 |
|||||||
INVERTED IMAGES |
|||||||
An investigation of the lesbian identity through visual and cultural representation |
|||||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
power was synonymous with masculinity, using the only terminology available to her. She was concerned enough to write to Magnus Hirschfeld, a sexologist, giving an account of herself as a ‘contrasexual’ (ibid, p. 49) and, examining this barest of biographies in conjunction with her appearance in fig. 2 (below), it is apparent that she was supplying Hirschfeld with some of the elements of what came to be known as the mannish lesbian. In the photograph, she is dressed in trousers and smock, the common garb of a male artist, whilst her stance is open and masculine with legs spread and head held high with a direct gaze instead of the more submissive downward gaze associated with women. |
WORDS PICTURES |
||||||
 |
||||||||
From Romantic Friendship to Sexual Inversion The earliest visual representations I could find of women in intimate poses were paintings such as Le Sommeil by Gustave Courbet (fig. 1, above) suggesting that they were of the erotic oeuvre, and produced for the edification of the male viewer and not an indication of a specific identity ascribed to women. The first recorded indications of lesbian couples were possibly in the concept of the ‘romantic friendships’ of the early nineteenth century – women living in same-sex(ual) relationships, known to a small circle of family and friends and living unassuming lives. Such a woman was Rosa Bonheur (1822-1899), a French artist who became very wealthy as a result of her skill in painting animals. Bonheur had been raised in the traditions of Saint-Simonism, which ‘espoused the emancipation of women and the overcoming of traditional sex roles’ and ‘bought her own property, wore male attire and settled down to a life-long relationship with a woman, referring to herself as “the husband” and her friend as the wife” ’ (Cooper, 1994, p. 47). Her ‘wife’s’ mother lived with them for many years and so an air of respectability was maintained and more overt comments avoided. Bonheur’s status enabled her to dismiss any gossip as the chattering of ‘silly, ignorant, low-minded people’ (ibid, p. 48). Bonheur explained her masculine clothing as necessary for her work and to prevent molestation as she went about the city. She seldom wore a skirt and saw herself as ‘a member of the “third sex”, as some sort of “masculinised” woman, a sexual neuter, perceiving herself very much in androgynous terms’ (ibid, p. 49). In the middle 1800s, in the Western World, our male-controlled and ordered society barred women from voting, holding positions of authority or decision-making in affairs of state. Bonheur, with her great wealth and many awards, was a powerful female figure in mid-eighteenth century France and these conflicting descriptions of herself would indicate that she was trying to find a way of fitting in to the patriarchal society, where |
||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|