Oops, you've already addressed my last question. It sounds interesting.
Could you say a bit more?
>From: "Michaela Giesenkirchen" <mgiesenk@artsci.wustl.edu>
>Reply-To: stein-l@ucdavis.edu
>To: <stein-l@ucdavis.edu>
>Subject: Re: Lifting Belly
>Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 18:32:12 -0600
>
>Yes, that's right. I guess that was a little opaque.
>
>Michaela
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Jo Maddux <JoM@pacmed.org>
>To: <stein-l@ucdavis.edu>
>Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 5:36 PM
>Subject: RE: Lifting Belly
>
>
> > >constantly endeavors to let her autobiography be written by the
>language
> > itself<
> >
> > Do you mean . . . by the way (or ways) in which she uses language . . .
> > rather than what the language may or may not be referring to? jO
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michaela Giesenkirchen [mailto:mgiesenk@artsci.wustl.edu]
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 3:12 PM
> > To: stein-l@ucdavis.edu
> > Subject: Re: Lifting Belly
> >
> >
> > Hm, dear Helen, I am not so sure about the non-existent interiority.
>This
> > is almost to say that Stein's text is empty of meaning. It undermines
> > referentiality, yes, but it still means. The shared cultural knowledge
>is
> > language and the ways in which it experiences. Anyone who has done
> > biographical research on Stein has the opportunity to recognize how
>Stein
> > constantly endeavors to let her autobiography be written by the language
> > itself.
> >
> > Michaela Giesenkirchen
> > --
> >
> >
> > > From: "helen king" <ms_myrnaminkoff@hotmail.com>
> > > Reply-To: stein-l@ucdavis.edu
> > > Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 22:36:42 +0000
> > > To: stein-l@ucdavis.edu
> > > Subject: Re: Lifting Belly
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Although it is virtually impossible not to do so (and in many ways
> > > anticipated by the text),I have always suspected that in attempting to
> > read
> > > _Lifting Belly_ as a love-poem to be deciphered and decoded, we are
> > falling
> > > for Stein's joke. Unlike much of her work, Lifting Belly seems to me
>to
> > > explicitly set up the idea of an external reality, constructed as a
>kind
> > of
> > > love-poem between two (?) conspiring individuals, it is littered with
> > > innuendo and nuance - absolute referential qualities - to which the
>reader
> > > ultimately has no access, and which ultimately doesnt exist. Reading
>it
> > > feels like doubling back on Stein's work, like being urged once more
>to
> > > enter into an interpretative mode and de-code the 'secrets' embedded
>in
> > the
> > > text, only to be defeated by the robust impenetrability of its
>surface.
> > Just
> > > like _Tender Buttons_ there is no way in which meaning can be
>extracted
> > and
> > > fixed, but unlike _Tender Buttons_, _Lifting Belly_ consistently
>gestures
> > > towards its own, non-existent, interiority. Peter Quatermain was
>really
> > > interesting on _Lifting Belly_ , saying that Stein's strategy here
> > > 'radically emphasises the reader's sense of the poem's referentiality
> > while
> > > rendering the precise nature of the reference irrelevant' (the reader
>is
> > not
> > > invited to, and cannot, draw on any shared cultural knowledge in order
>to
> > > access the text-hence our problems with 'Cow' and 'Caesar'- there is
>no
> > > assumed knowledge). I always get the sense that Stein would find my
> > attempts
> > > to work out what 'cow' referred to very funny, but also that it is
>just
> > that
> > > defiant, mischievous aspect of the poem (and the reader's inevitable
> > attempt
> > > to wrestle meaning out of it) that gives the text its inherent
>dynamism.
> > >
> > >> From: Ryan Jerving <jerving@Bilkent.EDU.TR>
> > >> Reply-To: stein-l@ucdavis.edu
> > >> To: stein-l@ucdavis.edu
> > >> Subject: Re: Lifting Belly
> > >> Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 12:33:35 +0200 (EET)
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> In _Lifting Belly_, as elsewhere in Stein, the key words can be
>inflected
> > >> in multiple and intersecting ways. I'd certainly agree with Renate
> > >> Stendahl's explanation (and with the others on this list who've
>responded
> > >> to this topic so far) that _Lifting Belly_ is a celebration of
>Stein's
> > >> relationship with Toklas and a poem that is very orgasmic in both its
> > >> referents and its exhuberant form--an extension of the "This Is This
> > >> Dress, Aider" poem that ends the "Objects" section of _Tender
>Buttons_:
> > >> "Aider, why aider why whow, whow stop touch, aider whow, aider stop
>the
> > >> muncher, muncher munchers."
> > >>
> > >> But what do we do with the other, rather obvious, ways that a lot of
>the
> > >> language in _Lifting Belly_, and in the other passages cited by
>Stendahl,
> > >> points to pregnancy? The title, of course: a pregnant belly "lifts,"
>and
> > >> it "grows and it [the belly] grows where it [what's inside it]
>grows,"
>it
> > >> fills it "full of filling." "Cow" also has this connotation of child
> > >> bearing--though this is trickier, since sometimes the referent of
>"cow"
> > >> seems to slip sometimes into meaning the offspring: the thing a
>"wife"
> > has
> > >> when she "has a cow" (in the Bart Simpson sense). "Caesar" in this
> > >> reading, of course, calls up "caesarian section": "And where does it
>come
> > >> out of. It comes out of the way of the Caesars...And the cow comes
>out
> > >> of the door."
> > >>
> > >> Now I don't think we'd want to put any of this down to some kind of
> > >> celebration of compulsory heterosexuality for the sake of species
> > >> propogation, unless terribly ironic. Or, unless this level of
>reference
> > >> is designed to register in some other-than-literal way: for example,
>to
> > >> displace the gendered expectations placed on women to be generative
>onto
> > >> the field of language itself where generation (of words, sentences,
> > >> paragraphs) is not so inflexibly linked to gender (on even to a
> > >> necessary self-identical subject--the grammar itself supplies the
> > >> generative force).
> > >>
> > >> This is definitely out of my usual critical territory, but I seem to
> > >> recall Kristeva having written something on the issue of pregnancy
>and
> > >> women's writing that may be useful here. Does anyone have any
> > >> suggestions?
> > >>
> > >> Ryan Jerving
> > >> Department of American Culture and Literature
> > >> Bilkent University
> > >> Ankara, Turkey
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, jessicalee wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> This is an excerpt from Renate Stendhal's introduction to
> > >>> _Gertrude Stein In Words and Pictures_. I'm not sure how
> > >>> much it will help, but the explanation of terms follows
> > >>> what was said about "Caesar.":
> > >>>
> > >>> "There certainly is ample evidence in Stein's writing that
> > >>> she pleased herself in the sexual role of the 'husband."
> > >>> But this is a husband whose 'wife has a cow.'...The term
> > >>> 'cow' covers a whole range of taboo topics ('sacred cows')
> > >>> of traditional writing: female sexual organs, desire, and
> > >>> above all orgasm. For example: 'Cows are very nice. They
> > >>> are between legs' ('All Sunday'); 'Yes tenderness grows and
> > >>> it grows where it grows. And do you like it. Yes you do.
> > >>> And does it fill a cow full of filling. Yes. And where
> > >>> does it come out of. It comes out of the way of the
> > >>> Caesars...And the cow comes out of the door. Do you adore
> > >>> me. When this you see remember me' ('A Sonatina Followed by
> > >>> Another'). The romance clearly is of a bodily, orgasmic
> > >>> nature. Pleasing Alice seems to have been a prime concern
> > >>> of 'husband' Stein: 'Have Caesars a duty. Yes their duty is
> > >>> to a cow. Will they do their duty by the cow. Yes now and
> > >>> with pleasure.' ('A Sonatina'). A line in 'Lifting Belly'
> > >>> ironically demands, 'Husband obey your wife.' Role-play and
> > >>> role reversal should not be confused with fixed gender
> > >>> stereotypes. If patriarchal patterns are played out, they
> > >>> are played out with gusto, ad absurdum."
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --- "lou L." <ladylouba@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Although, I am a die hard Gertrude Stein fan. This poem
> > >>>> is one I can not
> > >>>> quite grasp. I can honestly say, I do not know what is
> > >>>> going on-
> > >>>> What about Caesars? What does the cow signify? I have
> > >>>> read it about five
> > >>>> times in the last month. I found it's tone to be one of
> > >>>> playful domestic
> > >>>> bliss, but I can not figure out the underlining meanings
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Looking for feedback ideas and explanations
> > >>>>
> > >>>> thanks!
> > >>>> Ladylouba@hotmail.com
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>> _________________________________________________________________
> > >>>> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your
> > >>>> photos:
> > >>>> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> __________________________________________________
> > >>> Do You Yahoo!?
> > >>> Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!
> > >>> http://greetings.yahoo.com
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 06 2002 - 16:49:27 PST