interpretation and sometimes a choice has to be made between mutually exclusive and irreconcilable oppositions, such as, in this case, the right to individual and sexual freedom, or strict religious observance. You can't be both a defiant homosexual in complete good faith and practice and a subordinate Muslim in complete good faith and practice. To try, is to lead a compromised life full of contradictions. But perhaps we all lack integrity truth be told ...             

What really surprises me is why anyone who is so clearly disprivileged and despised within a homophobic religious tradition would want to belong to it in any way shape or form; is it really so much harder (or more dangerous) to come out as a secular atheist than a cross-dressing homosexual? Is apostasy still the most unforgivable sin in the minds of believers? 


Notes:

Those interested in this subject should view Muslim Drag Queens, a First Cut documentary for Channel 4, dir. Marcus Plowright, to be broadcast on 24 August, 2015.

Those who want to see a video of super-glamorous Asifa Lahore in action can click here, or visit her website: asifalahore.com   

 

In Solidarity with the Bloggers of Bangladesh

Avijit Roy and his wife Rafida Ahmed Bonya 

Facebook photo (2012)

Three members of an Islamist terror group have been arrested this week in Bangladesh, in connection with the brutal murders of secular bloggers Avijit Roy and Ananta Bijoy Das in separate incidents earlier this year.

Two other bloggers, also said to have insulted Islam with their atheism, have also been killed in Bangladesh in recent months: Niloy Chatterjee and Washiqur Rahman. 

I didn't know any of these writers personally and can't claim to be familiar with their work. I may not even share their politics and values. But, like many others, I feel it's right to protest their deaths, honour their lives, and send condolences to their families and friends - particularly, Roy's wife, Rafida Ahmed Bonya, also a blogger, who was seriously injured in the attack that left her husband lying dead on a street in Dhaka (the city of his birth, and where his father had taught physics at the university). 

The couple, who had US citizenship, had returned to Dhaka in February for a brief visit in order to attend the city's annual book fair. They were leaving one of the events when they were ambushed by a group of young men carrying meat cleavers. 

Roy was the author of several books in Bengali dealing with subjects guaranteed to enrage religious fundamentalists of all stripes. His two most recent works, translated into English as The Philosophy of Disbelief (2011) and The Virus of Faith (2014), give a good indication of his interests and the Dawkins-Dennett inspired perspective from which he passionately argued the case for secularism (something enshrined as one of the four founding principles of the Bangladeshi state, although this seems to be increasingly forgotten or ignored by the Muslim majority).      

I would encourage readers of this blog to read these works as I intend to. 

Klittra: On Sexual Politics in Sweden

Stieg Larsson's best-selling crime novel, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2008), was originally published three years earlier under the much more provocative title Män som hatar kvinnor - Men Who Hate Women; one that indicates the misogyny and violence at the heart of the book and, it seems, Swedish society (despite its reputation for social and sexual equality).

As critics have noted, the work brutally examines this disjunction between image and reality. Where many imagine Sweden to be a kind of achieved utopia, Larsson finds political, financial, and moral corruption - not to mention a form of fascism that is both historically present and rooted in the everyday behaviour (the speech acts, the pleasures, the dreams and fantasies) of those who would like to see an Ikea world triumphant.        

I have to admit, Swedish neo-Nazism and corporate greed doesn't really surprise me. But I was shocked to learn from an EU report last year on sexual violence against women, that, whilst there is an extensive problem across the Continent, it's the Scandinavian countries, where the problem is at its most acute: 46% of Swedish women interviewed, for example, report being the victim of some form of physical or sexual abuse at the hands of men. 

Without wanting to sound flippant, it's perhaps no wonder that so many Swedish women have chosen to make their home in Chako Paul City, a female-only town established in 1820 on the edge of the forests to the north. Better to be in a healthy, happy lesbian world than an unhealthy, unhappy heterosexual one where misogyny and rape are common and normalized. 

Better even just to keep to yourself and make your own fun; which, apparently, a lot of Swedish women do with great enthusiasm. In fact, they even have a new word for it, thanks to the Swedish Association for Sexual Education (RFSU): klittra - a portmanteau of clitoris and glitter. This neologism might not be ideal, but it's better I suppose than other options that included pulla and runka. 

However, whilst I have no objections to Amazonian lesbians living in their own communities, or masturbating women who like to grind their own coffee, as Oliver Mellors would describe it, one can't help but hope for the establishment of better - non-violent, non-sexist - male/female relationships in the future. For I suspect that separatism and sexual solipsism are only partial and short-term solutions (though this suspicion itself might be one full of heteronormative prejudice).

Afterthought: perhaps it will be a young Swedish woman - with or without a dragoon tattoo - who will show us a way forward. And who knows, she might already be living in Malmö; obedient of heart and golden of skin ...     

In Praise of the Octopus

A serving of octopus at the Bar Celta - Barcelona's best pulperia

barcelta.com

We all remember Paul the Octopus, now sadly deceased, for his uncanny abilities of prediction during the World Cup 2010.

It was noted by commentators at the time that octopuses are highly intelligent and sensitive animals with complex thought processes, short and long-term memories, individual personalities, and able not only to learn by observation, but even use tools to solve problems and open jam-jars. In short, they are remarkable creatures.

Indeed, according to the latest findings of scientists mapping their genome, they are even more unique than previously realised; to the extent that we might almost think of them as an alien life-form. That said, they obviously share some features with other animals, including man, such as a closed circulatory system, for example. 

In uncovering their DNA sequence researchers found that octopuses have a similar set of genes (protocadherins) to those found in humans responsible for the forming of neural networks in the brain. This, it is thought, accounts for their ability to quickly adapt and learn from their environments.

But what's crucial to keep in mind is that the octopus - and not man or any other warm-blooded creature - was the first super-smart being on the planet; their primordial intelligence evolved more than 400 million years ago, i.e. 230 million years before mammals first stepped on the Earth.

And so, it's only right, surely, that octopuses are afforded some degree of protection under the law in the UK and other European countries; any experimental procedures that might cause pain may only be performed once the animal has been anesthetized, a kindness usually extended only to vertebrates.    

Ideally, of course, we should just leave them alone to live their lives happily beneath the waves. The problem, however, is that they are so delicious to eat when served with a sprinkling of sea salt, paprika, and olive oil, accompanied by a dry white wine from Galicia, that one suspects that, despite their psychic abilities and numerous other talents, they'll always be on the menu.  


This post is dedicated to my friend Carlos Machado - a great aficionado of catching and cooking octopus. 

On Militant Respectability

A gay protest outside the Pentagon (1965) 

Photo: Kay Tobin (New York Public Library)

Until recently, I had never heard of the strategy of protest termed by historian Marc Stein militant respectability. But now that I have, I'm intrigued by the idea.

For whilst there are times when one is obliged (politically and ethically) to break the law and resort to the use of force, what matters most is not whether a demonstration is violent or non-violent, legal or illegal, but whether it is effective; that is to say, whether it achieves its aims.

And there have been times when the most carefully choreographed, polite, peaceful, well-ordered and well-mannered of protests have been the most successful not in capturing, but in charming support from the public, the media, and, indeed, even opponents. For example, the demonstrations organized by Frank Kameny and the Washington branch of the Mattachine Society in the mid-1960s requesting (not demanding) that gay men and lesbians be given their full civil rights as American citizens, were absolutely carried out in the right manner and cleverly placed squarely within the tradition of lawful American protest. As David Johnson writes:

"Because they had long been seen as subversive and a threat to national security - perhaps even connected with the Communist Party - MSW members were exceedingly careful to highlight not only that they were homosexuals but that they enjoyed rights as American citizens ... suggesting that sexual identity and political rights were not incompatible."  

Wanting to be seen not only as upstanding citizens, but also as potential employees of the civil service, those who marched outside the White House and other government buildings, dressed appropriately; women in dresses, men in suits and ties:

"The MSW drew up strict regulations stating that 'picketing is not an occasion for an assertion of personality, individuality, ego, rebellion, generalized non-conformity or anti-conformity'. Dress and appearance were to be 'conservative and conventional'. Signs had to be approved, neatly lettered, and carried in a prearranged order. Talking among picketers, smoking on line, and acknowledging passers by ... were discouraged."

Militant respectability is thus an ordered and dignified - but also subversive and seductive strategy - rather than a chaotic and confrontational one. Those who do not see how this might at times be necessary and effective - those who think protesting must always be noisy and involve skirmishes with the police - are idiots (and useful idiots at that to the state and its security services).

Torpedo the Ark sometimes means: shut your mouth, smarten up, and put down the petrol bombs; because the 'ark' just might happen to be counterproductive revolutionary posturing, empty political rhetoric and ideological cliché.

Ultimately, if you want to be accepted and have your arguments heard, then you just might consider behaving in a socially acceptable manner and speaking in a pleasant tone of voice. Likewise, if you want to be accorded your rights, then face up to your duties and obligations as a citizen.      


Note: The lines quoted from  David K. Johnson are from The Lavender Scare, (University of Chicago Press, 2006), pp. 200-01.

On the New Barbarians

Riot police try to maintain order during a registration procedure on Kos. 

Photo: Alkis Konstantinidis / Reuters

From where will come the new barbarians, asked Nietzsche, rather wistfully. And it was a question that also troubled Lawrence. For despite the modern world being very full of people, there were no longer, he said, "any great reservoirs of energetic barbaric life", as in the ancient world. 

At one time, I also shared this romantic fascination for those who roamed outside the gates of Western civilization; peoples full of violent discontent and savage enthusiasm; cultured, but untamed. Men who still believed in their own gods, because they still believed in themselves.

But when one turns on the news and sees what is happening on the Greek islands, and in Sicily, or at the French port of Calais ... One can't help being disconcerted by these hundreds-of-thousands of refugees and asylum seekers - these new barbarians.

It would help, I think, if - despite their obvious desperation - they behaved in a rather more respectable fashion: would it kill them, for example, to queue in an orderly manner and to show at least a modicum of gratitude towards those among whom they would live and prosper?

Having escaped from war, persecution, and sectarian stupidity and made it to European shores, they need now to display the greatest degree of civility and overcome their own terrible and violent origins; not threaten to recreate the very conditions they have fled by importing chaos and resentment. 


Note: the line quoted from Lawrence is taken from Fantasia of the Unconscious, ed. Bruce Steele, (CUP, 2004), p. 189.