Introduction
A common notion about the history of sexuality is largely informed by the belief that sexuality in the past was repressed, much like a taboo. However, in the eighteenth century, sexual behaviors including sexual perversion such as homosexuality and child sexuality were a prominent object of study. Priests and Kings expected confessions from individuals regarding sexual temptations or immorality.
Additionally, an individual’s sexuality reflected his or her character with regard to knowledge and power. Increasingly, during this era, sexuality became an object of intense study especially with regard to its relation with power and knowledge. Scientific investigations, alongside the confessions, revealed the relationship that existed between sex and power in the eighteenth century.
Foucault, in the book, ‘The history of sexuality’ points out that; sexuality holds the key to explaining human behavior particularly with regard to knowledge and power. He argues that power does not repress or restrict sexuality rather it reinforces it. He specifically identifies four focus points for the deployment of sexuality: sexuality of women, children, and married couples and “perverse” sexuality (Foucault1990, 23).
These focus points facilitate the spread of power throughout the society especially during the rise of the bourgeoisie in the 18th Century. They placed tighter controls on sexuality to promote “healthy sexuality” as well as make it easier to control the population. The deployment of sexuality in the society fosters the power over life but does not imply repression over the population.
Deployment of sexuality in Marie de France’s lais Bisclavret
Sexuality in lais Bisclavret is reflected as a social constructs that facilitate the deployment of sexuality with respect to Foucault’s sexuality of married couples focus point. Bisclavret’s wife betrayed him after realizing that he sometimes turned a werewolf, three days each week. The wife suspected that Bisclavret could be having a lover, who he visits during his three-day absence each week (Burgess, and Bursby 1986, 69). This highlights the relationship that existed between power and sexuality in Brittany.
Bisclavret was a “handsome knight” and wielded much power as the king’s favorite closest advisor (Burgess, and Bursby 1986, 70). Foucault explains that power in the 18 century was exercised to bring sex increasingly into focus, speeches and thoughts (1990, 29). It is apparent in lais Bisclavret through the wife’s allusion to Bisclavret’s immorality during his absence. This implies that sexuality was spoken about openly not under repression by power.
Additionally, following his wife’s request, Bisclavret reveals his secret place where he hid his clothes when he turned into a werewolf. She implores a certain knight to take her husband’s clothes pledging to grant him “what has tormented” him for long including her love and body as well as be his mistress (Burgess, and Bursby 1986, 71). This shows the openness with which sex and sexuality among the powerful was expressed. In lais Bisclavret, all people exercise power over their individual lives.
Bisclavret’s wife had the power to remarry a knight of her choice after learning that his husband occasionally turned into a werewolf. This indicates that power in lais Bisclavret existed in every relation, whether in subservience, as was Bisclavret’s wife, or knighthood. Foucault criticizes the conception that power is dominating and instead argues that power is inherent in the relationships of sex, economics or knowledge thus suggesting that everybody is a source of power (1990, 90).
In lais Bisclavret, multiple power relations existed. Apparently, the main power relations assumed a ruler/ruled model with the king making all crucial decisions with advice from the barons. After learning of Bisclavret’s misfortunes following his wife’s betrayal, the king unilaterally decides to banish Baclavret’s wife and the knight who married her. Additionally, the king commanded the men who had accompanied him to hunting in the forest not to harm the werewolf, which later turned out to be Basclavret.
This shows that power relations in lais Bisclavret were primarily vested in the king. However, other centers of power popped up at different social levels in the story. Bisclavret’s wife, though subservient, wielded power too. She schemed to have Bisclavret remain a werewolf by taking his clothes so that she could marry the knight of his choice. Bisclavret also could turn himself into a werewolf three days a week without the authority or knowledge of the king or his wife (Burgess, and Bursby 1986, 71).
Foucault argues that power relations come up at different levels in the society irrespective of the ruling powers (1990, 95). In the story, though the knights and the barons wielded power, the king had the ultimate power especially on crucial decisions.
The centers of power in the lais Bisclavret involved four individuals: the king, the knights, the barons and the mistresses. The relationships among these centers of power assumed a ruler/ruled model. The king held the ultimate power passing judgments on vital social issues. For instance, after rescuing Bisclavret, he decides to banish Bisclavret’s wife after learning of her mischief (Burgess, and Bursby 1986, 72). However, he made much of his decisions after seeking the advice or opinion of the barons.
The knights like Bisclavret were the king’s closest advisers and commanded some power within the society. The mistresses also wielded power as the knights’ wives. Bisclavret’s wife after learning of Bisclavret’s regular transformation into a werewolf and where he hid his clothes, she sent a messenger to summon another knight. This implies that the wives of knights also held some power and influence in lais Bisclavret.
The Role of the Discourse on Sexuality
Foucault idea of power primarily targets political relationships that exist between individuals or institutions in the society. He argues that power essentially causes the relationships to shift and thus his conception is that power is not stable (Foucault1990, 111). Similarly, in lais Bisclavret power relations are not stable.
The relationships between the king and the barons and the knights and their mistresses were the source of power in lais Bisclavret. According to Foucault, the conception of sexuality is also built on multiple relationships that exist within the society (1990, 115). Specifically, he identifies the relationship between children and parents, the psychiatrists and their patients, and sexual “perverts” and society as representative of a constantly shifting power in all these relationships.
Conclusion
Foucault objects to the common belief the power relationships indicate a power repression, where one party represses the other. Instead, he argues that power is the force that creates a discourse on sex around the four focus points of relationships within the society. In lais Bisclavret, four centers of power including the lordship, the barons, the knighthood and the mistresses define the discourse of sexuality.
The power relations that define the discourses on sexuality also determine the thoughts or outward expression through speech about sexuality of individuals. Foucault proposes for the “polyvalence discourse”, which joins power and knowledge in different ways (1990, 123). Under this discourse, there is no domination or repression and silence or secrecy about sex does not mean that the society is under repression but rather power in the society works in multiple ways.
Reference List
Burgess, Glyn, and Bursby, Keith. 1986. The Lais of Marie de France. London: Penguin Group Publishers.
Foucault, Michel. 1990. The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction. New York: Vintage.