Is Sa Gay? Come and disver what has been said lately about this and what's Sa sayg about this.
Contents:
IS SA GAY?
* sade gay *
Sa Adu is known to be straight and not meddlg homosexual relatnships. Dpe the celebrated and famo posn that the marquis Sa holds such diverse tellectual and artistic tradns and popular imagatn, his work has received ltle ser attentn the fields of gay, lbian, genr, or queer studi for s discsn of sadism, homosexual practic, and genr variatn.
And rarely is the life of the thor who penned the novel La philosophie dans le boudoir (1795), which clus a tract that is an early claratn for homosexual rights, acknowledged as a precsor of the gay and queer movements.
While the vlence and celty sexualy that are often seen as typil of Sa’s work receive relatively ltle attentn, them of homosexualy and ct drive Edmiston’s analysis a readg that giv a rich overview of genr and sexual transgrsns Sa’s work and life. Lerary and bgraphil analys ame the third major theme Edmiston’s work: is homosexualy a practice or proclivy Sa and his characters?
IS SA ADU GAY?
Edmiston draws on a mendably diverse range of sourc three chapters voted to the topics of genr and sexual pleasure; nature, sodomy, and the qutn of homosexualy as practice or proclivy; and ct parison wh same-sex pleasure (rpectively). Edmiston is pecially terted whether homosexualy is a practice that anyone n engage or an nate characteristic. He to the ncln that Sa’s wrg reprents a perd when theori were changg om the ia of homosexualy as a practice to s nceptn as an born tra.
He nfirms Fouult’s theory regardg the transformatn of sodomy as a practice, s, and crime, to homosexualy as a pathologil inty, but dit that the se of Sa, this transn happened a century before s realizatn by doctors and homosexuals themselv. In this readg, Sa sat between two time perds and was very much a forenner as his work preced those of homosexual rights activists such as Karl Herich Ulrichs and Magn Hirschfeld, and of sexologists such as Richard von Krafft-Ebg and Havelock Ellis. I am somewhat amazed that Edmiston nnot enterta the view that both theori (the one that saw sodomy as a practice and the one that saw homosexualy as a pathologil inty) may have existed at the same time.
A good example is the nversatn between Chevalier Mirvel and Dolmancé at the begng of La philosophie dans le boudoir (1795), which the first is clearly heterosexual and the send homosexual. Here we see a generalizg perspective (that homosexualy is a practice anyone n engage ) that fs together perfectly wh a particularizg one (Dolmancé assertg a preference for peratn).