FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2000431567> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2000431567 endingPage "70" @default.
• W2000431567 startingPage "53" @default.
• W2000431567 abstract "Redeeming Beggary/Buggery in Michaelmas Term Theodore B. Leinwand Citing the work of Alan Bray, Stephen Orgel argues that in Renaissance England a sodomitical subject was inconceivable: “Charges of sodomy always occur in relation to other kinds of subversion: the activity has no independent existence in the Renaissance mind, just as there is no separate category of the homosexual. It becomes visible in Elizabethan society only when it intersects with some other behavior that is recognized as dangerous and antisocial; it is invariably an aspect of atheism, papistry, sedition, witchcraft.” 1 But recently it has been asked whether the “rhetoric of the stigmatized sodomite is fully inscriptive,” whether a sodomitical subject might not be identifiable in Renaissance England after all. 2 Identifiable at least in texts in Renaissance England, where, while we may not locate an “actual sodomite,” we may find “a delineation of the conditions for his existence” — we may reveal the “possibility of the sodomite.” 3 Identifiable, that is, in “poetic discourse” in which “we recognize a potential for erotic feeling in male relationships” and in which “we are invited to feel... the possibility of a homosexual subjectivity.” 4 Or identifiable “in life, in letters — as a marginal site, the ‘place’ of the exorbitant méconnaissance,” the “ (no) place of homosexuality” Jonathan Goldberg opens up in Spenser’s January eclogue as well as his letters to and from Gabriel Harvey. 5 I begin with these distinct claims and possibilities because I think that sodomy and sodomitical discourse in Thomas Middleton’s Michaelmas Term (1605) are situated either somewhere or seemingly everywhere in between them. Put schematically, and so reductively, it is impossible to say where infractions of social decorum and a dark rendering of incipient capitalism leave off and where sodomy begins. Michaelmas Term tests Orgel’s conviction that Puritans first must have known the theater to be dangerous before they could or would have associated it with the promotion of sodomy. 6 The trajectory of socio-sexual relations does not necessarily commence with status inversion or atheism or financial corruption in order that it may arrive at the sodomitical; it might arc in the opposite direction, it might wander, or it might even be interrupted (moving first in one direction, then reversing direction any number of times). I can restate this in terms applicable to what transpires in Michaelmas Term by [End Page 53] posing the questions, does an already constituted sodomitical culture produce its commodity scam-inspired version of a bed trick, does the scam admit sodomy (merely) as its means, or are they at least intermittently disjunct? Does buggery produce beggary, beggary buggery, can we tell, or is causality, priority — even relationship — impossible to establish? To my mind, Michaelmas Term stages a historical conjuncture at which no necessary, or wholly naturalized, relation between sodomy and stigma prevails. The play indicates that in some instances, homosocial relations in Jacobean London may have been founded upon, at the very least may not have been antipathetic to, homoeroticism. Because I take Middleton’s “beggary” to be a double entendre, I may appear to be sighting along some base line linguistic level, arguing that “beggary” is prior to, causes, or insinuates buggery. 7 But I can identify this particular word play only if I have already imagined a sodomitical ecology within which it may thrive. Word play depends upon some such acknowledgment; indeed, language makes possible only what that which is already expressed in language makes possible for it. In Michaelmas Term, one such “that” is sodomy. A seemingly conventional city comedy plot is interlaced with doubles entendres which, when activated, seem to replot the play sodomitically. The “sexual reference” that R. B. Parker finds so “absolutely pervasive” in Middleton is the transfer point (the switch) at which beggary becomes buggery. 8 And that which effects the transfer (or flips the switch) is an audience’s acknowledgment of sodomitical behavior. But doubles entendres can only trigger sodomitical reference if they are first recognized as doubles entendres. It would seem, then, that the prior possibility of sodomitical reference activates the buggery in beggary. 9 The mere possibility of such sodomitical reference in Michaelmas Term becomes probability when we recognize that..." @default.
• W2000431567 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2000431567 creator A5009158727 @default.
• W2000431567 date "1994-01-01" @default.
• W2000431567 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2000431567 title "Redeeming beggary/buggery in Michaelmas Term" @default.
• W2000431567 cites W1494782575 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W1538542877 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W1561902222 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W1563433624 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W1585976992 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W1972373359 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W1996971668 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2000444668 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2004340813 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2007512889 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2019697822 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2021679844 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2033503866 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2035189582 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2035267794 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2043366687 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2044503738 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2052458942 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2070488390 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2071656243 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2082284386 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2083312048 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2160901290 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2164321996 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2318076551 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2326746275 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W2328716526 @default.
• W2000431567 cites W653091613 @default.
• W2000431567 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/elh.1994.0005" @default.
• W2000431567 hasPublicationYear "1994" @default.
• W2000431567 type Work @default.
• W2000431567 sameAs 2000431567 @default.
• W2000431567 citedByCount "23" @default.
• W2000431567 countsByYear W20004315672017 @default.
• W2000431567 countsByYear W20004315672020 @default.
• W2000431567 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2000431567 hasAuthorship W2000431567A5009158727 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C107993555 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C11171543 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C1370556 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C161191863 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C202889954 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C25343380 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C27206212 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C2776001192 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C2777367489 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C2777855551 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C2779750976 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C52069626 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C52119013 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C77088390 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C107993555 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C111472728 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C11171543 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C124952713 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C1370556 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C138885662 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C142362112 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C144024400 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C15744967 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C161191863 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C17744445 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C199539241 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C202889954 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C25343380 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C27206212 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C2776001192 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C2777367489 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C2777855551 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C2779750976 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C41008148 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C52069626 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C52119013 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C77088390 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C94625758 @default.
• W2000431567 hasConceptScore W2000431567C95457728 @default.
• W2000431567 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2000431567 hasLocation W20004315671 @default.
• W2000431567 hasOpenAccess W2000431567 @default.
• W2000431567 hasPrimaryLocation W20004315671 @default.
• W2000431567 hasRelatedWork W1500837116 @default.

• next