, Bewitching of Anne Gunter , pp. 5, 98–106.
23 S. Clark, ‘Inversion, misrule and the meaning of witchcraft’, Past and Present 87 (1980), pp. 98–127.
24 Sandra Gilbert, ‘Introduction’ to Hélène Cixous and Catherine Clément, The Newly Born Woman , trans. Betsy Wing (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1986), p. xii.
25 Nicholas Breton, The Good and the Badde, or Descriptions of the Worthies, and Unworthies of this Age (London, 1616), cited in N. H. Keeble (ed.), The Cultural Identity of
that he cut out for himself in the forest of
modernity, the Cyclops for Joyce is not a figure of deprecation, but on the contrary one
to be admired and emulated, a sovereign god-like authority who makes decisive actions
that shape the historical, political and cultural landscape by virtue of his will to power.
16 Developing Derrida, Cixous (1976) says that ‘phallogocentrism’ is the operative
principle of culture that is male-dominated. Just as the phallus is implicitly (or explicitly) assumed to be the only significant sexual organ, the masculine is accepted as the
Is Not One , trans. Catherine Porter with Carolyn Burke ( Ithaca, NY : Cornell University Press , 1985  ), 28 .
144 As exemplified by Hélène Cixous in ‘The Laugh of the Medusa’ (1975), which asserts of woman that: ‘there is always within her at least a little of that good mother’s milk. She writes in white ink.’ Hélène Cixous , ‘ The Laugh of the Medusa ’, trans. Keith Cohen and Paula Cohen , Signs 1 , no. 4 (Summer 1976 ): 875–93 ( 881 ).
145 ‘Woman’, Beauvoir stated, ‘is not a completed reality, but rather a becoming
. 55 This door metaphor is keyed to
Schmitt’s political theology, with its reactionary nostalgia for
the Pontifex Maximus, an ‘authoritarian person or an idea that as
soon as it is represented also personifies itself’. 56 But the occulting
figure is very pertinent to Julius Caesar , where as
Hélène Cixous poeticizes, the question ‘What is it
o’clock’ is associated with a ‘door we never
case study on hysteria,35 or rather to its historical antecedent, the
sorceress, as defined by Cixous and Clément in ‘Sorceress and Hysteric’.36 This reading is enhanced by the ring in Stella’s self-addressed
instructions as she methodically proceeds in her destructive task,
which is strongly reminiscent of the bloodcurdling threats of witches
or ogres persecuting a terrified child: ‘Ramsack the bedroom [. . . .]
Give me a pot and let me turn cannibal [. . . .] Give me a drill [. . . .]
Where is the chalk? [. . . .] First sever the headboard. Second, disembowel the
patience. As Hélène Cixous perceived, the quotidian
question ‘What is it o’clock?’ [ Julius,
2,1,191; 2,2,114; 2,4,24; 5,3,108 ] therefore becomes the most
imperative issue on this stage; so what also hangs about the endlessly
unopened door, the uncanny attentisme of such a
‘strangedisposéd time’ [ 1,3,33 ], in these
accounts, is a troubled impatience with the illusion of abstracted
, Goytisolo recognised that Genet’s late plays express the same revolutionary desire as his later militancy ( ibid .: 329).
3 Stunning, close readings of what we might call the ‘camp’ or ‘feminine’ component in Genet’s language are provided by Hélène Cixous, ‘Le rire de la Méduse’, L’Arc , 61( 1975 ), 39–54; Jacques Derrida, Glas , trans. J. Leavey, Jr and R. Rand (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1990) and ‘Countersignature’, Hanrahan, Genet , 7–42; Mairéad Hanrahan, Lire Genet: une poétique de la différence (Montréal: Presses de l’Université de Montréal
. Deleuze, Difference and Repetition (London: Continuum, 1994); S. Renshaw, The
Subject of Love: Hélène Cixous and the Feminine Divine (Manchester: Manchester
University Press, 2009).
34 Renshaw, Subject of Love.
35 For an extensive discussion of my conceptualisation of power see: K. Barclay, Love,
Intimacy and Power: Marriage and Patriarchy in Scotland, 1650–1850 (Manchester:
Manchester University Press, 2011), Chapter 1.
36 P. Bourdieu, Outline of a Theory of Practice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
38 E.D. Ermath, ‘Agency in the
People: Native American Gender Identity, Sexuality, and Spirituality,
ed. Sue-Ellen Jacobs, Wesley Thomas, and Sabine Lang (Urbana and
Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1997), pp. 100–18, at p. 103.
Ibid., p. 104.
Gary Kinsman, The Regulation of Desire (Montreal: Black Rose Books,
1996), p. 93.
R. W. Gray, ‘“…in my writing I see myself as a community worker”: An
Interview with Gregory Scofield’, Arc 43 (1999): pp. 21–9, at p. 23.
Jamieson, ‘Âyahkwêw Songs’, p. 60.
Morag Shiach, Hélène Cixous: A Politics of Writing (London and
dynamic, but it also
suggests a hidden gender essentialism: male as practical and rational, female
as impractical and irrational – or the difference between a straight line and a
spiral (Lundberg and Farnham 1947: 3).
It is not so much the pairing of terms that is problematic, but the implicit
values attached to each term of the pair: one side is preferred, while the other
is denigrated. As Hélène Cixous argues, it is ‘always the same metaphor [. . .].
Thought has always worked through [. . .] dual, hierarchical oppositions.
Superior/Inferior’ (1997: 91). Patriarchy is