The fashion for self-identification -- or self-labeling --
is fairly new. We're gay, straight, bi, soccer-mom, bobo, sub, GenX, millennial,
geek, jock, liberal, conservative, religious, dog-person, cat-person hipster Team-Edward nerds. We collect labels, arrange them all around ourselves, and then tell the rest
of the world, "Hey, this is what I am. Deal with it." Kind of
liberating, yeah? Our ancestors were not so lucky.
Don't get me wrong, people in the 18th and early 19th
centuries got labels slapped on them all the time -- sans culottes, provincial,
wife, aristocrat, artisan, journeyman, beggar, whore. They rarely sought out
labels, though, because their labels came with a burden of responsibility, an
expectation of behavior that was rarely liberating. Sometimes the weight of that burden convinced people with homosexual preferences
to marry and beget children despite their nature. Sometimes it caused them to
hide who they were and what they wanted.
Case in point: In 1631, the second Earl of Castlehaven was tried and beheaded for sodomy. Not because he was frolicking with another man -- though that was the superficial reason, loads of gentlemen did as much without being prosecuted for it -- but because he failed, spectacularly and publicly, in his responsibilities as head of family. He not only failed to keep his own liaisons discrete but also to control the behavior of his wife and children and other dependents. He would have described himself, not as a gay man, but as a head of house, an earl, and that label was neither liberating nor empowering. It shackled and ultimately defeated him.
Case in point: In 1631, the second Earl of Castlehaven was tried and beheaded for sodomy. Not because he was frolicking with another man -- though that was the superficial reason, loads of gentlemen did as much without being prosecuted for it -- but because he failed, spectacularly and publicly, in his responsibilities as head of family. He not only failed to keep his own liaisons discrete but also to control the behavior of his wife and children and other dependents. He would have described himself, not as a gay man, but as a head of house, an earl, and that label was neither liberating nor empowering. It shackled and ultimately defeated him.
In the soon-to-be-released story "Sophie's Rogues" --
co-written by Christa Paige and Vivien Jackson -- all three of the characters in the ménage are struggling
with the challenges of satisfying their personal needs within the limitations
of their labels. Sophie is a widow, Edward has just inherited a barony,
and Sebastian is a powerful marquess. These are the labels that, in their
society, are supposed to inform all of their desires and ambitions. Unfortunately for
them, their desire for each other is just too damn strong.
Oh, and the story-specific answer to the pop quiz question -- How would the characters in SOPHIE'S ROGUES self-identify in 21st-century parlance? Well, Edward would probably
call himself conflicted. Sebastian would call himself Master. And with both of those gentlemen lounging mostly naked in her boudoir, Sophie would call
herself one
lucky bitch.
~ Coming 1 September 2012 ~
--
Image from iStockphoto. Cover image belongs to Harlequin Spice Briefs. Both used with permission.
Posts
2 comments:
Love the way you tied all this into Sophie's Rogues. She is a lucky lady for sure. I wonder if those self-imposed titles would change after the story ends and life carries on.
Ooooh... you stop tickling the muse now, y'hear? *grin*
Post a Comment