vision and inversion nightwood

8/11/2019 Vision and Inversion Nightwood

1/27

VISION AND INVERSION IN

NIGHTWOOD

Jean Gallagher

I am not a critic.To me, criticism is so often nothing more than the

eye garrulously denouncing the shape of the peephole that gives

access to hidden treasure.

Djuna Barnes, "The ongs of ynge"

In !!#, t$enty years %efore the pu%lication of Nightwood, Djuna

Barnes characteri&ed criticism as mista'enly concerning itself $ith the

visual aperture rather than the ostensi%le o%ject of vision. (o$ever,

Barnes)s !*+ novel suggests that despite this early disavo$al of the

critical act, Nightwood does indeed offer a critiue not only of "the shape

of the peephole" %ut of the entire "peephole" model of seeing that plays

such an important role in the visual culture of modernity, especially

through the technologies of vision associated $ith the camera. This

critiue of the "peephole" is accomplished through the novel)s repre-

sentation of $hat Barnes called the "peculiarly seed" %ody /td.in 0lum%

1*23 and its construction of the reader)s relation to that %ody. In its

turn from representing $omen $ithin heteroseual contets to repre-

senting same-se desire and transgendered su%jects, Nightwood repeat-

45 Modern Fiction tudies,6olume 7#, num%er 1, ummer 122!. 8opyright 9 for the 0urdue :esearch

5oundation %y the Johns (op'ins ;niversity 0ress.


2/27

1=2 6ision and Inversion in Nightwood

edly attempts to unsettle its readers from a position outside the visual

field and to locate them instead $ithin a circumscri%ed visual field shared

$ith the variously gendered and seuali&ed %odies that inha%it the novel.

everal readers of Nightwood have identified the novel)s narrator

and, %y etension, its reader as vie$ers at a peephole, particularly the

vie$finder of a camera or the voyeur)s 'eyhole. 8arolyn


3/27

Gallagher 1=!

"sho$n to loo' not from a site eterior to the field of vision, %ut from

one fully inside" /!713. (o$ever,the tet also gestures to$ard the some-

$hat later concept of "homoseuality," $hich depends not on the no-

tion of miing or crossing genders $ithin an individual su%ject %ut rather

on the radical separation of genders. eologists developing the dis-

course of "homoseuality" emphasi&ed the "sameness %et$een partners,"

creating "a permanent avenue of potential slippage >...? %et$een >...?

identification and desire" /edg$ic' !3. In its representations of the

central les%ian relationship %et$een :o%in and Eora 5lood, Nightwood

uses voca%ulary and images associated $ith the discourse of "homo-

seuality" to suggest a comple relationship %et$een les%ian desire and

photographic visuality. Fve Cosofs'y edg$ic' has o%served that the

discourse of "homoseuality" developed after, %ut did not necessarily

supersede, the notion of "inversion" in early-t$entieth-century culture

/7#3 in a similar $ay, Nightwood dra$s on %oth models to eplore the

relationship %et$een visuality and seuality.


4/27


ries,and ideasand ver%al images, chiefly metaphors and descriptions /

!23. Ahile this essay is concerned primarily $ith "ver%al images," it is

also concerned $ith the novel)s linguistic representations of other

"%ranches" of images, as presented %y the narrator)s descriptions of the

visual eperiences of the novel)s characters.The range of images that

cro$d Nightwood are repeatedly descri%ed as if placed or contained $ithin

yet another "ver%al image"@ the %ounded, constraining space that charac-

teri&es the nature of visuality as it is represented in the novel. This

image of a limited, constraining space is $hat constitutes the "visual

field" in Nightwood$ 4y goal here is to eplore not only ho$ that visual

field is constructed $ithin the tet, %ut ho$ Nightwood's characters and

readers are located in relation to the visual field and to the "inverted"

%odies inscri%ed on that field.

The novel)s title and t$o of its chapter titles /"Eight Aatch" and

"Aatchman,Ahat of the EightH"3 underscore the visual anieties asso-

ciated $ith "night," $hich, among other things, can %e defined as a con-

dition of limited visi%ility. i'e theorists discussing visuality,!2Eora and

Dr. )8onnor, t$o of the novel)s homoseual characters, treat "night" as

a su%ject of anious scrutiny /"tell me everything you 'no$ a%out the

night" >#?3 as something $ith a comple cultural history /"(ave you

thought of the night, no$, in other times, in foreign countries, in 0arisH >.

..?ou should, for the night has %een going on for a longtime" >=1?3 and

as an agent $hich affects and transforms su%jectivity /"no$ I see that the

night does something to a person)s identity" >=!?3. Nightwood might,

then, %e read as a site for eamining the limited and aniety-laden condi-

tions of visi%ility for the ne$ly emerging gender identities of the mod-ernist period, $hich Eancy


5/27

Gallagher 1=*

of the ord and the disapproval of the people, (edvig

6ol'%eina 6iennese $oman of great strength and military

%eauty, lying upon a canopied %ed of a rich spectacular crim-

son, the valance stamped $ith the %ifurcated $ings of the

(ouse of (aps%urg,the feather coverlet an envelope of satin

on $hich, in massive and tarnished gold threads, stood the

6ol'%ein armsgave %irth, at the age of forty-five, to an only

child, a son, seven days after her physician predicted that she

$ould %e ta'en.

Turning upon that field, $hich shoo' to the clatter of

morning horses in the street %eyond,$ith the gross splendour

of a general saluting a flag, she named him 5eli, thrust him

from her, and died. /!3

In the first sentence, the su%ject /(edvig 6ol'%ein3 and its ver% /gave

%irth3 are separated %y a long series of appositional and prepositionalphrases set %et$een dashes.!! These phrases, descri%ing %oth (edvig

and the %ed upon $hich she lies, locate the gravid, dying $oman among

a set of visual signs associated $ith Furopean empire and aristocracy.

These imperial signs, $hich occupy so much of the center of the long

opening sentence, are se$n and stamped into the material surfaces of

(edvig)s %ed. They dra$ the reader)s attention to the %ed as much as to

the figure on the %ed, rendering (edvig part of the "spectacular" visual

surface itself.

The impression that (edvig is placed upon, and is a constitutive

element in, this flattened visual field is reinforced in the first phrase of

the second sentence, "turning upon that field." The O%#ord &ngish Dictio!

nar provides one definition of "field" as "the surface on $hich some-

thing is portrayed" or "the ground$or' of a picture." (edvig is the

foregrounded image or figure on the picture plane, set at a distance %y

the demonstrative pronoun "that." In a more specific etension of this

definition,a "field" in heraldry is the %ac'ground upon $hich the picture,

also 'no$n as the "charge" or the "%earing," is placed. The presence of

the "6ol'%ein arms" and the "$ings of the house of (aps%urg" as $ell as

a later description of (edvig dancing /"The feather in her hat had %een

'nife-clean and uivering as if in a heraldic $ind" >7?3 support a reading

of (edvig as part of a coded heraldic image. Giving %irth and dying on

this field, (edvig is as much a "charge" or "%earing"that $hich is %orne,


6/27


charged, received, upon the visual fieldas the eplicitly heraldic "6ol'%ein

arms" and the $ings of the house of (aps%urg.

< "field" is also defined in the O%#ord &ngish Dictionar as "the space

or range $ithin $hich o%jects are visi%le through an optical instrument

in any one position" and the space to $hich o%servation etc. is limited."

i'e many of the tetually rendered visual fields in Nightwood, the %ed in

this passage is an etremely limited sphere of vision and action. This

field, $hich %ears the coded mar's of family and empire, a site of intense,

and intensely gendered, physical pain and danger, underscores the sense

of physical constraint to $hich the gravid $oman is su%ject.Thi!

circm!cribed% menacing "i!al #ield i! what ma&e! 'ed"ig

("i!ible( to reader! who are po!itioned a! e)ternal% detached

!pectator!$

The reader of these opening sentences, immediately positioned at

the "peephole," is constructed in $ays similar to the spectator $ithin

perspectivalism or of classical cinema!1@ disem%odied, detached, atemporal,

and eternal to the field of vision. (o$ever, this seeing su%ject inscri%ed

in Nightwood's first t$o sentences is thereafter repeatedly challenged %y

an "inverted" model of reading and vie$ing.

A Doble *on#!ion

This challenge first appears in the novel)s second chapter and its

!econd repre!entation o# a #emale body on a bed pre!ented a! a

con!training "i!al #ield. ;nli'e in the opening passage, $ith its

disem%odied vie$ing position, the loo' in this scene is em%odied %y acharacter, 5eli 6ol'%ein, $hose %irth is descri%ed in the novel)s

opening sentences. :evising a concept introduced %y GKrard Genette,

4ie'e Bal uses the term "focali&ation""a narrative mechanism that

spreads %efore the )mental eye) of the reader a vision of the narrative

content" /73to descri%e this directing of the reader)s imagined

"vie$" of ver%ally descri%ed events and o%jects.!*5eli, the "focali&er" in

this scene, accompanies Dr. )8onnor to a hotel room in $hich, they

learn, "a lady >...? had fainted and couldn)t %e %rought out of it" /**3.

The unconscious o%ject of 5eli)s /and the reader)s3 fascinated loo' is

:o%in, $ho later marries 5eli, %ears a child %y him, and eventually

leaves him to enter a relationship $ith Eora. :eaders discover later inthe novel that :o%in is, according to the doctor, "the girl $ho should

have %een a %oy," %ut at


7/27

Gallagher 1=

this point in the narrative, !he appear! only a! the ob+ect o# the

de!iring% hetero!e)al male ga,e% embodied in Feli).

In a manner similar to the novel)s opening passage, the sentence

that descri%es the reader)s and 5eli)s first loo' at :o%in sets up a com-

ple visual field through a series of appositional phrases and relative

clauses %efore arriving at its main su%ject and ver%@

n the %ed, surrounded %y a confusion of potted plants, e-

otic palms, and cut flo$ers, faintly oversung %y the notes of

unseen %irds, $hich seemed to have %een forgottenleft $ith-

out the usual silencing cover,$hich, li'e cloa's on funeral urns,

are cast over their cages at night %y good house$iveshalf

flung off the support of the cushions from $hich, in a moment

of threatened consciousness she had turned her head, lay the

young $oman, heavy and dishevelled. /*73

The sentence)s delayed arrival at its main ver% and su%ject /"lay the young

$oman"3 emphasi&es the visual and aural surroundings $hich frame :o%in,

$hose prone %ody is the final focus of the sentence.!7 The narrative

underscores the flat, planar uality of this initial presentation of :o%in

%y e)plicitly comparing Robin her!el# to a painting@ "i'e a painting

%y the douanier :ousseau, she seemed to lie in a jungle trapped in a

dra$ing room /in the apprehension of $hich the $alls have made their

escape3 thro$n in among the carnivorous flo$ers as their ration the

set, the property of an unseen dom(teur, half lord, half promoter"

/*3. This visual scene, replete $ith a high degree of artifice, constructs

a sense of a heavily circumscri%ed and constructed visual field /"a jungletrapped in a dra$ing room"3 containing a profusion of visual detail

surrounding the ostensi%le su%ject of the sentence and of the reader)s

attention.

Ahile :o%in is eplicitly compared to a moderni!t painting,

the tet)s presentation of her to the vie$er also recalls t$o other

modes of figuration in modernist visual culture, the cla!!ical #ilm image

and the !till photograph$-. :ead as a classical cinematic image, the

scene places the reader, li'e 5eli, outside the visual field% while Robin

occpie! the po!ition o# the woman/a!/!pectacle$ (o$ever, unli'e

the classical spectator or the "unseen dom(teur" $ho is reminiscent of

the detached vie$er of Nightwood's opening sentences, 5eli occupies aparticular place on the margin of the visual field@ "5eli, out of delicacy,

stepped %ehind the palms"


8/27

1=+ 6ision and Inversion in Nightwood

/*3. 5eli)s "delicate" vie$ing position is that of the voyeur, since his

screened o%servation post does not prevent him from "loo'ing >. . .?

intently" at the young $oman prone on the %ed /*#3. n the other

hand, even though 5eli is himself ostensi%ly screened from sight %y his

step %ehind the palms, his "delicacy" also suggests an a$areness of the

possi%ility of %eing seen. This suggestion that the voyeur is at least po-

tentially su%ject to o%servation is consonant $ith ilverman)s definition

of the eperience of specularity in $hich the voyeur)s "eperience of

himself as )pure) loo', eterior to the field of vision, gives $ay to the

disuieting reali&ation that he is himself immanently in that field, )on

vie$)" /!+73.

5eli)s position as a vie$er $ithin, rather than eternal to, the vi-

sual field is emphasi&ed in a !entence that de!cribe! the !pectacle

o# Robin0! body a! a !till photographic image1 "The $oman $ho

presents herself to the spectator as a )picture) forever arranged is, for

the contemplative mind, the chiefest danger" /*#3. This self-

presentation as a fied image "forever arranged" strongly suggests the

"pose" ta'en %y a person a%out to %e photographed, descri%ed this $ay

%y 8raig $ens@ "$hen I pose for a photograph, I free&e >...? as if

anticipating the still I am a%out to %ecome mimic'ing its opacity, its

stillness inscri%ing,across the surface of my %ody, photography)s

)mortification) of the flesh" /td. in ilverman 1213. (o$ever, the

narrator indicates that :o%in)s pose not only articulates her o$n

position $ithin visuality %ut also constitutes a "danger" to her

"contemplative" vie$er. The "danger" to $hich 5eli is su%ject in this

scene may stem from his very position of seeming visual mastery overthe fied image of the spectacular female %ody. ilverman suggests that

the act of posing creates a "photographic" field of vision $hich

encompasses everything around the posed %ody@ "The representational

force $hich the pose eerts is so great that it radiates out$ard, and

transforms the space around the %ody and everything $hich comes into

contact $ith it into an imaginary photograph" /12*3. If, as $e have

seen, 5eli is already a$are of himself as potentially under the ga&e, :o%in)s

"photographic" pose even more emphatically opens to the camera-li'e

ga&e the visual field in $hich 5eli is located.

This scene in $hich the voyeur is %oth hidden from vie$ and su%-

ject to a specular, decentering ga&e offers yet another and related distur-%ance in the visual field@


9/27

Gallagher 1=#

Fperiencing a dou%le confusion, 5eli no$ sa$ the doctor,

partially hidden %y the screen %eside the %ed, ma'e the move-

ments common to the "dum%founder," or man of magic the

gestures of one $ho, in preparing the audience for a miracle,

must pretend that there is nothing to hide the $hole pur-

pose that of ma'ing the %ac' and el%o$s move in a series of

"honesties," $hile in reality the most flagrant part of the hoa

is %eing prepared.

5eli sa$ that this $as for the purpose of snatching a

fe$ drops from a perfume %ottle pic'ed up from the night

ta%le of dusting his dar'ly %ristled chin $ith a puff, and dra$-

ing a line of rouge across his lips, his upper lip compressed on

his lo$er, in order to have it seem that their sudden em%el-

lishment $as a visitation of nature still thin'ing himself uno%-

served, as if the $hole fa%ric of magic had %egun to decom-

pose, as if the mechanics of machination $ere indeed out of

control and $ere simplifying themselves %ac' to their origin,

the doctor)s hand reached out and covered a loose hundred

franc note on the ta%le. /**+3

If the source of one half of 5eli)s "dou%le confusion" is his displacement

from a position of visual mastery as he ga&es at the posed $oman, the

other half is his $itnessing of the scene of gender inversion, signified %y

the doctor)s appropriation of feminine accessories, the fetishi&ed "de-

tacha%le part>s?" $hich, as 4arjorie Gar%er demonstrates, are so cen-

tral to cross-dressing /!7=3. The doctor)s "machination," $hich empha-

si&es the process of imperfect transformation, reflects Gar%er)s claim

for the "deconstructive nature of the transvestite performance," $hich

is "al$ays undoing itself as part of its process of self-enactment" /!73.

The doctor)s movements, displaying the usually hidden processes that

create the visi%le surface of gender, %elie the certainty or naturalness of

gender.!+The "confusion" and "disuiet" /*+3 occasioned in 5eli %y this

image of gender am%iguity resonates $ith Jacueline :ose)s assertion

that "uncertain seual identity muddies the plane of the image so that

the spectator does not 'no$ $here she or he stands in relationship to

the picture. < confusion at the level of seuality %rings $ith it a distur-

%ance in the visual field" /11+3.


10/27

1== 6ision and Inversion in Nightwood

The "dou%le confusion" that 5eli eperiences in loo'ing at :o%in

and the doctor%oth of $hom are characteri&ed %y the doctor later in

the novel as "inverts"is $rought %y this scene)s lin'ing of insta%ilities

in visual mastery and gender %oundaries. Dra$n into the visual field, the

vie$er of this scene is eposed not only to the specular ga&e that dis-

rupts his voyeuristic loo' at the spectacular female %ody %ut also to the

%rea'do$n of gender sta%ility itself. The dual image of the $oman as a

dangerous "picture" and the doctor)s gender machinations help to un-

dermine the "peephole" model of vision, $hich no longer ensures the

contemplative spectator)s sta%ility in relation to the visual field.

The Di!order that Met 'er Eye!

Nightwood's fifth chapter, "Aatchman, Ahat of the EightH" again

represents a %edroom as the site of inversion, %oth as a seual-gender

practice and as a model of seeing and reading.


11/27

Gallagher 1=

half a do&en odd instruments that she could not place, a cath-

eter, some t$enty perfume %ottles, almost empty, pomades,

creams, rouges, po$der %oes and puffs. 5rom the half-open

dra$ers of this chiffonier hung laces ri%ands, stoc'ings, ladies)

underclothing and an a%dominal %race, $hich gave the im-

pression that the feminine finery had suffered venery. < s$ill

pail stood at the head of the %ed, %rimming $ith a%omina-

tions. There $as something appallingly degraded a%out the

room, li'e the rooms in %rothels, $hich give even the most

innocent a sensation of having %een accompliceyet this room

$as also muscular, a cross %et$een a chambre ) coucher and a

%oer)s training camp. There is a certain %elligerence in a

room in $hich a $oman has never set foot every o%ject seems

to %e %attling its o$n compressionand there is a metallic

odour, as of %eaten iron in a smithy.

In the narro$ iron %ed, $ith its heavy and dirty linen

sheets, lay the doctor in a $oman)s flannel nightgo$n.

The doctor)s head, $ith its over-large %lac' eyes, its full

gun-metal chee's and chin, $as framed in the golden semi-

circle of a $ig $ith long pendant curls that touched his shoul-

ders, and falling %ac' against the pillo$, turned up the shad-

o$y interiors of their cylinders. (e $as heavily rouged and

his lashes painted. /#=-#3.

!7?3,!#finally arriving at the image of the doctor in %ed.

(o$ever, unli'e the disem%odied vie$er of (edvig)s imperial %edroom

or the reader $ho vie$s :o%in via 5eli)s position as the hidden voyeur,

the reader of this scene, through Eora as "focali&er," is identified as an

"accomplice" to the cro$ded field of images. By remar'ing that a $oman

had never %efore set foot in the compression cham%er of the doctor)s

room, the tet underscores Eora)s physical entrance into the "invert)s"

visual field, littered $ith the "pieces" that are part of the transvestite

performance. Just as 5eli)s entrance into the "inverted" visual field is


12/27

12 6ision and Inversion in Nightwood

mar'ed %y "confusion," so here, the field of vision that contains %oth the

seually inverted %ody and its o%server is characteri&ed %y intense "dis-

order."

In addition to this emphasis on the em%odied and disordered na-

ture of Eora)s entrance into thi! "i!al #ield% the pa!!age

metaphorically !trctre! Nora0! loo& arond the room a! i# !he

were photographing it$This is emphasi&ed %y the $ay tet presents

Eora)s entry into the room not once, %ut t$ice. Immediately after the

long passage uoted a%ove, the tet says, "It flashed into Eora)s head@

)God, children 'no$ something they can)t tellthey li'e :ed :iding

(ood and the $olf in %edL) But this thought, $hich $as only the

sensation of a thought, $as of %ut a second)s duration as she opened

the door in the net, the doctor had snatched the $ig from his head"

/#3. In the earlier and lengthier representation of Eora)s loo' around

the room, each o%ject in the long list of o%jects is vie$ed as if in a

series of still photographs. The second representation of Eora)s

entrance into the room suggests the actual moment in $hich a

photograph is ta'en@ a one-second duration and a flash, reminiscent of

the one that accompanies the clic'ing of a camera)s shutter.

The jutaposition of Eora)s photographic perception and her em-

%odied, physical entrance into the room /the narrative and visual space

of inversion3, suggests that one element of this visual field)s disorder is

its conflation of the photographic and the haptic, once again modifying

or challenging the "peephole" model of vision. !=The description of the

room)s smell and the sense of intense physical enclosure /emphasi&ed %y

the small %arred $indo$ $hich provides the only ventilation and thecro$ded space $hich allo$s Eora only "to $al' side$ays"3 suggest that

the "inverted" visual field$hich represents and contains the "inverted"

%ody and $hich "turns in" the reader-vie$er from a detached vie$ing

positionalso continually reinscri%es the physical, em%odied nature not

just of the o%ject of vision, %ut the su%ject as $ell, including the su%ject

situated metaphorically at the camera)s vie$finder.

Ob!er"able Space

< contrast very similar to the one $e have %een tracing %et$een

the disem%odied su%ject of "peephole" vision and the em%odied, "in-


13/27

Gallagher 1!

verted" su%ject on the confusing, disordered, visual field of seual inver-

sion occurs in the descriptions of the central relationship in the novel,

that of :o%in and Eora. Before her relationship $ith :o%in shifts the

features of the visual field, Nora i! de!cribed in way! that recall the

!pectatorial !trctre! o# cla!!ical cinema. i'e (edvig, she is

represented as an o%ject of disem%odied, detached, monocular sight@

"There is a gap in )$orld pain) through $hich the singular falls

continually and forever a %ody falling in o%serva%le space, deprived of

the privacy of disappearance as if privacy, moving relentlessly a$ay, %y

the very sustaining po$er of its $ithdra$al 'ept the %ody eternally

moving do$n$ard, %ut in one place, and perpetually %efore the eye.

uch a singular $as Eora" /!3.

i'e the %edroom scenes discussed a%ove, this passage relies on a

series of apposite phrases and relative clauses $hich inscri%e a visual

field %efore arriving at the central figure on that field /"uch a singular

$as Eora"3, although the field in $hich Eora appears is descri%ed in

$holly a%stract terms /$orld pain, o%serva%le space, the po$er of $ith-

dra$al, privacy3 and free of temporal limitations /"continually and for-

ever," "perpetually"3. The o%server or focali&er inscri%ed %y this passage

is once again reminiscent of the vie$er at the peephole@ a

di!embodied% !ingle% atemporal eye be#ore which Nora i!

(perpetally( in "iew$Thi! de!cription o# Nora al!o re!emble! the

cla!!ical cinematic image2a mo"ing image continally be#ore the

eye o# the !pectator who!e ga,e i! aligned with the camera . /< fe$

pages later, the narrative descri%es Eora)s "singular" condition in another

$ay@ "The $orld and its history $ere to Eora li'e a ship in a %ottle sheherself $as outside and unidentified, endlessly em%roiled in a

preoccupation $ithout a pro%lem. Then she met :o%in" /*3. Eora,

previously descri%ed as the image under the classical cinematic ga&e,

no$ occupies the privileged vie$ing position, eternal to the visual field,

"outside and unidentified."3

*on"er!ely% Nora0! two (cinematic( po!ition! are

challenged by her meeting with Robin at a circ! per#ormance /a

shift already signaled %y the sentence, "Then she met :o%in"3@

>Eora? came into the circle of the ring, ta'ing her place in the

front ro$. >...? < girl sitting %eside Eora too' out a cigarette

and lit it. (er hands shoo' and Eora turned to loo' at her


14/27


she loo'ed at her suddenly %ecause the animals,going around

and around the ring, all %ut clim%ed over at that point.They

did not seem to see the girl, %ut as their dusty eyes moved

past, the or%it of their light seemed to turn on her. . . .? Then as one po$erful lioness

came to the turn of the %ars, eactly opposite the girl, she

turned her furious great head $ith its yello$ eyes afire and

$ent do$n, her pa$s thrust through the %ars and, as she re-

garded the girl, as if a river $ere falling %ehind impassa%le

heat, her eyes flo$ed in tears that never reached the surface.


15/27

Gallagher 1*

sual field of the doctor)s room, this circus scene infuses the visual field

$ith the haptic, emphasi&ing the physically em%odied status of the scene)s

"inverted" spectator $ithin a highly constricted visual field.

Their Doble Regard

In its representation of Eora and :o%in)s relationship, Nightwood

restages its struggle $ith the "peephole" model of spectatorship, sug-

gesting that the novel)s critiue of the peephole is significantly compli-

cated %y its representation of les%ian desire. This is seen at the end of

the "Eight Aatch" chapter, $hich descri%es the years Eora and :o%in

live together in !12s 0aris@

oo'ing out into the garden in the faint light of da$n, >Eora?

sa$ a dou%le shado$ falling from the statue, as if it $ere mul-

tiplying, and thin'ing perhaps this $as :o%in, she called and$as not ans$ered. tanding motionless, straining her eyes,

she sa$ emerge from the dar'ness the light of :o%in)s eyes,

the fear in them developing their luminosity until, %y the in-

tensity of their dou%le regard, :o%in)s eyes and hers met. o

they ga&ed at each other. ...? Eora fell to her 'nees, so that her


16/27


eyes $ere not $ithdra$n %y her volition, %ut dropped from their or%it

%y the falling of her %ody" /+73. The %rea'ing of this visual "or%it" does

not rupture the enclosures $hich characteri&e %oth visuality and "inver-

sion" in the novel, %ut instead reinscri%es those enclosures in the %ody

itselfnot any single %ody, %ut rather the anonymous %odies of uniden-

tified $omen@ "he closed her eyes, and at that moment she 'ne$ an

a$ful happiness. :o%in, li'e something dormant, $as protected, moved

out of death)s $ay %y the successive arms of $omen" /+73. The "succes-

sive arms of $omen"the continuing, physical enclosures of les%ian

desire, reminiscent of the concentric circles $hich structure Eora and

:o%in)s meeting at the circus%oth replace and etend the "or%it" of

vision $hich characteri&es the mutual ga&e %et$een these lovers.HHH

The !trctring o# thi! !cene again ca!t! Nora in the

po!ition not only o# the #ocali,er who go"ern! or "iew o# the

in"ert0! body bt al!o a! a photographer o# that body$ Nora0!

violent dropping from the framed visual field and the closing of her

eyes,follo$ed %y the multiple image of :o%in in the successive arms of

$omen $hich move her "out of death)s $ay," metaphorically stages a

photographic event@ the closing of the camera)s shutter $hich %oth

immortali&es and "mortifies" the person photographed. The fact that

Eora is %oth participant in and metaphoric photographer of the scene

she o%serves from the $indo$ once again indicates ho$ Nightwood

challenges the model of the detached vie$er at the peephole or

vie$finder, dra$ing that vie$er into the visual field oc cupied %y the

invert)s %ody.

This passage descri%ing Eora at the $indo$ also evo'es a laterstep in the photographic process@ the reproduction of the image. Ceep-

ing in mind :oland Barthes) o%servation that ">$?hat the 0hotograph

reproduces to infinity has occurred only once the 0hotograph mechani-

cally repeats $hat could never %e repeated eistentially" /73, I suggest

that the imagined "successive arms" can %e read as a tetual analogue to

a photographic reproduction of the image that Eora has seen from the

$indo$an em%race already associated $ith a reproduced image

through the "multiplying" shado$s falling from the statue. (o$ever, this

reproduction is mar'ed %y difference as $ell as %y duplication, as these

are the successive arms of di##erent $omen, reflecting


17/27

Gallagher 1

The notion of a photographic image mar'ed %y %oth duplication

and difference recalls another of Barthes)s assertions a%out photogra -

phy and su%jectivity@ "the 0hotograph is the advent of myself as other"

/!13. < parallel to this conception of the photographic image is evident

in Nightwood in relation to les%ian desire $hen Eora, echoing the lan -

guage of "homoseuality" $ith its emphasis on the sameness of same-

se desire, says of :o%in, "he is myself" /!1#3 and later asserts that ">a?

man is another person a $oman is yourself, caught as you turn in panic

on her mouth you 'iss your o$n" /!7*3. :esponding to the parts of the

novel $hich seem to euate les%ianism $ith narcissism,. . .? the %inary portrait emphasi&ed the

sameness and euality of the t$o individuals portrayed." he claims that

these portraits,moreover,%y %lurring ">s?eual difference,including po$er

differences" /1#3 offered "a visual challenge to heteroseual norms" /1=3.

8astle also notes the presence of "numerous les%ian )adaptations) of the

%inary portrait in the later )12s and )*2s" /*23, such as the !*# Meda!

ion, a dual portrait of the artist and her lover %y the les%ian painter

Gluc' /see cover3. In this painting, the les%ian couple is represented in

overlapping profiles that emphasi&e similarity of facial features and a


18/27

Figure *$

8laude 8ahun, +ue Meeu%!Tu-, !1=. 0rivate 8ollection, 0aris.

shared trajectory of vision. These images enact in visual terms the trend

that


19/27

Gallagher 1#

Figure /$

8laude 8ahun, elf-portrait, !1=. 8ollection 0remiere (eure, t. 8loud, 5rance.

Figure 0$

8laude 8ahun, elf-portrait, !1=. 8ourtesy of the Jersey (eritage Trust.


20/27

1= 6ision and Inversion in Nightwood

trast to the unidentifia%le feminine garment around 8ahun)s mid-torso

and arms. The confusion occasioned %y these self-portraits is dou%led in

"+ue me veu%!tu-" $here the t$o figures are placed $ithin the same

frame so as to appear to %e in intimate dialogue and physical contact

through the reversing or inverting of one image and the tilting of the

other. The title, $ith its t$o pronouns, and the t$o heads in the image

suggest t$o separate figures and t$o separate individuals, $hile the over -

lapping and merging of the figures at shoulder level suggest a single shared

%ody in the space %eneath the lo$er edge of the frame. The dou%ling

and inversionthe literal inverting or turning of images of this am%igu-

ously gendered figurethat structure this photomontage are intensi-

fied yet again in a !1!*2 photomontage /fig. 73 made %y 8ahun and

her lover and stepsister 4oore /u&anne 4alher%e3, $hich reuses and

again inverts /%y turning upside-do$n3 the dou%le image of "Nue me

veu-tuH"17

8ahun)s photographs and the Nightwood passage descri%ing Eora

at the $indo$ are %oth engaged in revising the "shape of the peephole."

They also $or' to revise our understanding of les%ian desire in the age

of mechanical reproduction. The play of dou%ling, inversion, sameness,

and difference that characteri&es 8ahun)s images offers a strong visual

parallel to Nightwood's metaphoric association of les%ian desire $ith a

form of photographic reproduction mar'ed %y %oth duplication and dif-

ference. 4oreover, %oth Eora and 8ahun can %e read as photographers

$hose images not only represent the les%ian %ody %ut also depend on

the 'ind of visual inversion I have %een associating $ith Barnes)s critiue

of the "peephole" model of vision. Both 8ahun and Eora occupy posi-tions simultaneously outside and inside the visual field@ 8ahun through

the self-portraiture that places heron either side ofthevie$finderEora

through the intense mutual ga&e she shares $ith :o%in that renders her

%oth spectator and participant. Both as' us to imagine a photographic

order in $hich the vie$er is %oth at the peephole or vie$finder and

occupying a position $ithin the visual field under o%servation.

To$ard the end of Nightwood, Dr. )8onnor articulates a meta-

phor for the tet)s response to modern visuality@ " ) I f you really $ant to

'no$ ho$ hard a pri&efighter hits,) he said, loo'ing around, )you have got

to $al' into the circle of his fury and %e carried out %y the heels, not %y

the count)" /!=3.


21/27

Gallagher 1

Figure 1$

8laude 8ahun and 4oore, 8ollage from2veu% non avenus, !1-*2. 0late I6. Fditions du

8arrefour, 0aris.

$ant to 'no$ ho$ hard a pri&efighter hits,ou must not be a (ri3e#ighter,

you must $al' into the circle of his fury as an onoo4er, and get carried

out %y the heels, not %y the count" /td. in 0lum% 1++ emphasis added3.

The deleted phrases emphasi&e ho$ Nightwood as's visual outsiders or

"onloo'ers" to a%andon their detached, voyeuristic position at the "peep-

hole" to enter a circumscri%ed, often menacing or distur%ing visual fieldand there%y to enter the ueer spaces of modernist visuality.1

Note!

!.


22/27

*22 6ision and Inversion in Nightwood

0$ n theories of "seual inversion," see ymonds Fllis !-1 8hauncey ! !+

8alhoun 11*-17 5aderman 17*6icinus 7=2-=!.

1$ By "apphic 4odernism," I mean a modernist art practice that not only

represents aspects of les%ian erotics %ut also is formally or structurally

impacted %y that representation. It is an art $hich is, as Fric 8arlstonputs it, "hypersensitiv>e? to seuality in, and as, the aesthetic and the po

litical" /+3. ee Benstoc' !=*-= !+-# and 8arlston +-.

5$ The li%eratory model $hich denigrates the mastering eye and the struc

tures of the 0latonic eidos may %e traced %ac' to the $riting of (enri

Bergson, $hom 4artin Jay identifies as "the first modern philosopher

any$here to dispute the no%ility of sight" /!=+3.

6$ 8hisholm finds an analogous suspicion in Barnes)s resistance to "the ten

dency that animated her ama&onian contemporaries to ela%orate and

glorify )inversion) instead, she flaunts a ueer scepticism concerning seual

li%eration and its %ohemian milieu" /!#+3.

7$ ee the introduction to Downcast &es$

8$


23/27

Gallagher *2!

is no focali&ing or focali&ed character@ #ocai3ed can %e applied only to the

narrative itself" /#*3. Genette)s definition of "focali&ation" is, unli'e Bal)s,

not concerned $ith the representation of visual eperience, although he

does use the visual metaphor of the "field" to define the concept@ "%y

focali&ation I certainly mean a restriction of)field)actually, that is, a se-lection of narrative information $ith respect to $hat $as traditionally

called omniscience" /#73.

!7.


24/27


11. If :o%in is rendered as a cinematic image, her loo' at Eora here recalls

not so much the "classical" film actor as the actor of "primitive" or early

cinema, $ho often loo'ed %ac' at the spectator. ee Gunning += and

(ansen *#.

1*. 5or other discussions of "mirroring" and "dou%ling" in 8ahun)s photographs and in her $ritten $or', see 8a$s -! ! Crauss 172

ichtenstein Dean asalle and olomon-Godeau.

17. 8ahun)s familiarity $ith seology and $ith the voca%ulary of "inversion"

is evidenced %y the fact that she translated into 5rench one of (aveloc'

Fllis)s essays on female seuality /"a femme dans la sociKtK," Mercure de

France, !1 cited in creen.;eading Broust6isually.Trans.


25/27

Gallagher *2*

---------. "The ongs of ynge." NewCor4 MorningTeegra(h >unda Maga3ine$

!= 5e%. !!#@=.

Barthes, :oland. ?amera :ucida.;e#ections on Bhotogra(h$Trans$ :ichard (o$ard.

Ee$or'@ 5arrar, !=!.

Benstoc', hari. "Fpatriate apphic 4odernism@ Fntering iterary (istory.":esbian Te%ts and ?onte%ts. ;adica ;evisions$ Fd. Carla Jay and Joanne

Glasgo$. Ee$or'@ Ee$or' ;0, !2. !=*-12*.

Boone, Joseph e%uait and the >ha(ing o# Modernism$

8hicago@ ; 8hicago : !=.

Brennan,Theresa,and 4artin Jay, eds. ision in ?onte%t. Historica and ?ontem(o!

rar Bers(ectives on >ight$ Ee$or'@ :outledge, !+.

Broe, 4ary ynn, ed. >ience and Bower. 2 ;eevauation o# Duna @arnes$

8ar%ondale@ outhern Illinois ;0, !!.

Bryson, Eorman. "The Ga&e in the Fpanded 5ield." ision andisuait$ Fd. (al

5oster. eattle@ Bay, !==.=+-!2=.

Bryson, Eorman, 4ichael mboic 2ction. &ssas on :i#e, :iterature,

and Method$ Ber'eley@ ; 8alifornia : !++.172-*.

8alhoun, 8hesire. "The Gender 8loset@ es%ian Disappearance ;nder the

ign )Aomen.)" :esbian >ubects$Fd. 4artha6icinus. Bloomington@ Illinois

;0, !+.12-*1.

8arlston, Frin G. Thin4ing Fascism. >a((hic Modernism and Fascist Modernit$

tanford@ tanford ;0, !=.

8astle,Terry. NoE ?oward and ;adc##e Ha. indred >(irits$ Ee$or'@ 8olum-

%ia ;0, !+.

8a$s, 4ary urreaist :oo4$ 8am%ridge, 4amagundi =-/!=1-!=*3@ !!7-7+.

8hisholm, Dianne. "%scene 4odernism@ &ros Noir and the 0rofane Illumina-

tion of Djuna Barnes."2merican :iterature +.! /!#3@ !+#-12+.

8ollecott, Diana. "Ahat Is Eot aid@ < tudy in Tetual Inversion." e and

>ameness.Te%tua Di##erences in :esbian and GaWriting$ Fd.Joseph Bristo$.

Ee$or'@ :outledge, !1. !-! !2.

Dean, 8arolyn. "8laude 8ahun)s Dou%le." Cae French >tudies 2 /!+3@ #!-

1.

Fllis, (aveloc'. "eual Inversion." >tudies in the Bschoog o# >e%$ 6ol. !. !=#.

Ee$or'@ :andom, !71.

5aderman, illian. >ur(assing the :ove o# Men. ;omantic Friendshi( and :ove @e!

tween Women #rom the ;enaissance to the Bresent$ Ee$ or'@ Ailliam

4orro$, !=!.


26/27


"5ield." Def. !* !*a !*% !+ and !+%. ?om(act &dition o# the O%#ord &ngish

Dictionar$ !#!.

5isher, Jennifer. "(aptic ense and ensi%ility in the 6isual ient Fim$ 8am-

%ridge, 4te 1+.1 /!13@ *!2-1+.

0lum%, 8heryl, ed. Nightwood.The Origina ersion and ;eated Dra#ts$ By Djuna

Barnes. Eormal@ Dal'ey e%oog in ?uture.:abeing @odies and

Desires$ Fd. ucy Bland and aura Doan. 8hicago@ ; 8hicago 0, !=.

!!+-*!.

:ose,Jacueline. >e%uait in the Fied o#ision$ Ee$or'@6erso, !=+.

edg$ic', Fve Cosofs'y. &(istemoog o# the ?oset$ Ber'eley@ ; 8alifornia 0,

!2.


27/27

Gallagher *2

ilverman, Caja. The Threshod o# the isibe Word$ Ee$ or'@ :outledge, !+.

ymonds,John e%ua Inversion$ !=+. Ee$ or'@ Benjamin Blom, !#!.

6icinus, 4artha. "They Aonder to Ahich e I Belong@The (istorical :oots

of the 4odern es%ian Identity." Feminist >tudies !=@* /!13@ 7+#-#.Ain'iel, aura. "8ircuses and pectacles@ 0u%lic 8ulture in Nightwood$" ourna

o# Modern :iterature 1!. ! /!#3@ #-1=.

vision and inversion nightwood

Documents