Register to read the introduction…
At the start of the review Carter describes Lovelace´s fame as a result of the “demands of a society that uses libidinal gratification as a soporific in a time of potential social disruption”. From the outset of this review Carter´s negativity towards “our Lady of Hard-Core Porn”, is evident, so what is different about Linda Lovelace and the content of her own works that attracts so much argument regarding its pornographic nature? In her review she goes on to remark that “libidinal gratification” is now unlimited but that this has changed as a result of society changing as in short that although we are sexually free now it is only because society says so, which means that if we have to wait for society´s permission we still are not free, (Angela Carter, Shaking a Leg 54). This oppression of women is one of the most commonly debated aspects of pornography. The debate develops into deciding what pornography is and what is erotica, the difference being (if one uses Gloria Steinem´s definition as example), that erotica is “mutually pleasurable, sexual expression between people who have enough power to be there by positive choice”, (qtd. by Sheets 637). Although Linda Lovelace claims sexual freedom and wants to be equal in bed, Carter makes sure to point out that the sexual acts that Lovelace boasts about being able to do with her mouth and her vagina she has learned from a man, Chuck, (Carter, Shaking a Leg 54). In turn when one compares this oppression to “The Bloody Chamber” one can see that indeed there are some obvious examples of masochism, one of which being when the narrator describes having sex as being “impaled”, (Angela Carter, Burning Your Boats, 121) by her husband. Indeed the whole story up
…show more content…
For example, the story of “The Lady of the House of Love” shows the inversion of the Bluebeard character. Who can mistake the gothic tropes used to portray the female vampire as a male. The teeth of the vampire which would penetrate the virgin boy, but yet there is still an element of desire for the vampire and in order to obtain that she must pay a price. Makinen argues that rather than being against or for pornography, Carter aims to portray a wider incorporation of female sexuality, and use “feminism to challenge sexist constructions”, (Makinen 25). This, it could be argued, is why the book starts with an obvious description of female oppression. At the same time however, one also has to keep in mind the variations to the original Bluebeard story that Carter has included. The mother who saves the day, the second husband who is gentle and kind and also the protagonist being the narrator herself, are what Sheets describes as Carter “writing against the interpretive tradition that emphasizes the wife´s sexual curiosity”, (Sheets
For example, the story of “The Lady of the House of Love” shows the inversion of the Bluebeard character. Who can mistake the gothic tropes used to portray the female vampire as a male. The teeth of the vampire which would penetrate the virgin boy, but yet there is still an element of desire for the vampire and in order to obtain that she must pay a price. Makinen argues that rather than being against or for pornography, Carter aims to portray a wider incorporation of female sexuality, and use “feminism to challenge sexist constructions”, (Makinen 25). This, it could be argued, is why the book starts with an obvious description of female oppression. At the same time however, one also has to keep in mind the variations to the original Bluebeard story that Carter has included. The mother who saves the day, the second husband who is gentle and kind and also the protagonist being the narrator herself, are what Sheets describes as Carter “writing against the interpretive tradition that emphasizes the wife´s sexual curiosity”, (Sheets