Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA.
J Lesbian Stud. 2022;26(4):400-414. doi: 10.1080/10894160.2022.2117802. Epub 2022 Sep 7.
This article addresses the question of whether Anne Lister can be considered a lesbian through a reassessment of how the modern period is conceptualized within the history of sexuality. Returning to the original texts that first defined the history of sexuality project, the article emphasized that those texts indicate that the mechanisms of biopower and identity formation based on cultural texts undergo their most significant shift in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, rather than in the late nineteenth. The formation of sexuality as a disciplinary mechanism, and identities based on it, originated in the late nineteenth century, but many of the mechanisms through which this occurred were in operation earlier. Much of what is now known about gender and sexuality in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries was unknown at the time that the history of sexuality project was first formulated, leading to a starker divide being drawn between the late nineteenth century and earlier periods than is warranted. This article argues that the example of Anne Lister can lead to a better appreciation of the continuities in how cultural texts shaped understandings of desire from the early eighteenth century forward.
本文通过重新评估现代时期在性史中的概念，探讨了安妮·李斯特是否可以被视为女同性恋者。本文回到了最初定义性史项目的原始文本，强调这些文本表明，基于文化文本的生物权力和身份形成机制在 17 世纪末和 18 世纪初发生了最重大的转变，而不是在 19 世纪末。性作为一种规训机制的形成，以及基于它的身份，起源于 19 世纪末，但这一过程中的许多机制早在之前就已经开始运作。现在关于 18 世纪和 19 世纪早期的性别和性的大部分知识，在性史项目首次制定时是未知的，这导致在 19 世纪末和更早时期之间划出了比实际情况更明显的分界线。本文认为，安妮·李斯特的例子可以更好地理解从 18 世纪早期开始，文化文本如何塑造人们对欲望的理解的连续性。
