Hence the phrasing ostensibly non-sexual! At least, as I understand it. This isn’t precisely one of my areas of expertise – though I’ve been attempting to read up on Elizabethan conceptions of sexuality and gender lately. (It’s pertinent to me as a drama specialist – for instance, how were theater audiences expected to react to the boy actors playing women? That’s a matter of considerable scholarly debate.)
Part of the confusion, too, stems from the influence of classical literature and ideas in Renaissance culture…
BTW, my favorite of Shakespeare’s sonnets is the one that starts What is your substance, whereof are you made… That one has some interesting gender stuff in it too:
Describe Adonis, and the counterfeit
Is poorly imitated after you;
On Helen’s cheek all art of beauty set
And you in Grecian tires are painted new…
(Also, Potter, I’m not sure I see the “intimations of bed-sharing” in the Sonnets – the jealousy, I’ll agree to, certainly – but that’s more of a hijack than I’m willing to countenance. Perhaps I should start a new thread on Shakespeare’s Sonnets? Then, too, though, I don’t have my copy at hand…)
[biographical nitpick]Oscar had two children from his marriage to Constance, but that’s not necessarily proof that he was “happily married.” What’s more likely is he tried to be “straight” to conform with Victorian appearances of respectability. I’ve known several gay men, including close friends and a member of my family, who in their younger days attempted romantic relationships with women, mainly because they thought it would please their family’s expectations of them. They did so, however, only by repressing their preferences for men.
In Oscar’s case, he was unable to keep his preferences repressed, and was able to pursue a more fulfilling relationship with Bosie–he kept hotel rooms away from his house for what his wife believed was the sole purpose of writing, and was able to see Bosie under those circumstances. There’s no doubt that his relationship with Bosie (and several other young men) was sexual in nature–if that’s what you mean by “queer in any sense.”
As for his marriage, it completely broke down after Oscar was convicted for commiting homosexual acts, and he and Constance divorced while he was in prison. I don’t believe he ever saw his children again (they left England with Constance and adopted a new surname, “Holland,” which their descendants still bear today).
This isn’t to say that he didn’t have any feelings for his wife or children–it’s just that he wasn’t happily married and couldn’t ever have been so. [/biographical nitpick]
Sorry, I didn’t see your post on preview before I posted my response. Anyway, I think you’re right that there are several historical individuals who were somewhat bisexual, but who wouldn’t ever have identified themselves as queer. The artist that I’m doing research on, Charles H. Shannon, maintained a lifelong companionship with another artist, Charles Ricketts, and their relationship is usually presumed to be homosexual.
The thing is, while Ricketts was definitely homosexual, Shannon seems to have preferred women and had several romantic relationships with women throughout his life. Indeed, Shannon’s a good example of a bisexual man (if we take it for granted that he did at some point have a sexual relationship with Ricketts–this is far from clear) who doesn’t fit as a good example of a Victorian gay.
Oscar, however, was predominately homosexual in his preferences. If he lived today, he probably wouldn’t have felt compelled by social propriety to have a wife and family, and would have been free to conduct a relationship with another man.
But to get back on topic, here’s a link to some poetry by Michael Field, the pseudonym for the poets Katherine Bradley and Edith Cooper (who were, incidentally, close friends with Wilde and Ricketts and Shannon).
Please will everybody stop encouraging me to hijack all over the place! I’m a terror for arguing endlessly over this kind of thing. Many Wildean scholars and biographers agree that he was happily married and consistantly enjoyed both a loving and sexual partnership with his wife. Too rushed to find cites now, will do so later on if anyone’s particularly interested. Ditto on the ‘bed’ references in the sonnets, which I will dig out soon as I’ve got a sec. My problem with the ‘ostensibly’ was that I’d argue they were no such thing. When I have more time, that is…
(Sorry boo, promise I’ll shut up about all this soon)
You might try Constantine P. Cavafy (1863-1933). The link has a fair number of his poems. I particularly like the ending of Beautiful Flowers and White That Became Him Well
… On Sunday they buried him, at ten in the morning.
On Sunday they buried him, it is almost a week.
On his very cheap coffin, he placed flowers,
beautiful flowers and white that became him well,
that became his beauty and his twenty-two years.
In the evening when he went – on a job that came his way,
a need to earn his bread – to the cafe where they
used to go together; a knife in his heart,
was the desolate cafe where they used to go together.
The last two lines, in the translation I have (Before Time Could Change Them, the complete poems of C. P. C., published by Harcourt, 2001-- ISBN 0-15-100519-2) read:
where they always went together; a knife in his heart,
that black cafe where they always went together.
This is all very surprising to me, as I’ve always understood Wilde’s sexuality to have been predominately homosexual. Admittedly, he had a sexual relationship with Constance at least up until 1886, when his second son Vyvyan was born. However, after he began a relationship with Robert Ross (not long after Vvyvan was born, IIRC), I’m not sure if he ever returned to a sexual relationship with Constance. I suppose that only Oscar and Constance would know this for certain, though.
I’d be interesting in reading any sources that argue that Wilde continued to have a happy and sexually-fulfilling relationship with Constance even after he became involved with Ross (and then with Bosie–what a high-maintenance boyfriend he was).
We should probably start a new thread, though. Sorry for the hijack.
This is all very surprising to me, as I’ve always understood Wilde’s sexuality to have been predominately homosexual. Admittedly, he had a sexual relationship with Constance at least up until 1886, when his second son Vyvyan was born. However, after he began a relationship with Robert Ross (not long after Vvyvan was born, IIRC), I’m not sure if he ever returned to a sexual relationship with Constance. I suppose that only Oscar and Constance would know this for certain, though.
I’d be interesting in reading any sources that argue that Wilde continued to have a happy and sexually-fulfilling relationship with Constance even after he became involved with Ross (and then with Bosie–what a high-maintenance boyfriend he was).
We should probably start a new thread, though. Sorry for the hijack.
At least, as I understand it. This isn’t precisely one of my areas of expertise – though I’ve been attempting to read up on Elizabethan conceptions of sexuality and gender lately. (It’s pertinent to me as a drama specialist – for instance, how were theater audiences expected to react to the boy actors playing women? That’s a matter of considerable scholarly debate.)