Speaking through the flesh: Affective encounters, gazes and desire in Harlequin romances
Keywords:affect theory, body/mind duality, romance narratives, gendered desire
AbstractIn the wake of the affective turn, emotion and embodiment have emerged as key terms in cultural studies in order to acknowledge the affective dimension of media texts (Gibbs, 2002; Gregg & Seigworth, 2010). Drawing from the cross-disciplinary field of affect theory, the article examines the writing of desire in Harlequin romances through the delineation of gendered encounters. Against the backdrop of earlier feminist critiques of romance fiction, it argues that Harlequin’s intense focus on corporeal sensations and gazes encompasses a looking relationship that differs significantly from the visual mediation of gender and desire. With its use of an extended literary transvestism, a double narrator perspective, and the appropriation of a female gaze, Harlequin offers readers an affective imaginary space in which the significance of the gendered body is re-made, re-versed, and the male body is stripped of its unique position.
Ahmed, S. (2004). The cultural politics of emotion. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Bal, M. (1996). The gaze in the closet. In T. Brennan & M. Jay (Eds.), Vision in context. Historical and contemporary perspectives on sight (pp. 139-154). London, New York: Routledge.
Berger, J. (1972). Ways of seeing. London: BBC and Penguin books.
Bordo, S. (1999). The male body: A new look at men in public and private. NewYork: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux.
Brennan, T. (2004). The transmission of affect. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
Church-Gibson, P. & Gibson, R. (1993). Dirty looks: Women, pornography, power. London: B.F.I.
Cohn, J. (1988). Romance and the erotics of property: Mass-market fiction for women. Durham: Duke University Press.
Damasio, A.R. (1994). Descartes' error: Emotion, reason and the human brain. London: Picador.
Doane, M.A. (2003). Film and the masquerade: Theorizing the female spectator. In A. Jones (Ed.), The feminism and visual cultural reader. London, New York: Routledge.
Ebert, T. L. (1988). The romance of patriarchy: Ideology, subjectivity and postmodern feminist cultural theory. Cultural Critique, 10, 19-57.
Fischer, M. & Cox, A. (2010). Man change thyself: Hero versus heroine development in Harlequin romance novels. Journal of Social Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 4 (4), 305-316.
Gibbs, A. (2002). Disaffected. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 16(3), 335-341.
Gibbs, A. (2005). Fictocriticism, affect, mimesis: Engendering differences. Text Journal (9)1, http://www.gu. edu. au/school/art/text/april05/gibbs.htm.
Giddens, A. (1992). The transformation of intimacy: Sexuality, love and eroticism in modern societies. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gregg, M. & Seigworth, G. J. (2010). The affect theory reader. Durham & London: Duke University Press.
Hirdman, A. (2007). (In)visibility and the display of gendered desire: Masculinity in mainstream soft-and hardcore pornography, NORA 15(2-3), 158-171.
Hirdman, A. (2008). Den ensamma fallosen: Mediala bilder, pornografi och kön (The lonely phallus: Imagery, pornography and gender). Stockholm: Atlas.
Jacob, C. M. (1996). The materialist world of pornography. In L. Hunt (Ed.), The invention of pornography: Obscenity and the origins of modernity, 1500-1800 (pp. 157-202). New York: Zone Books.
Koivunen, A. (2010). An affective turn? Reimagining the subject of feminist theory. In M. Liljestrom & S. Paasonen (Eds.), Working with affect in feminist readings. Disturbing differences (pp. 8-27). London, New York: Routledge.
Lotz, D. A. (2001). Postfeminist television criticism: Rehabilitating critical terms and identifying postfeminist attributes, Feminist Media Studies, 1(1), 105-12.
Modleski, T. (1988). Loving with a vengeance: Mass-produced fantasies for women. London, New York: Routledge.
Mulvey, L. (1975). Visual pleasure and narrative cinema, Screen, 1(3), 6-18.
Mulvey, L. (1990). Afterthoughts on 'Visual pleasure and narrative cinema' inspired by 'Duel in the Sun'. In T. Bennet (Ed.), Popular fiction: Technology, ideology, production, reading (pp. 139-151). London, New York: Routledge.
Panksepp, J. & Biven, L. (2012). The archeology of the mind: Neurorevolutionary origins of human emotions. New York: W.W Norton.
Pollock, G. (2003). Vision and difference: Feminism, femininity and the histories of art. London, New York: Routledge.
Rabine, W. L. (1985). Romance in the age of electronics: Harlequin Enterprises. Feminist Studies, 11(1), 39-60.
Radway, J. A. (1987). Reading the romance. Women, patriarchy and popular literature. London, New York: Verso.
Richardson, A. (2010). Facial expression theory from Romanticism to the present. In L. Zunshine (Ed.), Introduction to cognitive cultural studies (pp. 65-83). Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.
Shouse, E. (2005). Feeling, emotion, affect. Journal of media and culture, 8(6).
Snitow, A.B. (1979/1995). Mass market romance: Pornography for women is different. In G. Dines & J.M. Humez (Eds.), Gender, race and class in the media (pp. 190-201). London: Sage.
Skouvig, L. (2009). Troværdighed eller Buzzword. Diskursen om autenticitet. In N. D. Lund m.fl. (Eds.), Digital formidling af kulturarv. Fra samling til sampling (pp. 81-96). København: Forlaget Multivers.
Sobchack, V. (2004). Carnal thoughts: Embodiment and moving images. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Tomkins, S. (1962-1992). Affect, imagery, consciousness. New York: Springer.
Waskul, D. (2003). Self-games and body-play: Personhood in online chat and cybersex. New York: Peter Lang.
Zunshine, L. (2010). Lying bodies of the Enlightenment: Theory of mind and cultural historicism. In L. Zunshine (Ed.), Introduction to cognitive cultural studies (pp. 115-133). Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.
How to Cite
Articles submitted to MedieKultur should not be submitted to or published in other journals. Articles published in MedieKultur may be used (downloaded) and reused (distributed, copied, cited) for non-commercial purposes with reference to the authors and publication host.
The authors and MedieKultur own the copyright to the published articles and reviews.