Aesthetics and Orientalism in Lady Mary Wortley Montagu's Letters

AestheticsandOrientalismin LadyMaryWortleyMontagu'sLetters ELIZABETHA.BOHLS Asawomantraveller,LadyMaryWortleyMontaguwasuniquelyprivileged .WhenshewenttoTurkeyin1716asthewifeoftheBritishAmbas- sador,shewasassuredaccesstotheupperechelonsofOttomansociety. Hergender,inaddition,gainedherentrytodistinctiveinstitutionsof thatsocietywhichwereofflimitseventoprivilegedmen.Haremsand women'sbathhouseshadalreadyprovidedtopicsforprurientspeculationbymaletravelwriters ,severalofwhomclaimedtohavevisited them,althoughasMontagupointedout,"TisnolessthanDeathfora Mantobefoundinoneoftheseplaces."1Thesefabricatedportrayalsof TurkishwomenwereakeyelementofearlyOrientalistdiscourse.2 ThoughEdwardSaid'simportantstudyofOrientalismoffersno detaileddiscussionofthephenomenonbeforeNapoleon,late seventeenth-andearlyeighteenth-centuryBritishandFrenchaccountsof traveltotheOttomanEmpireareconsistentwithSaid'sdelineationof laterrepresentationsoftheMiddleEast.TheOrientisdiscursivelyfemi- nizedanderoticized;WeststandstoEastinarelationofproto-colonial dominationthattakesonaseeminglyinevitablesexualcharacter.3Orien- talwomencarryadisproportionatesymbolicburdeninthisdiscourse. Doubly"other"anddoublyexotic,theybecomeasynechdocheforthe Orientitself,theirsupposedlyinsatiablesexualappetitesofferingan excuseforthesexualizeddominationthesetraveloguesreinforce.Mon- 179 180 / BOHLS taguwasfamiliarwithatleastsomeofthesewritings.Sheremarkswith characteristicsarcasm: 'TisaparticularpleasuretomeheretoreadthevoyagestotheLevant, whicharegenerallysofarremov'dfromTruthandsofullofAbsurditys Iamverywelldivertedwith'em.TheyneverfailgivingyouanAccount oftheWomen,which'tiscertaintheyneversaw,andtalkingverywisely oftheGeniusoftheMen,intowhoseCompanytheyarenever admitted,andveryoftendescribeMosques,whichtheydarenotpeep into.(1:368) Butsheseemsgenuinelyconcernedtocorrectthefalsehoodsspreadby previoustravelwriters,especiallyabouttheTurkishwomenwhosewit, hospitalityandbeautyshesoenjoyedduringhertwo-yearstay. SaraSulerihasrecentlyexpressedconcernthatmuchscholarshipon travelandcolonialismisstillstructured,likeSaid'sinfluentialbook,bya "rhetoricofbinarism"takingasitspointofdeparturethefundamental oppositionbetweenselfandother,WestandEast."Evenastheotheris privilegedinallitspluralities,inallitsalternativehistories,itsconceptfunctionremainstooembeddedinatheoreticaldualityofmarginto centerultimatelytoallowtheculturaldecenteringthatsuchcriticalatten- tionsurelydesires."4ThehistorianBillieMelmanoffersonepromising meansofdecenteringourdiscourse,workingtowardthe"productive disorderingofbinarydichotomies"thatSuleridemands:throughclose scrutinyofrepresentationsofexternalcultural"others"producedby Europe'sinternal"others,"especiallywomen.5Idonotintendtoclaim that"women'sOrients"arenecessarilyoressentiallydifferentfrom men's.Earlymaletravellers,too,occasionallydepartedfromdiscourses ofdominationtocultivatelimitedintersubjectivityorreciprocitywith membersofanon-Westernculture;oneexampleisMungoPark'sTravels intheInteriorDistrictofAfrica(1799).Ibelieve,likeMelman,thatfar frompresentingaseparate,coherentview,women'srepresentationsare inaconstantand"dynamicinterchange"with"hegemonicorientalist culture."6Montagu'slettersareanoutstandingexampleofsuchan exchange.HerinteractionwiththewomenofTurkeyunfoldsintricate ambiguities.Apparentlyundertaken,atleasttoadegree,inpursuitof reciprocityandgenuineculturalexchange,theprocessinevitablyreflects backaswellonMontagu'sownpositionasawomaninBritishculture.7 AswewatchhersetouttochallengethemaleOrientalistsofherday,we maysucceedincomplicatingthetheoreticalparadigmsofourown. Montagu'sfamousaccountofhervisittothewomen'sbathscarries outapolemicwiththeseearliertravellers,exposinga"diversityofidiom" orBakhtinianheteroglossiawithinOrientalistdiscourse.Attentionto LadyMaryWortleyMontagu'sLetters/181 thiskindof"polyphony"isvaluableinhelpingdispeltheimpressionof Orientalismasmonolithic,andhenceperhapsunsusceptibletodisrup- tionorsubversion.8Debunkingfantasiessoattractivetoreaders— especiallymalereaders—isMontagu'sdifficulttask:howdoyoudescribe aroomfullofnakedTurkishwomenwithoutperpetuatingtheirdouble objectificationaswomenandas"Orientals"?Onekeyelementofthe rhetoricalstrategyshechoosestomeetthischallengeisherappealtothe contemporarydiscourseofaesthetics,strategicallypittingitagainstthe offensiveidiomofearlyOrientalism.9Bycomparingthebathingwomen toworksofEuropeanart,sheattemptstode-eroticizeandde-exoticize them,neutralizingOrientaliststereotypes.Toaccomplishthis,however, shemustpresentherselfassomeonecapableofperceivingandjudging aesthetically,itselfaboldmoveinanagethatconsideredtastethepre- rogativeofafewprivilegedmen. Theeighteenthcenturysawanunprecedentedproliferationofdis- courseonaesthetictopics:tasteandsensibility;thebeautiful,thesub- lime,andthepicturesque;theappreciationandevaluationofpainting, architecture,gardensandnaturalscenery.10RecentworkbyTerryEagleton ,PeterDeBoIIaandothersseekstounderstandaesthetics'riseto prominenceatthismomentinBritishandEuropeanhistory."Mycon- cerniswithwomen'srelationtothisprestigiousculturalcategory.12Mon- tagu'sself-positioningasanaestheticsubject,notjustinthewomen's bathsbutthroughouthertravellettersfromEuropeandTurkey,illumi- natesthedifficultiesofthisrelation. Definedbroadly,aestheticsencompassesthepleasuresofsensuous perception,theappreciationofbeauty,andthecultivationofjudgment ortaste.ItwasjustbeginninginMontagu'stimetoemergeasaselfconsciousphilosophicaldiscipline .Subtlybutpersistently,Montagu appropriatestheaestheticdomaintothewomantraveller.Theallureof sensuoussurfacesandthetextureofvisualpleasureprovideherwith fertilegroundforculturalcriticism,aswellasentertainingdescription. Montaguwaswelleducatedforawomanofherday,attunedtothe nuancesofart,literatureandcriticisminAugustanEngland.Shewasa contemporaryoftheaesthetictheoristsShaftesbury,Addison(afamily friendwhosetragedyCatoshecritiquedinmanuscript),andPope,with whomshehadanotoriouslyvexedrelationship.Herlettersproveher sensitivetotheplayofsocialpowerwithintherelationshipsofspectator andspectacle,aestheticsubjectandaestheticobject:whatAddison dubbed"thepleasuresoftheimagination." Addison's1712remark,"AManofaPoliteImagination,isletintoa greatmanyPleasuresthattheVulgararenotcapableofreceiving," 182 / BOHLS expressesthewidelyheldviewthattastedistinguishesthe"polite"upper classesfromthe"vulgar"masses.13ArchibaldAlisonin1790testifiesto thedurabilityofthisview,finding"onlyinthehigherstations...orin theliberalprofessionsoflife...meneitherofadelicateorcomprehen- sivetaste."14Addison'ssystemofsocialcategoriesopposesthe"Manofa PoliteImagination"totheheterogeneous,ungendered"Vulgar";itomits thepossibilityofawomanofpoliteimagination,afemaleaesthetic subject.EvenanaristocraticwomanlikeMontaguseemsexcludedfrom thiskeyprivilegeofherclass.Astheyformulatedkeynotionslikeimagi- nationandtaste,theseearlyaestheticistsincorporatedintheirconceptual structurethepowerrelationshipsthatstructuredtheirsociety.Judith Butlerhaspositedexclusionasamastermechanismofsubjectconstitu- tioninWesternculture.Subjectsarediscursivelyconstituted,sheargues, "throughthecreationofadomainofdeauthorizedsubjects,presubjects, figuresofabjection,populationserasedfromview";or,inanotherfor- mulation,through"actsofdifferentiationthatdistinguishthesubject fromitsconstitutiveoutside,adomainofabjectedalterityconvention- allyassociatedwiththefeminine,thoughclearlynotexclusively."15 Eighteenth-centuryaestheticdiscourseexemplifiesthisprocessof empoweringoneprivilegedgroupofsubjectsbyexcludinganddisempo- weringothers. Women'sexclusionfromthepositionoftheaestheticsubjectbecomes morecomprehensiblewhenweconsidertheextenttowhichwomenwere (andare)conceivedofasaestheticobjects,spectaclesconstantlyon display—aswellas,conversely,theextenttowhichtheaestheticobject wasconceptualizedasfeminine.ApassagefromShaftesbury's1711dia- logue"TheMoralists"isstrikinginthisregard.Contemplatingthe beautyofanaturalobject,inthiscasethesea,iscontrastedwiththeurge touse,possessorcontrolit.Thisisanearlyoccurrenceoftheidea, centraltophilosophicalaesthetics,thataestheticperceptionshouldbe disinterested,devoidofanypracticalvestedinterestintheobject.16We canobserveinthisdialoguehowearlyandhow"naturally"genderenters intoaestheticdiscourseasTheoclesSomaticallyquizzeshispupil,Philo- cles:"Imaginethen...ifbeingtakenwiththebeautyoftheocean, whichyouseeyonderatadistance,itshouldcomeintoyourheadto commanditand,likesomemightyadmiral,ridemasterofthesea,would notthefancybealittleabsurd?" Philoclesreplieswithastartlinglogic:"Absurdenough,inconscience. ThenextthingIshoulddo,'tislikely,uponthisfrenzy,wouldbetohire somebarkandgoinnuptialceremony,Venetian-like,towedthegulf, whichImightcallperhapsasproperlymyown."17 Shaftesburyisalludingtothetraditional"wedding"betweenthe LadyMaryWortleyMontagu'sLetters/183 RepublicofVeniceandtheAdriaticinwhichtheDogesailsoutinstate anddropsaringinthewater,aceremonyMontaguwitnessedin1740.18 Inthisquaintcustomboththeobjectofpropertyownership(exemplified bymarriage)andtheaestheticobjectaregenderedfemale.Theperceiv- ingorpossessingsubject,ontheotherhand,isgenderedmale.Aesthetic contemplationandpropertyownership,thoughtheyaremutuallyexclusiveinShaftesbury 'sthought,bothappearasaspectsofmasculineprivi- lege.Clearly,Shaftesbury'sinfluentialaestheticsisanythingbutdisinter- ested.Itincorporatesanetworkofgenderedassumptionsabout relationshipsofsocioeconomicandaestheticpower,presentingtheaes- theticsubjectasawell-educated,propertied,whiteEuropeanmanwhose goodtasteenhanceshisprestige. Wemaytaketheseassumptions,prevalentinMontagu'sculture,asa contextforhersubversiveapproachtobothtravelandaesthetics.Stak- ingouttheaestheticsphereasthespecialterritoryofthewomantravel- ler,sheoccupiesarolegenerallybarredtowomenandclaimsforherself thesocialpowerwrittenintothatrole—powertowhichsheisentitledby rank,butnotbygender.HerencounterswiththewomenofEuropeand Turkeyrevealthetensionsgeneratedbyandforafemaleaestheticsub- jectwhenhercultureconstructswomanoverwhelminglyasobject,rather thansubject,oftheaestheticgaze.19Thisisapparentearlyinhercorre- spondenceduringherjourneytoTurkey. WritingfromHollandin1716onherwaytoTurkey,Montagucom- paresaDutchcastletooneinNottinghamfamiliartohercorrespondent, SarahChiswell.Herremarkssuggestagendereddivisionoflaboramong travellers:"'Tistruethefortificationsmakeaconsiderabledifference. AllthelearnedintheartofwarbestowgreatCommendationsonthem. Formypartthatknownothingofthematter,Ishallcontentmyselfe withtellingyoutisaveryprittywalkontheRamparts,onwhichthereis aTowerverydeservedlycall'dtheBelvidere,wherepeoplegotodrink Coffee,Tea,etc.,andenjoyoneofthefinestprospectsintheWorld" (1:251-52). Holland,ofcourse,wasarivalmilitaryandeconomicworldpower. TheGrandTourofEurope,bythistimeanestablishedinstitutionwitha standarditinerary,retainedamilitaristicdimensionfromitsTudorori- ginsaspreparationfordiplomats.Thepatriotictraveller(presumptively male)wasexpectedtonotegeographyandfortifications,collectinguse- fulinformationforcountryandsovereign.20Leavingmilitaristicpursuits to"learned"men,Montaguturnsinsteadtoprettywalksandfinepros- pects,thebeautyofvisiblesurfaces—inshort,toaesthetics.Shesteps intothepositionoftheaestheticsubjectmock-apologetically,usingster- 184 / BOHLS eotypicalfeminineignoranceorsuperficialityasatongue-in-cheekpre- textforsuggestinganewperspective. Herscornfortraditional,masculinemodesoftravelismoreexplicitin letterswrittenduringherlateryears.LivinginItalyfrom1739until1761, shewasconstantlyvisitedbytouringteenagedaristocrats,whomshe labels"thegreatestblockheadsinnature"(2:177).Lecturingherdaugh- ter,LadyBute,shedecriedconventionaltravelwritersaswellasGrand Tourists. IfindyouhavemanywrongnotionsofItaly,whichIdonotwonderat. YoucantakeyourIdeasofitonlyfromBooksorTravellers.Thefirst aregenerallyantiquatedorconfin'dtoTriteObservations,andthe otheryetmoresuperficial.Theyreturnnomoreinstructedthanthey mighthavebeenathomebythehelpofaMap.TheBoysonly rememberwheretheymetwiththebestWineortheprettyestWomen, andtheGovernors(Ispeakofthemostlearnedamongstthem)have onlyremark'dSituationsandDistances,oratmostStatusandEdifices. (2:494-95) Menarethetrulysuperficialtravellers.Thelearnedtutors'quantitative ormonumentalapproachisonaparwiththeircharges'pursuitof womenandwine.PassageslikethisonesuggestthatMontagu'saesthetic approachmayhavebeenpartofaconscioussearchforanalternative mode of travel. TouringEuropeancapitalsandcourtsonherwaytoTurkey,Montagu attendspersistentlytomattersofsurfacedisplayandsensuouspleasure. Sheregaleshercorrespondentswithrichdescriptionsofdress,food, buildingsandfurnishings;sherecords(oftenwithProtestantscorn)the glitterofrelicsinchurchesandthecuriosdisplayedinnoblemen'shomes, andisespeciallystirredbythegrandspectaclesoftheaterandopera.She assesseslocalcustomsfromanaestheticperspective:inaletterwritten fromNurembergshearguesinfavorofsumptuarylaws,citingthe"agré- ableEffecttotheEyeofaStranger"ofavisiblyorderedsocietythat distinguishesrankbydress(1:255).Connectingaestheticpleasuretoa legallyenforcedcodeofsocial-sartorialhierarchy,Montagualignsher- selfwithAddison'sviewofaestheticpleasureasanupper-classpreroga- tive. ThisviewfromthetopcontinuesasshevisitstheAustrianaristoc- racy'smagnificentViennaapartmentsandsuburbanvillas,suchasthat ofCountSchönborn:"theFurnitureallrichbrocards,sowellfancy'd andfitedup,nothingcanlookmoreGayandSplendid...throughout thewholeHouseaprofusionofGilding,Carving,finepaintings,the mostbeautifullPorcelane,statuesofAlablasterandIvory,andvast OrangeandLemonTreesinGiltPots"(1:261).TheViennese"Faux- LadyMaryWortleyMontagu'sLetters/185 bourg"becomesanextravagant,operaticspectacleofglittering"profu- sion";theaestheticsphereemergesasanarenaforconspicuouscon- sumption,withthewomantraveller's"politeimagination"underwriting thisflauntingdisplayofprivilegeandpower. Anothertypeofspectacle,however,movesMontagutoconsiderfrom adifferentperspectivetherelationbetweenaestheticpleasureandsocial power.Wecansensethroughoutherlettersanuneasytensionbetween classandgenderasinterpenetratingdimensionsofhersubjectivity.Gen- erallyconservativeonmattersconcerningsocialrank,shecanbesurpris- inglysubversivewhenspeakingasawomanratherthan,primarily,an aristocrat—anincongruitysheshareswithotherearlywomenwriters suchasMaryAstell.TravellingthroughEurope,Montagutakesspecial noteoftheculturallyvaryingaestheticsoffemaleappearance,theways womenofdifferentnationsproducethemselvesasobjectsofthegaze. Shecausticallylampoonstypesofartificeshefindsdegrading,fromher hilariousaccountofViennesecourtdress—"moremonstrousandcon- trarytoallcommonsenseandreasonthantispossibleforyoutoimag- ine"(1:265)—toherdescriptionoftheheavilymade-upwomenofParis, "thesegrotesqueDawbers"(1:440).NonethelessMontaguherselfpartici- patesintheprocessoffeminineself-objectification:sheispresentedat theEmperor'scourt,"squeez'dupinaGownandadorn'dwithaGorget andtheotherimplementsthereuntobelonging,"presumablywithafash- ionablehairdo"toolargetogointoamoderateTub"(1:265). InSaxony,femaleaestheticsubjectconfrontsfemaleobjectinakind ofdistortedmirrorasMontagurecountsthemisdirectedartificeofthe Saxonladies,who"wouldthinkitamortalsinagainstgoodbreedingif theyeitherspokeormov'dinanaturalmanner.Theyallaffectalittle softLispandaprittypittypatstep,whichfemalefrailtysought,how- ever,tobeforgiven'eminfavoroftheircivilityandgoodnatureto strangers"(1:282-83). Theseremarksarefollowed,significantly,bytestimonytoaSaxon woman'sstrengthanddetermination:thestoryoftheCountessofCosel, mistressoftheElectorofSaxony,whodefiesherpowerfulloveruntilhe locksherup(1:283-84).Thejuxtapositionunderscoresarecurringtensionintheletters :adifficultyreconcilingwomen'sobjecthood(whether aestheticorerotic)withtheirstatusasindependentsubjectsoragents. Thespectacleofwomenproducingthemselvesasfrail,dependentobjects triggers,asifinprotest,aviolentassertionoffemaleagency.Thelisping SaxonbeautiesseemtoremindMontaguthatherownpositionasaes- theticsubjectisausurped,culturallycompromisedprerogative. Montagu'ssojourninTurkey...