[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

RARA-AVIS: Red Wind: homoerotics & other readings 

There's some interesting stuff coming out of the 'Red Wind' thread, 
though I hope that traffic will not concentrate on commenting on my 
suggested reading to the neglect of other areas.
Apologies too for the line wrap!  
Dunno what happened---I'll hit return more.
That said, I'd like to respond to some points made in the last digest:

On  Thu, 29 May 1997, Jerry Silverman <silvrmn@enteract.com> wrote: 

[SNIP]
>has "a string of pearls" always had an alternative masturbatory meaning?  
>Or is this relatively recent (or more recent than "Red Wind")?  

AFAIK, 'string of pearls' isn't a phrase used to describe masturbation.

Roger Dowdy <dowdy@ix.netcom.com> wrote:

>Sorry. Perhaps I have blinders on but I just not seeing it.  

This is how I read the closing scene {yes, it is quite 
subjective and interpretive, but hey---that's reading):

Dalmas goes to sit on his rock and slips the pears off the string, 
then he recalls:

'I flipped her pearls out into the water one by one'

The implied motion, of a hand and arm moving back and forth, 
tossing the pearls 'one by one', suggests a motion not dissimilar to 
that of solo male masturbation.

The, uh, icing on the cake, so to speak, is the continuous plip-plip 
of the pearls arcing out of Dalmas's hand into the sea.  The colour 
and trajectory of the pearls is, I would suggest, evocative of ejaculatory 
spurts of semen.

While this symbolic 'wank' is taking place, Dalmas is, he tells us, 
thinking of Stan Phillips---he even utters his Phillip's name aloud as 
the 'pearls' begin to fly.

Meanwhile, michael d sharp wrote:

> What Chandler's stories demonstrate (duggan may have said this in
>other words) is the homoerotics of conventional, heterosexual masculinity.

I didn't <I wish I had though> --- but it's a point well made.  I think I
came 
across a similar point in reading about pornography: 'straight' males can 
'check out' other in males in pornography, while their homerotic fears are 
allayed by the female presence.

Though "H. Curtiss Leung" <hleung@prolifics.com> has me bang to rights:

>OK...but this line of reasoning seems to simply replace "intention" 
>with "libido"  within the same interpretative scheme; it still
hypostatizes an
>aspect of meaning.  

Indeedy --- but imo it's fun/rewarding/pleasantly polyvalent to 'open up' 
texts and 
look at a range of possible meanings.  The meanings and interstices of
meaning 
might tell us more about the *readers* than the text, but readings are
negotiated, 
I would maintain, between the terms  reader::text::context.

So while I'm glad Curtiss agrees that :
 
>There's no denying the erotic and homoerotic aspects of Chandler's prose
[...] 

Sure, it's one way to read Chandler, albeit narrow, speculative and tending

toward biographical/freudian

> but they're not its "foundation."  

Well, I don't know about this 'foundation' stuff---that takes us back to
intention.
BTW, the suggestions to look to _TLG_ might be followed bearing in mind
that
this _TLG_ was written much later (1953) than the other novels; AFAIK, it
wasn't 
'cannibalised' and, by this time, RC was aware that there was some
'criticism' 
of Marlowe as being a bit 'faggy' [the term is mine]  I don't have specific
references
to hand, but I think I can dig some out if anyone wants to follow it up.  
[Critics which *do* come to mind who have commented upon Marlowe's
sexuality 
are Gershon Legmon <sp?> and Peter Wolfe.  MacShane meanwhile is an avowed 
heterosexist reader of Chandler]
 
But that's enough of that.

There are *other ways* we might also look at 'Red Wind'---frinstance,
someone
has already mentioned 'canibalisation' {RC reworked his short stories, or
bits of
them, into novels).  There is also *plot* --- generally not RC's strong
point --- and
language, which is often self-conscious, parodic and fun.
Any takers? 

Eddie Duggan
-
# RARA-AVIS:  To unsubscribe, say "unsubscribe rara-avis"
# to majordomo@icomm.ca

[Archives] | [RARA-AVIS]