Emmeline Gros

Keywords: Masculinity, Gender Studies, Glasgow, Femininity, Subverting Identity Performance, Contesting prescribed identity constructions

En s'intéressant ici au point de vue masculin, cette étude met en évidence une oscillation entre un discours qui vise à rassembler autour d'une norme hégémonique de masculinité (ou de performance masculine)-un discours du même-et un discours qui vise à la différence masculine-un discours d'altérité, d'absence, ou de marginalité. Au sein même de cette dynamique, semblent alors se profiler des alternatives intéressantes, des modèles de masculinité subordonnés, déviants, voire innovants. Pour autant, comme le suggère cette étude, une masculinité en crise ne signifie pas un idéal de masculinité en mutation. Il s'agit alors d'interroger l'effet paradoxal d'une discours d'altérité qui se trouve lui--même altéré et de montrer comment dans un contexte de dissolution d'une identité régionale forte (le Vieux Sud), les frontières (entre norme et contre--norme, centre et périphérie, Nord et Sud, milieu rural et industrialization) tentent de se ré--inscrire au niveau identitaire, en particulier dans les rapports de genre (identité séxuée).

past that has died, just as decaying Belles like Eva Birdsong cling to their memories of past glories. This society has become stagnant and ingrown [because it] "blindly holds to past ideals and past rules of conduct while the future knocks at the door" (Manning 300). The group, to use White's terms, has lost "its power to locate itself in history, to come to grips with the Necessity that its past represents for it, and to imagine a creative, if only provisional transcendence of its fate" (148)(149).

As the narrator emphasizes:

Ever since the War between the States had stransformed opulent planters into eminent citizens, a dozen old country families had clung to the lower end of Washington Street.

Here they had lived; knit together by ties of kinship and tradition, in the Sabbath peace that comes only to those who have been vanquished in war. Here they resisted change and adversity and progress; and here at last they were scattered by nothing more tangible than a stench...Only the Archbalds and the Birdsongs... stood their ground and watched the invasion of ugliness (Glasgow 6).

In this new era, the decline of the old-landed aristocratic South is inevitable. Yet, if the "signs of modernization indicate that [Glasgow] is portraying the South at a time of change, the novel's action does not rest on a conflict between the old and new ages. [. . .] Rather than changing times, Glasgow's focus here is the Old South tradition itself... enforced by a strict code of behavior [that] stunt Gros 3 individuals" (Manning 302). As Manning remarks, the Archbald's walled garden, in particular, symbolizes the family's attempt to hold at bay the new order and to make time still (301).

In that regard, all the inhabitants of Washington street try to celebrate the remnants of the old order: "still undaunted, the two families held the breach between the old and the new order, sustained by pride and by some moral quality more enduring than pride. After all, they might have asked, were they not defending their homes from a second invasion?" (7). And it is the allegorical figuration or appropriation of the body, more specifically the female body, which becomes a possibility for the meaningful transformation of history, and thus a successful example of what Jameson, paraphrasing Karl Marx, names "the collective struggle to wrest a real of freedom from a real of necessity" (31).

Not surprisingly, Carol S. Manning's afterword, for instance, focuses almost entirely on the female body in Glasgow's fiction. Through special attention to Eva Birdsong and to the burden of cult of beauty in the beautiful woman (304), to Etta Archbald, "the woman who lacks beauty" and who cannot win any man1 or to Cora Archbald who has "assumed the role of the society's other, more sedate ideal of womanhood" (307) and who believes that appearance "matters [. . .] more than anything in the world," some critics (Manning included) have justly interpreted The Sheltered Life as Glasgow's attempting to bitterly expose the evils of the cult of the womanly woman (or true womanhood), a male-defined ideal which cripples the women's lives and aspirations by representing the woman's actions as artificial and the woman's body (and most specifically the Southern Belle's body) as a collective artifact rather than as an individual body. Eva, we hear, is "still regarded less as a woman than as a memorable occasion" (7).

Of course, this interpretation should not come as a surprise, for times of crisis, as Hilda Smith remarks, work to reinforce this understanding of the cult of true womanhood. 1 The transformation of the economy and the elaboration of a public male sphere depend, as Smith explains, on the parallel creation of a female sphere within the home, which becomes a males' haven of retreat from a hostile and competitive environment. The cult of genteel behavior means that these women conform to male ideals of femininity and in turn, abandon all true sense of self. Eva Birdsong is one perfect example of this female tragedy. Like her canary, Ariel, she is imprisoned in a cage, as she reflects: "I sometimes wonder," she said, ...."if it is fair to keep a single bird, even a canary, in a cage. If I let him out, what would become of him?" "He would fly away. You would never find him again." "Yes, when a bird flies away, you never find him again." (285) Living in a cage according to the society's expectations of women (Manning 321) also means that 1 For a detailed analysis of Cora Archbald, refer to Carol S. Manning's afterword to Glasgow's The Sheltered Life. 2 The doctrine of true womanhood, or the Angel of the House was adopted from the Victorian era. According to this belief and in a public world of fierce competition, Southern gentlemen could find peace and comfort from the public arena in the privacy of the house (the women's sphere). The Angel was passive and powerless, meek, charming, graceful, sympathetic, self-sacrificing, pious, and above all--pure.

women exist as projections of the male gaze, suggesting that, in the power relationships rooted in gender, the male gaze win. Eva Birdsong, in particular, corresponds to this ideal. She is, according to Manning, "frozen in the role of the Southern belle, expected [by men] to be forever young, vivacious, and beautiful" (307).

On Washington Street however, the female sphere, we quickly realize, offers but a solace from the social and economic anxieties of the PostBellum South. To the contrary, in this male-female system of interaction, not all women seem ready to accept the docile role of the plantation-Belle. The women may, at times, seem to be keeping to their place, i.e. inside the house, yet on closer acquaintance, women (especially the younger generation) turn into rebels.3 Jenny Blair Archbald, for instance, reads traditional guides to the good rules for the perfect lady, such as Little Women, yet reading (an activity usually linked to the more private sphere of domesticity) has become a public display of appearances. Archbald's granddaughter, we are told, reads only for "the assured reward of a penny a page" (3). We understand that among the social and political transformations of the Postbellum South, we must include a profound disruption of patriarchy and a profound sense of male anxiety. This sense of anxiety is clear from even a cursory look at the narrative: married to a woman he did not love because of appearances and now, a widower who has been denied the possibility of remarrying because his daughters and daughter-in-law expected him to remain loyal to his wife's memory, Archbald realizes that he has lived "in an age when marriage was an invisible prison" and that his own marriage was "thirty years of heroic fidelity" during which "he had sacrificed his youth, his middle age, his dreams, his imagination, all the vital instincts that make a man, to the moral earnestness of tradition" (Glasgow 33,qted. in Manning 303). "For forty years," we are told, "General Archbald had tried in vain to keep the library for his own use; but there had always been the dread that a closed door might hurt somebody's feelings. Now Mrs. Archbald's workbag of flowered silk lay on his [the General's] desk, with the contents of bright scraps and spools scattered over his blotting pad" (179). The women not only invade the males' space but they also open the door to a changing economy, to the commercial interests that, after the Civil War, penetrated the rural South. In Glasgow's South, no domestic space, we discover, has been kept for the males' relaxation, and the house is no longer a haven. By revising the Southern home and by alluding that Southern women might only pretend to abide by the rules of ideal femininity, Glasgow redraws the boundaries of the drawing room and portrays the males as ineffectual figures of authority and leadership. No longer able to control his actions, even less the actions of his daughters and grand-daughter, the patriarch of the old landed aristocracy, the General, is often confined to a chair and is mostly portrayed in the garden, tending to Dandelions. 2 George Birdsong is repeatedly-as his family name suggests--caged in his house, or brought back homeward, according to Eva's demand. Each in his own particular way has yielded power over women, both emotionally and physically.

Of course, it could be easy to lay the blame on the New Industrial South 3 or, even, on the women. Because they are often castrating in their demands, because "one woman after another had enslaved his [the General's] sympathy," (105) women can indeed be regarded as the cause for the males' anxieties and failures. However, and as this paper will suggest, the males' failures and anxieties reveal that it is the male body, rather than the female body, which becomes the object of a collective appropriation, for the stories and narratives "contained" or "dissimulated" within the male body could endorse strategies for the re-interpretation or reconfiguration of a utopian narrativization of history and thus, endanger the narrative conventionality of patriarchy, hegemonic masculinity, and Southern Romance.

The term "Patriarchy," as defined by scholars, usually encompasses "the rule of the father, including the rule of older men over younger men and of fathers over daughters, as well as husbands over wives" (Ehrenreich 284) and so defined, patriarchy seems to be precisely what does not function in The Sheltered Life. If the title he carries suggests that this General should be patriarch, Glasgow emphasizes that this man is not even qualified for the job. Archbald's patriarchal failure, we discover, lies precisely in his inability to pass what John Stoltenberg names "the test of loyalty to manhood"

(1), a rite of passage which qualifies southern males for hegemonic masculinity and dominance over subordinate groups (non-whites, non-southern, etc).

As he recalls his early years, the General revisits the narrative of masculinity that has been transmitted to him from his grandfather who assured him "that hunting had given greater pleasure to a greater number of human beings than all the poetry since Homer" (108). To the deception of his grandfather, the General was not a hunter, for "the sight of blood sickened him." Instead, he "saw visions in the night and wanted to be a poet" (108). "Different," controlled by fear of his grandfather's power and of the "little girls [who] were as savage as boys" (108), Archbald comes to realize that "from his earliest childhood [. . .] he had been the victim of pity, of his own pity" (105). Since "[p]ity, said the men who had none, is a woman's virtue" (108) the General's traumatic childhood (and construction of masculinity) reminds us of the rigidity of conventional gender forms.5 If neither melancholy nor reflection is expected of men, a man who exhibits either is immediately femininized.

2 In her autobiography, The Woman Within (1954), Glasgow reports that she became a rebel at an early age: « I cannot recall the time when the pattern of society, as well as the scheme of things in general, had not seemed to me false and even malignant » (Glasgow The Woman Within 42, qted.in Manning 298). 3 The defense of the Old South recurs frequently in the novels of the period. Composed a couple of years before The Sheltered Life, the collection of essays I'll Take my Stand defends the Old South's agrarian way of life against the encroaching industrialization of the modern age.

Because they were deemed "unmanly," these activities even led people to call "him a milksop" (108).

If as Connell argues, one of the weapons in the ongoing struggle to maintain hegemony is "a rich vocabulary of abuse: wimp, milksop, nerd ...sissy, lily liver, jellyfish, yellow belly, candy ass," and so forth, then, we must understand that Archbald, in this instance, is not only accused of effeminacy but also implicitly challenged to claim (or reclaim) his southern manhood.

In this sense, the General's masculinity is portrayed as stigmatized, marked by childhood trauma. The title of the section of the book, The Deep Past, is significant here. Michael Warner reminds us that stigma [...] marked the person, not the deed, as tainted. [...] It is a kind of 'spoiled identity' [which ...] befalls one like fate. Like the related stigmas of racial identity or disabilities, it may have nothing to do with acts one has committed. It attaches not to doing, but to being; not to conduct, but to status" (27-28). Of course, attempting to deny one's patriarchal heritage would be futile for, in this Southern community, masculinity is precisely a matter of status. We learn, for instance, that the grandfather "belonged to the Georgia school of Gentleman" (109). The young Archbald understands rapidly that he must take on his father's identity that is itself merely borrowed from previous fathers or ideas of fathers. 4 In psychoanalytic terms, we have no choice but to repeatedly enact our stories: identity is repetition compulsion. Therefore, Archbald gives up all resistance and decides to make-believe that he is not a reader of poetry, because "he knew that there were eyes somewhere among the leaves, and that these eyes, the eyes of the hunted, were watching him" while he was reading Byron's poetry (116).

Understandably, the masks or personas that he chooses to play are drawn from myths and icons of maleness-the hunter, the woodsman-all perceived as masculine pursuits that have not been or should not be performed by women or by effeminate men. This need to act out masculinity in front of an audience, either men or women, connects to the post feminist idea of gender as a masquerade and as performance rather than as essence. It is worth noting that the mention of the word "eyes" repeated three times in the sentence quoted above adds to the stage-like effect of the scene. The passage here, by revisiting the hunter's narrative inherited from his ancestors, suggests that the Southern notion of chivalry (and therefore of romance) is indeed produced by the willful manipulation of social decorum. 5 In the performance of masculinity, we understand that "passing" for a man is the opposite of failing; a 4 Carol S. Manning, in her afterword to the novel, alludes to the rigidity of the code, as follows: "Glasgow implies that surfaces are everything to the Old South code: if one if from an acceptable family and acts like a Southern gentleman-if one "fall[s] into the right pattern"-one is a Southern gentleman" (317). 6 Going to his hidden place in the forest, General Archbald "had brought clothes taken from the old garments in his father's and his grandfather's closets" (110). 5 Archbald admits that he has fulfilled the role of the honorable Southern gentleman to perfection but that it has been a life of surfaces, "A surface! Yes, that, he realized now, was the flaw in the structure. Except for that one defeated passion in his youth, he had lived entirely upon the shifting surface of facts. He had been a good citizen, a succesful lawyer, a faithful husband, an indulgent father; he had been, indeed, everything but himself. Always he had fallen into the right pattern; but the centre of the pattern was missing" (164).

successful rite of passage, the crossing of a boundary. But to "pass" also means to get away with pretending to be who you are not. The assumed role of the hunter becomes a gender-marked feature that marginalizes effeminate men, "milksops," poets, and the artists. In this context, the term "man" acquires a set of related negative definitions: man means "not woman," "not Queer," "not effeminate." Glasgow, it seems, plays with a definition of Southern male identity that goes something like "you are who you aren't." By featuring this traumatic scene in which the young General's uncertainty about his masculine role is explicitly linked to the staging of a typically "masculine" performance, Glasgow's narrative reads as a story of deception, giving us a good instance of how southern masculine hegemony was achieved and sustained.

The "deception" is double, for in the same chapter, the General's grandfather asks the General's mother if Archbald was "born lacking?" (109). "'Not lacking, father,' his mother protested, 'but different'" (109). The mother, working conspiratorially with the son, can be seen as a manipulating figure who deceives the patriarch and acquires power through the artful performance of the son she favors. Allied with the maternal, General Archbald is thereby made feminine-or better, brought under maternal control-to perform masculinity, i.e. to become gentleman-able.8 Because it is the mother who has staged Archbald's drama, the son who inherits the narrative future is therefore represented through greater dependence on the mother, greater vulnerability, and comparative smallness. He also has features and feelings (he likes poetry) that would, in later generations, be identified as feminine.

An alternative psychological reading suggests itself: the grandson of the patriarch represents a split self-projection of a father anxious about his masculine identity. Compared with the other young boys' unbridled masculinity, the young Archbald's masculinity may indeed represent the threat of the more maternally-allied aspects of the patriarch himself. And indeed, Archbald, by going back to the memories of his childhood, places himself between the past and the present, the then and the now of narrative and revisits the narrative of inherited masculinity. General Archbald himself asks, "[w]as it fair to blame him because he had been born different? Was anybody to blame for the way God had let him be born?" (110). Collier justly remarks that what actually is being addressed in many accounts of hegemonic masculinity is a "range of popular ideologies of what constitute ideal or actual characteristics of "being a man" (841). What is interesting, he adds, is not this model, which is unattainable, but rather the way the young boys and men position themselves in relationship to this collective image: "men can dodge among multiple meanings according to their interactional need.

Men can adopt hegemonic masculinity when it is desirable; but the same men can distance themselves Gros 8 strategically from hegemonic masculinity at other moments". 6 By going back to his past and by revisiting what happened in the woods (when he was staged by the eyes), it is the incongruity between the epic and the domestic that Archbald emphasizes. The narrative, we could even argue, is therefore ostensibly conceived as a critique of its pretext. By retaining passages from the original version and commenting on their antiquated mannerism, it enacts a conflict of styles and ideologies: fathering or grandfathering becomes a site of struggle in ways illustrating the problematic forging of new kinds of male identities and the difficulties of resolving competing versions--the individual version and the community version--here embodied by the patriarchs of the family, founding father figures who have become the motivating force of Archbald's masculine narrative. Fatherhood, we understand, becomes the mode in which the value of Southern masculinity is reasserted, and in our case, the importance of fathering (or grandfathering) clearly suggests an attempt at reclamation or re-appropriation of deviant masculine narratives (like the one revisited by the General, for instance) in which paternity is offered as crucial not only to children but also to the continuation of Southern masculinity.

If this patriarchal heritage is so fundamental, if the young Archbald cannot bind past and present together with meaning, the past may just as well die with his grandfather. If, as Peter Brooks argues, "it is at the moment of death that life becomes transmissible," then The Sheltered Life reveals considerable anxiety about the possibility of transmission, not only transmission to the next generation, but also transmission from the previous generation. Archbald is divided in his response to his own past and to his father's past: on the one hand, he acknowledges the inheritance of his father's past, but on the other hand, he acknowledges that there is nothing compelling about that past. In the introduction to Masculinities in Britain since 1800, Michael Roper and John Tosh argue that, "one of the most precarious moments in the reproduction of masculinity is the transfer of power to the succeeding generation" (17). Commenting on that statement Jonathan Rutherford writes:

The transformation of masculine subjectivities from one generation to the next is not simply an external relationship of social conditioning and role learning between parents and their children. Nor does it constitute a process whose passage of time is then confined to the past. Rather, it becomes an integral part of individual subjectivity, the child of his parents co-existing in a complex, often antagonistic relationship with the adult man. This weak link of the generational exchange of masculine values and practices, the ambivalences, conflicts and contradictions of identity, finds its expression in the structuring and dividing of male psyche (195-96). 6 Consequently, "masculinity" represents not a certain type of man but, rather, a way that men position themselves through discursive practices" -therefore, the beau or the southern gentleman should less be discussed as a type or as a given of characteristic traits (slaves, plantation...) but rather as a way to position oneself toward hegemonic masculinity.

Gros 9

Not surprisingly, this "transfer of power" (i.e hegemonic masculinity) from one generation to the next does become a source of tension, for if he is to avoid any breakdown in the hegemonic male narrative that has been passed on for generations, the father (or the older generation) needs to contain the son's possibly-deviant and "competing version" in a normative and conventional narrative -in Glasgow's South, the conventionality of Southern Romance. Significantly, there is no "father" in The Sheltered Life. We hear about the General's grandfather; yet, his father is absent. Jenny Blair's father is also absent from the story, killed while hunting, in turn suggesting that this absence of the father-figure might indeed point at a breakdown in the narrative of white hegemonic masculinity. This absence is reinforced by the grandfather figure, Archbald, who "does not think about how he can make life better for his precious granddaughter, how he can give her better guidance and nurturing than he received in his youth-how he can help her avoid living a life of surfaces [. . .] Never does the reader see him offer Jenny Blair moral guidance or intellectual stimulation. Archbald needs to be much involved in the present, but his thoughts and concerns (not only here but elsewhere in the novel) are much more about Eva Birdsong, the ideal of the Old South" (Manning 318-319). In Archbald's example and because it attempts to reconcile a reproductive, strong masculinity with the General's frail, ineffectual male body, the narrative begins a more or less direct commentary on the limitations patriarchy imposes upon both women and men. Glasgow focuses on the plight of the sons, who are usually confused or oppressed by their fathers or grandfathers, or befuddled by women, and yet who cannot think outside of these traditional relationships, precisely because they are unable to recognize any other alternatives for themselves. In relationship to their past, males like the General express the desire to master the anxiety of its influence.

The obsession with the past, the need to go back to the origin of the trauma represent, to some extent, the men's desire for an original moment that is believed to lie somewhere within the past.

Because they long for a masculinity that is uninfluenced, untouched, i.e. "original," Glasgow's men need to explore their roots and immediate creators: their male ancestors. For instance, the General continues to dream that one day, he will be able to shrug off the past and create himself anew.10 Yet, the General, who lives in a timeless present (where past/present/future coalesce) cannot abandon the present and return to a place where he can recapture the vitality of the original and re-appropriate for himself this body who was once reading poetry but forced to wear the mask of virility. Storytelling may indeed allow him to revisit his memories; yet, it cannot change the stale version of his present situation. Glasgow offers us what Roland Barthes calls a "vertigo of time defeated," an uncanny and conflicted sense of temporality generated by old photographs of people once alive, but who are now "alive" only in the photos, prompting us to "shudder... over a catastrophe which has already occurred," because "we feel, with a pang, that the dead have yet to die and that the past has yet to Gros 10 happen" (96).

The title "General" itself carries great romantic weight, suggesting glorious or doomed struggles. It communicates to the reader not only the male-dominated institution of the army, relying on the subversion and the suppression of identity of its members to a unified corps, but also an image of traditional masculinity that requires a similar repression of difference within the self. The patriarchal institution conforms to a definition-usually reserved for the "peculiar institution of slavery" -as a system of coercion that robs the people of their free will and their identity. Manhood thus necessarily precludes the essential quality-freedom-on which it is taken to be founded. At the heart of Glasgow's ideology, we discover an assumption that contradicts the idea that fatherhood is a natural fact that, if socially ratified, will convert southern society into a permanent alignment of essential givens (with natural aristocrats, pure women, and sturdy yeoman, all persistently content in their separate fields). In so doing, Glasgow revises the mystery of the all-transcending order of Southern society. One has to believe in it. 7 Yet, it is clear that the males living in Washington Street do not believe in it. The narrative goes even further than simply revisiting and questioning the masculine narrative being transmitted from one generation to the next. It also unsettles the traditional conventions of masculinity and patriarchy and comes as an affront to Southern wholeness, for it posits a community without a (male) leader, masculinity without even the desire for what has traditionally been understood as masculinity's hallmark: power. George Birdsong, for instance, does not want to correspond to the image of manhood that his wife Eva demands. Caught between two models of manhood-the independent individualist and ineffectual husband who keeps a mulatto mistress called Memoria in the lower part of the town and the community man tied into Washington Street wherein he must be husband and provider-George is unable to see or to commit to either fully, as he later admits to the General, "[a]fter all, you can't make a man bigger than he really is. I know I'm not a big man, and when I come up against anything that is too much for me, beauty, goodness, unhappiness, I give way inside" (197). 8 Glasgow here explicitly problematizes the notions of authority, power, and patriarchy as the solid foundations that the Archbalds (and the South as a whole) have taken for granted. Ultimately, by portraying a community deprived of any model of strong masculinity-Archbald, for instance, is a 7 Glasgow herself argued that, "the glory of men as of nations is measured not by the strength with which they cling to the past, but by the courage with which they adventure into the future ...[Genius] means a departure from tribal forms and images. It means a creation of new standards and new ideals of beauty and new rules of conduct" (The Dynamic Past 75) 8 Earlier in the novel, George has revealed his most secret desire: "I sometimes wish," George said desperately, "that she (Eva Birdsong, his wife) didn't believe in me. If she saw me as I am, I might be able to measure up better. But she would idealize me. She expected too much. I always knew it was hopeless" (196) Significantly enough, George (and the couple) does not produce any children, as if to emphasize the complete sterility of what marriage and gender have given him: authority within his own family and the Southern family (and community) as large.

crippled old man, Jennie Blair's father was killed by his desire to hunt, and George is crippled emotionally-Glasgow achieves a transformative revision of Southern patriarchy and empties "Southern masculinity" (and patriarchy) of its essential meaning, in so far as that term has depended upon the males' assumption of the authority in the family and cultural sphere. The General's inability to uphold patriarchy or George's failure to correspond to an image that would satisfy the traditional image of Southern manhood is not so much due to the women who seem to have taken control over them, or to the encroaching of the female sphere onto the public (masculine) one. To the contrary, by showing that Archbald and George's masculine and patriarchal inabilities lie inside (not outside) and by revealing that the men's failure is not so much due to some bad acting on a poorly arranged stage, as it is due to a deeper, inner refusal to act, the narrator raises the possibility that the Southern character may well have no countenance to it, which in turn foregrounds the question of essence in regard to identity: Is there an essence that a man can fall back on when everything has been lost, or is southern masculine identity a performance with no center? Is there not an essence to which male performances might be anchored?

If, as Michael Awkward has suggested, "monolithic and/or normative maleness" is conventionally defined by the "powerful, domineering patriarch," (3) then a family in which men no longer dominate is a family in which masculinity itself is called into question. Displaced as patriarch and divested of his former dominance, the General's fall from grace takes place in part as a selfrevelation and as an exposure to the reader of the inessentiality of all idea of patriarchy and here of masculine power. The question thus remains: can a man really be a man if he no longer possesses-or claims-the power to command? Who might a father become once he is no longer a patriarch, or no longer wants to perform the role? And if, as Martha Fineman suggests, "control, dominance, and independence are quintessentially masculine," (205) then, how might we reconceive manhood in a way that is not so dependent upon parallel binaries of male/female, strong/weak, potent/impotent, masculine/sissified?

The text here goes beyond the mere representation of an absent father, one who has abdicated from the legitimate seat of patriarchal rule; nor does it portray merely a father inadequately fulfilling the requirements of his assumed rightful identity. Both these possibilities evoke what Sharon Holland, following Hortense Spillers, identifies as "fatherlack": "the idea of a dream/nightmare deferred [. . .] an inevitable and unattainable fatherhood" (387). Ultimately, Glasgow invites a deeper critical scrutiny, for her conclusion, to use Jenkins' terms, "contains a possibility far more bewildering than the father's absence: a father who is present, but nonetheless no longer dominant or even interested in domination" (972). In so doing, Glasgow demands an entirely new way of defining and understanding gender and male-female interaction, one which begins with men who are men in spite of patriarchal Gros 12 power, not because of it. Moreover, if this "male" authority can be easily discarded, it raises questions about the clear social and gender boundaries that the South established between the real and the unreal, the Southern and the non-Southern, the masculine and the feminine, the enduring and the fading. And, as the narrative clearly shows, these boundaries are rapidly shifting. Wondering, "[w]as it conceivable, as Cora suspected, that Eva knew the truth, and was merely preserving appearances?" the General attempts to re-establish distinct boundaries between "real" and "fake" women, by convincing himself that, "[n]o, he could not believe this" (107). Because she is deemed "beautiful," "ideal," and "queenlike," because her body reads like a text of unaffected purity and transparent legibility, Eva remains unable to exercise her "knowing"subjectivity. This Southern Belle, we understand, must remain fixed in a recognizable (and therefore "universal") gender role, i.e. the pure, innocent, perfect Southern lady who keeps this world in order too. 9 If women only pretended, if such an idea was believable, that alternative could suggest that women could even appropriate for themselves the ability to "pass" and could become directors of the Southern drama, leaving the men become actors only.

Of course, insisting on the stability of categories of sex/gender and race/ethnicity may well be an elaborate defense against time (and death) and time's absolute erasure of identity boundaries, but the General's enactment and deliberate erasure of a more effeminate self (by pretending to be who he was not) "situate[s] us on the razor's edge that is life itself, reminding us that however the stakes in which games of identity performance are played, the final role-the final identity-knows no distinctions and no boundaries" (Lefkovitz 101). As Butler reminds us, "passing" is indeed a kind of failing, for another definition of passing is death, and this passing away-the ultimate failure of identity boundaries-may be the source of the anxieties about which Glasgow has been writing. Identity, it is true, is always held up through a series of arbitrary conventions. "Masculinity," Butler argues, "is conventionally conflated with the universal and thus remains unmarked" (49). Gender, she continues, is associated with femininity, whereas masculinity is granted as an abstract, universal quality. Along these lines, Laura Berlant explains that: Many formerly iconic citizens who used to fell undefensive and unfettered feel truly exposed and vulnerable. They feel anxious about their value to themselves, their families, their publics, and 9 Mrs Birdsong is essentially a frozen figure. Her marriage, Glasgow tells us, had "kept her from parties where she once shone so brilliantly, had saved her also from brooding, from that fatal introspection which is the curse of women and poets. She had had no time to fall out of love. She had not had time to discover that George was unworthy" (107). 14 Michael Uebel argues that an "attention to the specific historicity and textuality of privileged, often ideologically invisible, categories such as whiteness prevents the acceptance of their uniformity and autonomy". Other scholars have argued that just as masculinity is stereotypically seen as a universal, nongendered abstraction, so "white" has been framed as an abstract, nonraced race. In other words, whiteness, like traditional masculinity more generally, has conventionally been granted an abstract, universal status. See for instance, Cuomo and Hall 1999; Nakayama and Martin 1998;Hill, 1997;Delgado and Stefancic 1997;[START_REF] Dyer | Whiteness[END_REF]Frankenberg 1997. their nation. They sense that they now have identities, when it used to be just other people who had them (2). This unmarked character is, we understand, empowering for masculinity (in particular, white, middle, and upper-class, heterosexual masculinity) and disempowering for the others-the marked-alongside whom this unmarked identity is exercised. As Richard [START_REF] Dyer | Whiteness[END_REF] suggests, "the claim to power is the claim to speak for the commonality of humanity" (2). Unmarked (universal, general) bodies can do that, whereas marked bodies cannot. Only by troubling these conventions, Butler concludes, can we begin to transcend the problematic notions of identity. 10To some extent, Archbald's and George's crises of masculinity do contribute to the troubling of these conventions. Because it is precisely the feminine-the other-who has developed into a spectator position, the features and bodies of the men, we could say, do become the objects of an emblematic gaze that involves, at the same time, the taking on of "feminine" traits. George's body, for instance, takes on "feminine" traits by bearing the marks of Eva's illness: "his handsome florid face had changed utterly since the beginning of her illness. The rounded contour, so youthful a few weeks before, had sagged and hardened, and there were lines of anxiety between nose and beneath the still boyish grey eyes" (193). Women observe the male-players performing on their stage. Etta Archbald, for instance, judges that "it is miserable for a man to be too good looking" (22). Jenny Blair instantly perceives that "it was nursing he [George] craved, the maternal sort of nursing she gave her doll after she dropped it" (58). The General himself acknowledges that George , like the other men, are judged by appearances. According to him, George is "well-favoured enough if you judged by appearances, and did women, or men either for that matter, ever judge by anything else?" (108).

The male body, we realize, is no longer "universally generalizable" (Kimmel 4), for masculinity is performative, while femininity, as we have seen, appears as a much more fixed (but also problematic) identity. Through an excess of representation itself, by constantly putting on different personae, the hero, Butler argues, can never be pinned down as a single, fixed identity and becomes able to elide identity. General Archbald's own subversive performances seem to fit these ideas wonderfully. By remembering the past with a selective memory, by conflating past and present, the memorialized Archbald flows in and out of various characters from one instance to the next, being at the same time, "a good citizen, a successful lawyer, a faithful husband, an indulgent father [. . .] everything but himself" (128).

It is also through multiple performances, his multiple and competing identities, that Archbald's identity is somehow "washed away," leaving the reader with the impression that there is no real. If the women, for example, constantly refer to the presence of a smell, foreshadowing that, "industrialism Gros 14

will have swallowed us whole. Nothing can stop it" (249), the General, on the contrary, questions the reality of its presence; "I've never been positive," the General insists, "that it isn't mere imagination, or the emptying of garbage cans somewhere in the alley. I've tried my best, and I'm never able to detect it" (249). The General's deliberate refusal to "see" (and to smell) change and his capacity to "pass" unnoticed -as a fake hunter, an inoffensive aging man, a failed patriarch, and a defeated warrior-represent fluid and conflicted identities which, in turn, could become productive moments of possibilities, which is to say, they make possible the dissolution of dominant identities as well as their rearticulating and remembrance via new and changing forms.

Celebrating the fluidity of identity may indeed encourage subversive potentials that may work against traditional, dominant notions. However, General Archbald-by assuming the role of father, husband, and grandfather-does not seem to embrace a kind of fluidity that is able to challenge conventionally fixed notions of identity; quite the contrary. Discussing Brandon Teena, the transgendered man depicted in Boy's Don't Cry, Sloop explains:

As has become commonplace in many contemporary discussions of gender and trouble, at least since the publication of Judith Butler's Gender Trouble, gender and sexuality are assumed in this essay to be potentially fluid, held in check by each individual's interpellation into a cultural ideology that maintains male-female difference [and yet,] while this move to celebrate or highlight potential disruptions of the gender binary system is indeed a vital project, it can come at the cost of focusing on ways that dominant rhetoric/discourse of gender continues to ideologically constrain. (168) Sloop's argument thus invites another reading. If drawing attention to the performative (and marked) features of gender may serve to destabilize gender ideals, the encouragement of a kind of fluidity itself may well contribute to reestablish dominant figures of identification. For instance, the General's ability to "pass," his capacity "to drift alone into old age and beyond," can be seen as an empowering strategy of resistance within mass-cultural contexts, for as the General remarks, "[l]ife cease[s] to be complex as soon as one escape[s] from the tangle of personalities" (198). Yet, this desire for nothingness can also be linked to the ideal of masculine whiteness as self-abstraction, what Dyers defined as "being nothing at all [. . .] nothing in particular, the representative human, the subject without properties" (80). Seen in this manner, the no-thing-ness of whiteness reinforces the power through self-abstraction associated with the traditional, unmarked body.

In the eyes of Jenny Blair (the living embodiement of the new South), both George and John become explorations of two (young) contradictory ideals of masculinity that could resist the dominant identities imposed by men like the General's grandfather. One, George is "all talk," promising theories when he is unable to sustain them. We learn for instance that "women, especially romantic women like Eva (...) Gros 15 ma [d]e the mistake of measuring a man's love (George) by his theories" (102). George could be regarded as someone who does not have to make a choice, of a man who could be both things (on Washington Street and outside Washington Street), by obscuring the necessity to choose one model of manhood over another.

Yet, George Birdsong's killing in his garden-metaphorically, the re-appropriation of his body into the conventional domestic sphere11 -and John's departure for war at the end of the story reveal that the narrative resists resolution.

John, indeed, possesses a promising character as Eva witnesses. He is also-and it is important to remember-the one who authors a false (and prettier) version of the tragedy by offering an alternative ending to George Birdsong's tragic finale: "He [George] shot himself. It was an accident" (394). He has criticized the society's evasive idealism and "after the habits of all realists in every age, disliked sentimentality" ( 296), yet the man of facts eventually joins forces with the Old order (Manning 345). The love for war is essentially, we could say, the search for a new public sphere, the glimpse of a new kind of public realm distinct overtly from commercial values (John is a good Socialist) and linked to an older model of virtue (the old men discuss the benefits and the greatness of past heroic acts). Neither domestic nor commercial and distinguishable from the market, the battlefield instills norms of discipline, good will, and civility. However, despite the apparent promising possibility that lies behind the departure for war, Glasgow shows that war is another escape, another obscurity, the need to play the field and conform to a larger cohesively instilled version of masculinity, instead of having to make a choice of who to be. In going to war, John will only re-enact the promises that has kept the Southern honor alive.

Seen in this light, the General's obsession with the Past (or with the pretext of the narrative) encapsulates a reflection on what he has done and missed, for his remembrance of the past is not oriented toward confirming the ways in which the future has fulfilled its promise to the past. To the contrary, he bids us remember the ways it has precisely failed to do so. For these men confronted with the failure of their monolithic concepts, Glasgow offers a new challenge: it is not enough to register the loss of traditional orders of difference, but perceiving the emergence of new ones is necessary. If the next task is not only to record old versions of masculinity but to recognize and validate new versions, the end reveals that the emergence of new identities has yet to be achieved.

In failing her men, Glasgow reminds us the lesson learnt from Walter Scott's Waverley in which the hero, having been separated from the withdrawing army of the Pretender, feels "entitled to say firmly, though perhaps with a sigh, that the romance of his life has ended, and that its real history had now commenced" (283). In Scott's novels, Ackerman argues: "Romance is generally regarded as an artifact that has the power to work in history (not outside of history), and to reestablish social coherence. The dangers inherent in attempts to read romance as real history or transform real history according to a supposed original text are the themes of Waverley and its hero, Edward" (32). In other words, Edward's mistake lies in his attempt to returning and perpetuating an original past, because he disregards the factuality, "the irreversibility of history as a process that long ago opened a gap between romance and history (33).

Glasgow's men, we could argue, fail because they prefer to live the "romance" and try to rewrite the "history". George lives the romance personified in Eva Birdsong, wishing that the present or the past were different. "I sometimes wish," he says desperately, "that she didn't believe in me. If she saw me as I am, I might be able to measure up better. But she would idealize me. She expected too much. I always knew it was hopeless" (196). George tries to go back to a wishful time where he could change things; yet he commits the mistake of not silencing the representatives of the past order.

In his use of direct language to say that Eva "has never drawn a natural breath since she was married [and] if she dies [. . .] it will be the long pretense of her life that has killed her" (153) and in his socialist philosophy, John, Eva's young doctor, is "a realist; his vision of the world is accurate, scientific, unlovely, and unhopeful. He is the only character capable of showing 'moral indignation' against social injustice in the South and bold enough to criticize the Industrial Revolution openly" (Santos 103). Caught up within the romance while trying to rewrite history through his political beliefs (he is a socialist), he is also-and it is important to remember-the one who authors a false (and prettier) version of the tragedy by offering an alternative ending to George Birdsong's tragic finale (thus re-appropriating the General's deviant version): "He [George] shot himself. It was an accident" (291). John has criticized the society's evasive idealism and "after the habits of all realists in every age, disliked sentimentality" ( 296), yet the man of facts eventually joins forces with the Old Order (Manning 345) and like the ambiguous philosophical hero of Thomas Mann's 1925 novel The Magic Mountain, Hans Castorp, John will head off to the terrible war of 1914-1919.

Archbald himself, like Waverley's hero, realizes that, "[i]t was useless to regret. It was useless to sigh for the plumed hearse of one's ancestors [because] people, even the best people, were more selfish, now, and fought only when their material interests were menaced," (137) yet as Glasgow ironically remarks, letting go of old traditions is far from being achieved. When Archbald's daughters, for instance, persuade him to put on his slippers, loosen his collar, and lie down on a sofa in his library, with the doors closed, Archbald refuses: "He shook his head stubbornly, shrinking from so serious an infringement of habit. Though it was commendable to rebel in one's mind, it was imperative, he felt, to keep on one's collar" (262). The allusion to the collar itself calls to mind the collar that John will itself wear later on the battle field, and the collar that George had left on the chair Gros 17 of his black mistress in the lower part of the town.

For Ackerman, the emergence of new masculine identities can be achieved, but only if men follow "Waverley's conversion from "romance" to "real history" [which] signals a change of strategies," for "the hero eventually realizes that (modern) history has completely turn loose from the script of "romance," and that "romance" has been reduced to the status of fiction. From now on, he will observe the difference between the two worlds [. . .] Instead of living the "romance" and trying to rewrite the history, he now lives the history and adapts the "romance (33). For Glasgow's men, however, there is no change of strategy, maybe because strategies cannot be changed, or because new models of masculinity have not yet been embraced. The General's desire to cling to Eva Birdsong as the ultimate model of purity and innocence, his constant desire-even in old age-to rewrite the actual history according to the "romance" personified in Eva, reveals that "romance" and myths have become mixed up with "history." Of course, to throw out traditions and pasts completely is hardly a solution. Instead of embracing or denying a history, perhaps the solution is to entertain multiple versions of that history, to accept the making of masculinities, as Harry Brod entitles his volume of essays on the new men's studies.

By "failing" the men, Glasgow here demands an entirely new way of defining and understanding gender and male-female interaction. Glasgow's text remains enigmatic about the role that men can or should play in the PostBellum South. Rather than clearly delineating a man's place, she leaves several possibilities open, as evidenced, for example, by the difference between John's quiet confidence, George's acquiescence, and Archbald's philosophical companionship. Yet, the possibilities are never fully satisfying and one model of manhood cannot really prevail over another. Because Glasgow's characters seem to be imperfect actualizations of ideal modes of human masculinity, their choices and theories reveal the presence of desires founded on ideals (political, religious, moral or other). They also display their delusory self-conceptions, striving toward imperfectly understood goals.

In doing so, Glasgow seems to suggest that "the utopian moment of antebellum southern literature, then, is to be found less in some of the "values" endorsed by these texts than in their (failing) insistence on the (destructive) possibility of a utopian narrativization of human history and their (faltering) endorsement--under the title of "romance"--of strategies for the interpretation of history" (Ackermann 205). Rather than simply taking the family and the past (and the gender binaries that underlie it) as a static, naturalized entity that cannot help but limit our conception of politics, Glasgow leads us to consider how, within a culture that already takes family and the past as the model for nation, the family (and the past) itself can be redefined and in the process can unsettle political "givens" that might otherwise remain equally fixed!

For Butler, "Subversive performances" such as drag shows, for example, help to demonstrate the arbitrariness of these conventions and to topple them.

For Manning, "it is the frustrated, insecure, aging Southern belle who shoots George. If she cannot be sure of George's love, she cannot be sure she is beautiful, and without love and beauty she is nothing" (322).


Gros

William Gilmore Simms

Emmeline Gros

Charles Reagan Wilson

David Moltke-Hansen

Let me start by saying that I am extremely glad to see the name of William Gilmore Simms appear twice on this panel on the topic of piracy. Admittedly, Simms's sea writing is far from canonical today and

Gros 2 as foreign phenomena to be assimilated somehow to prevailing white ideas of civilization and morality" (3). 2 If, as Blum explains, "after the 1848-49 Gold Rush and the Civil War, […]the nation's arena for adventure and growth shifted to the West" (10), one may understand why popular fictions at the time focused on the "expanses of the land rather than of the sea" (Blum 10). This certainly contributed to make Simms' maritime fiction fall into oblivion. Simms' maritime fiction is indeed far from canonical today and is little known. Yet, it features important titles such as, -"The Pirates and Palatines: A Legend of North Carolina" first published in Magnolia (1842) -"The Pirate Hoard" serialized in Graham's Magazine (1856) -"The Lili and the Totem" (1850) and "The Cassique of Kiawah" (1859) -His Collection of stories Southward Ho! (1854), including "The Pirates and

Palatines" and "The Tale of Blackbeard". -"The Brothers of the Coast" (1866), a recently-recovered manuscript that will constitute our topic of interest today.

In this unfinished tale in 9 chapters, Simms depicts the settlement of New Providence on the island of Nassau. On the island, the "protagonists range from commoners to pirates to merchants [tchent] to exiled nobles" (15) living together. The central plot, however, revolves around Edward Cavendish (nicknamed Steel Cap) who hopes here 2 "All in all, Simms wrote more than a hundred literary pieces about Indians (poems, stories, essays and novels)" (Literary View xxix). Albert Keiser would even say that the treatment of the Indian by Simms was "the most balanced and most accurate in American Literature" (154-74). Quoting John Caldwell Guilds, Hagstette explains that Simms "wrote more about, thought more about, and almost certainly knew (and cared) more about the American Indian than any other man of Letters of the 19th Century" (Literary View, xxix). Charles Hudson contended that "Simms had experiences with Indians unmatched by any other man of letters of his time" (xxxviii). An Early and Strong Sympathy: The Indian Writings of William Gilmore Simms, William Gilmore Simms, South Caroliniana Library. Laura L. Mielke, in "Moving Encounters: Sympathy and the Indian Question in Antebellum Literature" (52), clearly acknowledges the importance granted to the Indian figure in Simms' work: "in 1851, in a letter to ethnographer Henry Rowe Schoolcraft, Simms explains that 'he has a personal and ethical interest in the subject matter (the Indian)' (qted. Page 52). Noting William Gilmore Simms' special interest in Native Americans and their culture, Nakamura quotes Louise K. Barnett who observes that Native Americans, the other race, have been "figures for all generations of Americans to react to, first as curiosities and physical threats, later as objects of pity and guilt, and always as foreign phenomena to be assimilated somehow to prevailing white ideas of civilization and morality" (3). Simms, for instance, used the story of "Jocassée, A Cherokee Legend" (1836) as "representative of Southern history in his failed 1856 lecture tour;" thus, writes John D. Kerkering, "a personification that initially marked the absence of the Cherokee nation comes in Simms' later writings, to mark the identity of a specific people, Southerners" (75). Such scholars emphasize Simms' commitment to exploring non-typically "Southern" territories or figures, what Hagstette calls « the South's non-English roots" in Reading William Gilmore Simms: Essays of Introduction to the Author's Canon.

In an essay collection titled America and the sea (1995), editor Haskell Springer explains that while "the vanished western frontier has been repeatedly so studied and invoked as to make it a hoary cliché, that other, and permanent, American frontier, the sea, hardly registers today in our cultural consciousness as setting, theme, metaphor, symbol, or powerful shaper of literary history" (ix). Springer, Haskell, ed. America and the Sea: A Literary History. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1995.

to accomplish a new society: a democratic, egalitarian republic that will transform the pirates into law-abiding enlightened citizens.

As a general rule, Simms' literary interest for the sea is often linked to a more specific interest for the practice of piracy.

Source/s of inspiration:

For one thing, as a young child, Simms was enamored of the stories of pirates, having been raised on the lore of the Carolina coast (Crosby 85) 1797) all take pirate culture as their central motif. Pirate tales abounded in periodical culture of the time as well.

The historical context might also justify this literary output: In his essay "Refuge Upon The Sea" in Early American Literature, Daniel Williams acknowledges that while many think the late seventeenth to early eighteenth centuries were the pinnacle of pirate culture, in fact "three thousand acts of piracy [were] committed against American ships in the Caribbean [after] the end of the war of 1812" (74). » (85-86).

Simms' sea-writing into oblivion: Gros 4 Given William Gilmore Simms' longstanding interest for piracy-most notably his admiration for Johnson's A General History of Pirates and given what Kathleen Crosby has identified as the "American public's desire for sensational pirate tales in the early nineteenth century" (85), it is quite shocking to read, in The Companion to Southern Literature's chapter on piracy, that [SLIDE] "one has to look long and hard to find [pirates'] trace in books by the most revered Southern writers […] even Charleston's prolific romancier William Gilmore Simms (1806-1870) seem[s] not to have cared much about pirates" (Hunt "Pirate" 647). 3 Obviously enough, William Gilmore Simms did care about pirates. It is true, however, that critics did not care so much about the sea and piracy as focal points in Simms's sea-writing, even when the ocean was the explicit subject matter of his texts. These scholars seem to have preferred to map the South (or Simms' concerns about the South) onto the sea. Thus, if the reference to pirates in Simms's manuscripts is certainly highly entertaining for the reader, these scholars claim that the world of piracy may be used as one of these guises used by Simms to work through his regional, cultural, and national anxieties. Literature, to use Crosby's terms here, becomes the primary way for Simms to capture, reflect on, or even question events in Southern history that many writers at the time were trying to articulate. 4 Kathleen Crosby, for instance, reads Simms' pirate tales as allegories of what happened in land or on land in Simms' life. Pirates and "the landlocked landscapes of Simms's "The Pirate Hoard" or the haunted seascape of "The Pirates and the Palatines" (109)become "metonymic representations of [Simms'] cultural anxieties: fears of expansion and concerns of the role of nation beyond the boundaries of its own nationography and changing models of manhood" (JowittCulture of Piracy 112)." (Crosby 85). 5

3 "Although they are the subjects of many well-known British works from Daniel Defoe's Robinson Crusoe '1719) to R. Louis Stevenson's Treasure Island (1883) and J.M. Barrie's Peter Pan (1904), one has to look long and hard to find their trace in books by the most revered Southern writers" (The Companion to Southern Literature, "Piracy" 647). 4 Such interpretation should not come as a surprise to us, knowing that"[b]efore his death, Simms saw his national reputation fall with the Confederacy he had vigorously supported and the slave regime that many in the North had come to despise."« As a professional writer, Simms would utilize the genre of the pirate story to craft a particularly southern story, one that established piracy as inherent to both the land and the sea of the Carolinas and one that recognized the complex ideological and national networks that piracy simultaneously challenged and constructed in the early national and antebellum periods » (Crosby 86). 5 In this reading: Read in this light, one could thus argue that Simms had had enough of the Southern gentleman figure and was looking for a more masculine, more aggressive masculine type, one he could only trace in the pirate model. Indeed, at the end of the Civil War (and even before the Civil War, as early as the 1840s as a matter of fact), "the perception of the planter-cavalier [was] not quite up to the demands of a rapidly changing contemporary world" (Cobb). As Cobb remarks, the planter-the Southern hegemonic model of manhood-certainly had "admirable intentions," yet those "were often neutralized by ineffectual behavior. The planter might be gracious hosts or gifted orators, but for all their talk of honor and pride, they were often of little use in a real crisis" (Away Down South). Such was indeed the view defended by Simms himself. "In disastrous periods," Simms complained that planters "fold their arms, in stupid despair." The indecisive planter was, "but a latter-day embodiment of

In their critical introduction to the manuscript, Nicholas G. Meriwether and David W. Newtonoffer a similar landlocked or Southern-bound interpretation of Simms' seawriting. Simms, they remind us, is "wrestling with issues he and the defeated South faced in the aftermath of the Civil War economic and social collapse and the triumph of Read in this light, the community of New Providence would thus actually serve the greater function as a metaphor for Southern issues troubling Shakespeare's Hamlet, "whose native hue of resolution/Was sicklied o'er by the pale cast of thought" (Simms, qtd. in Cobb). Such comments implicated Simms in a cultural and social discourse that came to identify the Southern gentleman as the embodiment of ineffectual manhood. As a man of letters, however, Simms's own status as man and author was increasingly made problematic (Fennessy 63). Fennessy remarks that, during the nineteenth century, "women constituted an increasing percentage of American authors" and "Simms too felt that this was one of the many problems threatening the future of Southern letters" (63). As a matter of fact, "the literary profession did not offer much promise for men" of letters, since "in the Southern states, the outwardlooking masculine ideals of honor and public reputation often came into conflict with the more introspective ideals of sensibility and imagination valued by literary men. A life of thought and intellectual labor also made it difficult for Southern writers to live up to the patriarchal ideals of mastery" (Fennessy 63-64). Fennessy adds that « Southern men who dedicated a large portion of their lives to writing often felt that their literary achievements were unappreciated by family, friends, and southerners generally » (64). In his Letters, Simms often complained that the struggling periodicals in his region were forced by a lack of solvent subscribers and worthy contributors to accept submissions "furnished by young Misses from their school exercises, and young Masters when they first begin to feel the startling sensations of the tender passions" (1:197, qtd. In Fennessy 60). At a time between 1830 and 1860 when Southern literature as American literature gradually became Southern literature as separatist literature, insisting on regional distinctiveness and positing that the idea of the South as a nation with a nation […] gave even greater cultural weight to the author in the South". "At the same time that literature was gaining in cultural significance, notions of gender were becoming polarized, with sentiment and imagination increasingly gendered as feminine […] Concerns over the place of literary men in the South were linked to concerns about mastery, which also necessarily reflected concerns about masculinity and the emotions it was proper for a white southern man to express" (Fennessy 64). In this context, the pirate-figure would be offered as a remasculinized alterative in a world deprived of effective models of masculinity. Portrayals of pirates have often associated their aggression with unruly masculinity illsuited to domestic spheres (The Culture of Piracy 1580-1630, 141, Claire Jowitt). Consequently, one could say that piracy constitutes the perfect outlet for reinvigorated masculinity. Indeed, pirates, Rediker explains, "constructed a social world where they had "the choice in themselves'" (Between the Devil 285). Pirates, Redicker continues, "constructed a culture of masterless men" (285) and used "the sea to distance themselves from the powers of the state", the church, the family, and disciplinary labor (Between the Devil 286). The symbols of piracy, like the adoption of the Jolly Roger as the pirates' truly national symbol, signified the rejection of any national allegiance marks. As Kuhn explains, "Some golden age pirates might have indeed 'no longer thought of themselves as English or Dutch or French but as pirates," and "as people without a nation." (qted. in Life Under the Jolly Roger 59). Read in this way, one could easily understand Simms' desire to embrace the pirate community, defined by Rediker as "the enemy of all nations", because himself felt that, as a Southerner, he was the enemy of the new nation. It might be no surprise that the pirate model was adopted by Simms at times when "between 1830 and 1860, Southern literature as American literature gradually became southern literature as separatist literature, insisting on regional distinctiveness and positing the idea of the South as a nation within a nation" (Fennessy 64). 6 As a matter of fact, the "empire" is never far in The Brothers of the Coast, suggesting that, indeed, Nassau, and the King's Tavern, can be read as crucial sites of conflict between formal articulations of power and alternative expressions of "being political that violate such neat containable models" (Drysdale online). (cf. Crosby page 109-110). As Drysdale recognizes, "the sea is also a space over which colonial and territorial lines are inscribed" (313). As such, "Oceanic fiction offers a lens through which we might examine how the nation produces itself in parts through its efforts to contain more seaborne models of community, intimacy, and belonging' (Drysdale 314). This paper, therefore, will reveal how The Brothers of the Coast traces the state's ability to appropriate the potential of discrepant forms of political community on order to reify its own authority on the insurgent space of the sea.

Simms at the time. 7 Fennessy suggests quite as much, when arguing that pirates, like Indians, paved the way to explore the emotional scenery of Southerners' imaginative worlds (Fennessy 80). 8 The neglect of attention for Simms' treatment of the seascape is better understood, I believe, if put into the context of a symptom that Margaret Cohen (in an article published in PMLA) names "hydrophobia". For Cohen and her fellow oceanic studies fellows 9 , this hydrophobia or the reluctance to look at the sea would explain why scholars (like Hunt in the Companion to Southern Lit) have, quite simply and logically so, forgotten the sea. This symptom, she claims, is pervasive in American Literature. She explains that literary scholars-these armchairs sailors, as she calls them (657)-have kept their eyes "fixed on land" or "mapped the land onto the sea " (657) even when the ocean was the explicit subject matter of these texts. 10 As a consequence, these have reduced the ocean in American literature to a mere metaphor for landlocked histories and practices. Somewhere along the way, Cohen explains, (SLIDE) Moby-Dick, for instance, stopped being about sailors and became a novel about factory laborers (657-58). 11 In doing so, these scholars have feared to acknowledge the sea as an independent space productive of unique models of community and belonging. 12 7 "Simms's geographic spaces reverberate with hauntings that serve to mark moments of intellectual, personal, and historical disconnect, thereby voicing the disjunctive nature of antebellum southern spaces" (Crosby iii). 8 Not so surprising if we remember what Michael O'Brien said when arguing that Southerners live in more than their geographical places-they also conjectured worlds that imperfectly (or indirectly) reflected the social reality of the American South (21, qtd. In Fennessy 80). 9 . ''Oceanic Studies'': a scholarly focus that shifts away from ''methodologies and frameworks imported from existing discourses'' toward one that ''takes the sea as a proprioceptive point of inquiry.'' For a discussion of oceanic studies and maritime literature, see Hester Blum, The View from the Masthead: Maritime Imagination and Antebellum Sea Narratives (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2008) and Jason Berger, Antebellum at Sea: Maritime Fantasies in Nineteenth-Century America (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2012) to start.Hester Blum, in the perspective of oceanic studies, suggests a focus on the sailors "as an alternative form of community to the hierarchical constructions of belonging that characterize the transatlantic colonial nation" (Drysdale 316-7). Sailors as a community may "represent the potential for transformation from below and the possibility of an epistemological reconfiguration of the nation-a dramatic restructuring of democratic governance" (318). "Acknowledging the sailor," she writes: "Allows us to perceive, analyze, and deploy aspects of the history, literature, and culture of the oceanic world that might otherwise be rendered obscure and abstract" (The Prospect of Oceanic Studies 671). 10 The syndrome is part of a pervasive twentieth-century attitude that the photographer and theorist Allan Sekula has called "forgetting the sea" (658). 11 Cohen joins scholars like Paul Gilroy, Hester Blum, and Iain Chambers in recovering the sea as a crucial literary and historical context and building a new methodology that "takes the sea as its proprioceptive point of inquiry" (Blum 671). "Oceanic Studies," as Blum names it, would discard the nation as the basic unit of literary analysis in favor of the uncontainable currents of the sea-watery channels that link cultures and peoples and undermine the putatively discrete categories of nation and state.

(Qtd. in https://davidjdrysdale.wordpress.com/2013/12/05/the-insurgent-sea-piracy-and-the-nation-in-antebellumamerican-literature/) 12 Daniel Defoe's The Life and Strange, Surprising Adventures of Robinson Crusoe of York, Mariner was read as the memoirs of a capitalist homo economicus or of a colonizer settling new territories; the ship's crew on the Pequod in Herman Melville's Moby-Dick offered an image of factory labor; and Joseph Conrad's portrait of an inexperienced commander in "The Secret Sharer" limned a narcissist ripe for a Freudian case study.

If we do not want to become hydrophobic or terracentric (to re-cast a term quoted by Marcus Rediker), [SLIDE] "ocean reading", according to Cohen, "must resist artificially imposed borders and inscriptions" and discard the nation as a primary lens for critical analysis13 (qtd. in Drysdale 314). Instead, readers should envision the seaborne models of community-not as bounded, fixed, and permanent-but in terms of flows, fluids, in terms of movement (Adey 2006, 77). 14 Herein lies the potential for transformation from below and for epistemological reconfiguration of the nation. 15 Today, in the wake of the research led by these oceanic scholars, I will attempt to keep our eyes on the ocean. In this exercise (and instead of reading "The Brothers of the Coast" as a metaphor for the Southern issues troubling Simms at the time) I will approach Nassau and its community of pirates as an insurgent space (a term coined by this field of research), one which defies landlocked representational patterns. Read in this light, the sea, as we will show, evokes "the laboratory [laboreuteuri] of another modernity" (Chambers, in Drysdale 313). 16 To keep our gaze fixed on the sea is certainly what Simms had in mind when he composed the opening pages of his novel. [SLIDE] From the opening paragraphs, readers must position themselves "above the seascapes and landscapes of the […] islands [. . .],17 because the narrator incites the readers to "command the wings of any one of these great white sea birds" (34). He invites them to "pursu[e] [their] objects of vision, from [their] ideal height," to "follow these thousand avenues of sea" (35) and to "board one of these vessels" (35).

As we read on, Simms is calling us to consider the islands of the Bahamas, the vessels beneath our eyes (remember we are the great white seabird), and Nassau on their "own terms" (Blum 671). 18 This site becomes a free space par excellence and the origins of the pirates indicate the transnational and cross-racial makeup of the New Providence settlement. [SLIDE] Simms introduces a multiethnic and multinational crew, "a medley" to quote the narrator: "there were a few groups of English and French, some Irish, and occasionally a family of Portuguese or Spanish. [. . .] The dashing English buccaneer, the French corsair, the Spanish or Portuguese picaroon, the Dutch filibustier were in the ascendant" (38).

Presented as a "reunion of discordant elements" (81), these men and women have very little regard, if any, for international boundaries and demarcations. 19 [SLIDE] We read that these are "Men of broken fortunes and attainted blood, from Europe, [who] were here united to maintain a monotonous existence, glad to find repose from the strifes of European society or politics, and escape from the dangers which they had incurred in the civil wars of their several countries [. . .] this or that banished noble, the son of a lord or earl or duke, and possibly his lordship himself, only too happy, if let alone when identified" (37-38). 20 If the sea (to use Drysdale's expression) "renders (artificially discrete) categories such as "nation" obsolete,21 we understand that these pirates' loyalty lays not with any particular nation but with one another as self-identified "common enemies of all mankind" (Rediker, Villains of All Nations 26). Nassau appears here as a place of lawlessness. In this society, "a wild abiding place", there is no understanding of the codes and conventions of civil society: "there was no law in this island. There was no municipality. The population lived mostly in violation of the law" (37). 22 This community appears as what Peter Linebaugh and Marcus Rediker call "hydrarchy," an alternative model of social order and democratic governance that transcends categories of race and nation (Drysdale 316) 23 .

In this place divested of authority and where disorder has replaced nationhood, even the borders of gender, it seems, can be transgressed and reframed. The community of pirates is a highly fluid space of heterogeneity, one that generates new possibilities for females, beyond the limitations established by European models. Gender models appear to be turned upside down in Nassau. Levasseur, the French merchant, traffics with pirates for his own profits. Yet, it is in his wife's home-turned into a social and culture center-that economic and cultural transactions prevail. 24 Piracy affords "a liminal space, one where the borders of gender, conventionality, can be transgressed" (Crosby 98).

If this a-national group clearly expresses a desire to live outside the parameters of social and gender conventions, it is also, Simms suggests, a space that cannot and should not be possessed or contained, one in which even "names" cannot be pinned down. 25 [SLIDE] As a matter of fact, the elusion/absence of names, "the play of image over substance, appearance versus reality, is a constant theme in the text, highlighted by the prominence of masks, (nick)names, roles, and identities" (Meriwether 26). As you can read on the slide behind me, Steel Cap remarks that "there is a mystery in all these several names which we cannot yet fathom" (60). (Chapter 2: "Steel Cap can't be his real name. It's a shy! » which prompts the response, "And who's got a real name among all these people here?" (42).)

Severed from race and nation, these men, we can argue, are also severed from historical record/fashioning. They resist the very categories of identity and social construction (based on heritage, family prestige, or social class). Tellingly enough, in Nassau, pirates might as well be regarded as counterfeit gentlemen who race and culture and threatened the structure of Euroamerican imperial power by defying the rigid hierarchies and spatial organizations upon which it depended. 24 "The liminality of the island generates new possibilities for females, beyond the limitations established by European models" (Crosby 113). For instance, the waitress at the tavern, Cicily, an orphan of seventeen, is described as "one of those naturally gifted creatures who grow superior to their circumstances, who grow superior to that which is called education; who gather by absorption; who hear nothing without sifting and solving it, as by a sense of natural chemistry" (45). Appropriately, it will be Cicily who will note the Danes' attempt to steal Steel Cap's keys so as to pillage his home, and it is she that will run "in the most direct route to the somber dwelling known as the castle of the mysterious Steel Cap" to warn him ( 51)" (Crosby 112-113).Simms's Bahamian pirate sphere illustrates a domestic piracy where pirates and their mates revert to traditional modes of male-female relationships, where the domestic is aligned with home and hearth, and female agency seemingly aligns with male agency, a representative space uncommon in Simms's oeuvre (Drysdale). In a similar manner, Barney Britton is a landlord who has lost a leg in battle. Yet, and as Crosby notes, "Barney's loss of power is juxtaposed with his wife's seeming potency: she 'was quite as shrewd and a shade or two more shrewdish' says the narrator ( 45)" ( 113). Here the woman wields as much financial prowess as the man. 25 After all,in the words of William Boelhower, the sea itself "leaves no traces, and has no place, names, towns, or dwelling spaces: it cannot be possessed" (92).It is "fundamentally a space of dispersion, conjunction, distribution, contingency, heterogeneity, and of intersecting and stratified lines and images-in short, a field of strategic possibilities in which the Ocean order holds all together in a common but highly fluid space" (92-93, qtd. in Crosby 87).

have chosen artificially constructed identities over the models and forms provided by national models of belonging (Drysdale 333). 26 Nassau is indeed a "fluid matrix" in which pirates can step in and out of conventional labels.27 [SLIDE] At these parties, "there were bold privateers, not calling themselves pirates, who bore commissions of the state, which might be forged, or be bought with money, from varied secretaries and governors, if not of the Crown itself!" (81). Here, we read, "It was well understood that these persons were pirates but, here, at the house of Madame Le Vasseur, they were received as gentlemen, and by the way, they were much more tenacious of their behavior as gentlemen, though just from the high seas" (82).

Simms here deploys an insurgent strategy: the fluidity or liquidity of the seascape is matched onto the liquidity and fluidity of identities. This community, like the sea itself, will not be contained or disciplined by the artificially imposed borders of identities and names (Drysdale 316). 28 This uncontainability compels the reader to engage in a reading practice which highlights uncertainty at the expense of stability and interrogates any facile delineation of who is who on the island: outlaw/gentleman; powerful/powerless; master/mastered; hegemonic/non-hegemonic. 29 Simms here opens an alternative social order, one that privileges heterogeneity, fluidity, ambiguity and doubt in place of the comforting, familiar frameworks of place, nation, and identity. 30 Admittedly, one could argue that the narrative also reveals the exiled British nobleman, Steel Cap's attempt to marshal this community into a new nation-state ideological form. 31 In this sense also, the seascape becomes the laboratory of another modernity. 32 Steel Cap's ideology, however, is clearly doomed from the beginning. Geraldine, Steel Cap's companion (one of these shrewd women), reveals the discrepancies between the utopian language of citizenship proposed by Steel Cap and the reality of political subjectivity. Steel Cap's utopia is presented as "a sort of madness" (54) i and Steel Cap's naïve dreams of homogeneity (versus fluidity) as anachronistic and abnormal in this setting. [SLIDE] "Steel Cap's castle is a mausoleum of lost nobility (where aging mirrors mock him and Geraldine with a faded reflection of their former status), which is described in a telling passage:

A lute in a corner, a few books upon tables, indicated, or would seem to indicate, unwonted taste for such a region; and yet the anomalies are not infrequent which require us to recognize the assassin in the sentimentalist, the midnight burglar occasionally in the guitar or flute player" (52). 33 Steel Cap may indeed dream that he will be able to [SLIDE] bring the people of the island together "under an authority" and hopes that he "shall subdue these Brothers of the Coast to meekness, to that gentleness and simplicity of the heart, which shall bend their hard and iron nature" into "an empire of unmixed freedom" (59-60). Simms, however, reminds us that the pirate is a true natural (or prejuridical man), one existing before politics. 34 The descriptions of pirates further emphasize this reality, as the narrator regularly chooses to identify these pirates with other figures who stand just beyond the limits of political culture, most notably animals.

SLIDE:

The opening paragraphs, for instance, "mak[e] pirates appear no different than sharks or eagles" (Meriwether 19). Pirates are repeatedly compared to "birds of prey" (37), as 'will those great sea birds whom we behold, to take their flight, seeking other prey, by the dawn of another morning" (37). 35 The discourses about the nation. One could argue that there is even a crucial link between pirate fiction and nation building. Read in this way, "pirate literature helps construct its community of readers in part through his censure of such violations of national boundaries and interpersonal intimacies" (Drysdale site). 32 New Providence is "a settlement on the cusp of emerging into a society". Driving the plot are the heretical doctrines of Steel Cap, former pirate, and Caraccioli, his friend, a priest, who both dream of accomplishing "a democratic, egalitarian republic that will transform the pirates into law-abiding enlightened citizens", turning Nassau into "an independent socialist utopia" (15). One could argue that Simms was reaching the end of his career and was simply (?) trying "to recoup his fortunes […] by writing tales and romances". For this reason, and "recalling the success with the subject of piracy in The Cassique of Kiawah, [this is why] he wrote over 170 pages of a pirate romance still in manuscript, "The Brothers of the Coast" (Wimsatt 219). 33 If we accept the definition that "Politics is the art of associating (consociandi) men for the purpose of establishing, cultivating, and conserving social life among them" (Athusius 12), Simms implies that the pirate will never be disciplined into this "necro citizenship" to recast the term proposed by Russ Castronovo. Necro citizenship (as opposed to Republic citizenship) "idealizes a body politic characterized by passivity as well as homogeneity and historical amnesia" (Drysdale 329). Geraldine reminds him that his dreams "would emancipate [man] from all the restraints of law and the teaching of all the ages and peoples for a thousand years" (54). 34 Johannes Althusius, The Politics of Johannes Althusius, trans. With intro. By Frederick Caurey (Boston: Beacon Press, 1964). 35 Episode of the parrot, page 54. Reductive parallel between the pirates who populated the seas and their animal counterparts, the predators that form a natural part of any ecosystem" (The Devil 19).

narrator also repeatedly compares one of the pirates, Dane, to an animal, making him say "I am a strong fellow myself-strong as a horse" (72). He is a true natural man, one existing before politics. The narrator notes that "Supper was announced! Enough of suppers! People will eat! They are the same animals all over the world, and we do not find that they change their habits much when they run beyond the seas, or that there is much novelty in any of the performances, whatever the company, at the discussion of the creature confronts" (88).

Familiar with pirates' novels, 36 Simms was also obviously familiar with "the pleasures of individual freedom, defined over and against state control [which] became unleashed in the seafaring adventures that became popular in the 1830s and 1840s, specifically in depictions of smuggling and piracy, and other kind of illicit trade" (Celikkol 43). 37 In The Culture of Piracy, Claire Jowitt had demonstrated to what extent the often marginal and unruly figure of the pirate could be flexible figures served to comment on and reinforce English nationalism, international relations, and contemporary politics. Pirate literature could thus become an imaginative space through which authors contested and sometimes disciplined radical forms of community that challenged and violated the discourse of the American nation-state. Simms in The Brothers of the Coast, I believe, refuses to discipline the pirate. By contrast and asking us to consider the seascape on its own terms, he "urges the reader to focus on the "ragged edges" of the sea-on those figures who speak, write, and act in and from the margins of officially historical discourse". In doing so, Simms "offers an insurgent practice reading that intervenes against the totalizing, fixing, bounding narratives of being an American in the nineteenth century" (Drysdale 335).

36 "In September of 1865, after Sherman's army had destroyed Woodlands, including Simms' library, 'which numbered some 10,700 volumes' (Letters IV, 501), Simms wrote Duyckinck asking if he could procure [him] a History of the Pyrates … [which], with all my books, has been destroyed … It gives me great material, which I have long desired to work up into a standard romance of Pirate life and practice" (Letters IV, 519). Because he requested the volume specifically for work on a new romance entitled "The Brothers of the Coast," it is reasonable to assume that he drew from the "History of Pyrates" for his colorful and lively description of the pirates in Cassique" (56-57). 37 The pirate "signified the triumph of rebellion, the end of discipline and antiauthoritarian hedonism" (Celikkol 43).Pirate literature offered American writers and readers an imaginative space through which they contested and sometimes disciplined radical forms of community that challenged and violated the emerging discourse of the American nation-state.In The Culture of Piracy, Claire Jowitt has already demonstrated to what extent the often marginal and unruly figure of the pirate can be flexible figures served to comment on English nationalism, international relations, and contemporary politics. She considers the ways in which piracy can, sometimes in surprising and resourceful ways, overlap and connect with, rather than simply challenge, some of the foundations underpinning Renaissance orthodoxies-absolutism, patriarchy, hierarchy of birth, and the superiority of Europeans and the Christian religion over other peoples and belief systems.

Notes

Pirates themselves are known for their defiance of rigid, self-contained models:

i Geraldine, Edward Cavendish's companion voices it in these words: "you dream dreams which will sink your vessel. You would change the world would you, with your philosophies. You think man may become a perfect creature under your wise administration. You would emancipate him from all the restraints of law and the teaching of all the ages and peoples for a thousand years. You ascribe all his vices and misfortunes to the vice of authority, the tyranny of rules, wicked counsellors and stupid laws. And you would persuade the lawless men who gather here, to become virtuous under your wiser maxims. You would convert these thousand islands into a commonwealth, and realize every fancy or your Platos and Sidneys [… ] Such followers you find here will sooner turn you into a pirate, than you turn them into saintly citizens" (54-55) Geraldine, in this passage, revealsthe discrepancies between the utopian language of citizenship proposed by Steel Cap and the reality of political subjectivity. Steel Cap's utopia is a "a sort of madness" (54) and Steel Cap compared to an infantile or naïve citizen.This infantile citizen, in the words of Lauren Berlant, "is potentially a subversive figure whose "stubborn naiveté gives her/him enormous power to unsettle, expose, and reframe the machinery of social life" (29). Soon, however, from infantile citizen, Steel Cap lapses into what Russ Castronovo calls "necro citizenship", one that "idealizes a body politic characterized by passivity as well as homogeneity and historical amnesia" (Drysdale 329). Geraldine reminds him that his dreams "would emancipate [man] from all the restraints of law and the teaching of all the ages and peoples for a thousand years" (54). Soon, however, Steel Cap's ideal is presented, in this setting, as anachronistic and abnormal: Cap's castle is a mausoleum of lost nobility, where aging mirrors mock him and Geraldine with a faded reflection of their former status, which is described in a telling passage: A lute in a corner, a few books upon tables, indicated, or would seem to indicate, unwonted taste for such a region; and yet the anomalies are not infrequent which require us to recognize the assassin in the sentimentalist, the midnight burglar occasionally in the guitar or flute player" (52) qted page 23-24. Steel Cap's philosophy, based on "socialistic views of morals and religion" (59), depends on the reasoning that there is "absurdity [in the] assumption of equality," since Steel Cap argues that 'I see no such equality among men, as the argument assumes. I see nothing but inequalities everywhere [. ..] there is no classing them.

  . Crosby explains that " Simms's admiration of the pirate romance is shown to have extended over twenty years of his writing history, and one can see his plea to Evert Augustus Duyckinck in a letter dated September 1865: "Is it possible to procure me a History of the Pyrates, the 2 vol. 8 vo. Edition? This, with all my books, has been destroyed. It gives me great material, which I have long desired to work up into a standard romance of Pirate life and practice" (Letters 4:519). As such, we see Simms's desire to root the pirate romance within-or against-recorded cultural memory" (111). The socio-political context of the time certainly prompted a search for new heroes and an increased/renewed interest in the ocean or seascapes."Captain Johnson's General History of the Pirates, which stands beside it as the other most important source on piracy [ …] has been seen [. . .] as a source for libertarians seeking heroes" (My emphasis, Pennell 61). Late 1840s: explosive number of seafaring narratives and novels that had been produced in the previous decade, largely by sailors themselves" (Blum The View from the Masthead 175). Crosby notes an "American public's desire for sensational pirate tales in the early nineteenth century" (85), noting that "Texts such as John Howison's The Florida Pirate (1821), Maturin Murray Ballou's Fanny Campbell, the Female Pirate Captain, A Tale of the Revolution (1845) and Roderick the Rover: or, the Spirit of the Wave (1847) and early predecessors like Susanna Rowson's Slaves in Algiers (1793) and Royall Tyler's The Algerine Captive: or the Life and Adventures of Doctor Updike Underhill: Six Years a Prisoner among the Algerines (

Simms seeks to establish the sea "as a proprioceptive point of inquiry" (Blum 671).

Hester Blum, "The Prospect of Oceanic Studies,"PMLA 125 (2010): 671. The rewards to be reaped are numerous, including: "One shift, for example, is to emphasize the fascination with high-risk yet potentially productive spaces at the edge of the dynamic present, where knowledge is expanding but incomplete: one of the defining chronotopes (to use Mikhail Bakhtin's term) of Western modernity" (Cohen 660).

This recent body of scholarship seeks to "shift away from ''methodologies and frameworks imported from existing discourses". Alex Farquarson, Martin Clark, Aquatopia: The Imaginary of the Ocean Deep, Nottingham Contemporary, 2013. For Rediker, in a terracentric view, "Seascapes, however, are not seascapes at all, but depictions of the exterior surface of the ocean seen from dry land or an oceangoing vessel; their element is not aquatic, but terrestrial and aerial." (inFarquarson 6). Such scholars have remained, to re-cast a term used by Marcus Rediker, "terracentric', a word that serves to describe how a "land-based worldview renders the ocean, as an historical arena,obscure." (Farquarson 6).

The sea, according to Iain Chambers, evokes ''the laboratory of another modernity" where the seaborne models of community should be envisioned as "an insurgent space," one that "violates and defies representational schemas through its liquidity, atemporality, and sheer uncontainibility" (Drysdale 313).As a metaphor for a trans-national body politic, the hydra evokes the uncontainablenature of an emerging working-class consciousness that cut across divisions of race and culture and threatened the structure of Euroamerican imperial power by defying the rigid hier-archies and spatial organizations upon which it depended.Peter Linebaugh and Marcus Rediker,The Many-Headed Hydra: Sailors, Slaves,Commoners, and the Hidden History of the Revolutionary Atlantic (Boston: Beacon Press,( 2000), p.4.

It is a description that moves the narrative from grounded space to imaginative space, one in which we can belie the constrictions that biologically define us and intellectually interrogate other ways of being".

To keep the gaze and the eyes fixed on the sea = to become fixed on this "theater where the vast forces of nature not only rule human history but are profoundly shaped by it as well" (Cohen 658). Blum, "The Prospect of Oceanic Studies,"PMLA 125 (2010): 671.

It is what Linebaugh and Redikeridentify as the figure of the hydra, which suggests a "decidedly non-national, often extraterritorial population that had little regard for international boundaries and demarcations" (in Drysdale 317).

This multinational, multiethnic crew is truly a non-national extraterritorial population.

Crucially, this community of sailors represents the possibility of an epistemological reconfiguration of the very idea of "nation" (Drysdale 318). Drysdale continues : « this fluid matrix interrupts and interrogates the facile evolutions of a linear mapping, disciplined by the landlocked desires of unilateral progress and a homogeneous modernity » (qted. In Maritime Criticism 681).

Example here of "Piracy as seen as a threatening example of democracy [that could] run amok, its threat located not simply in its violence or economic cost but also in radical politics that Melville described as "riotocracy"-a government "neither Grecian, nor Roman, nor American … which gloried in having no law but lawlessness" (The Encantadas 149)." (site Drysdale)

Rüdiger Haude calls it "the unlimited, unpredictable space, the negation of everything 'national.'"Particularly important to this reconfiguration is Peter Linebaugh and Marcus Rediker's book The Many-Headed Hydra. This hydra evokes the uncontainable nature of an emerging working-class consciousness that cut across divisions of

In Nassau, assessing pirates in terms of law versus lawlessness is an elusive enterprise.

We read that during Madame Le Vasseur's evenings, Mr. LeVasseur "found his markets and his profits from the pirates, but he was no pirate himself" (79).

Simms clearly calls for a reading of this community as a nation turned upside down, one marked by fluidity, movement, and non-linear hierarchy. Crosby, "'The Brothers of the Coast' proffers a new place of settlement, one established by a coterie of individuals who co-exist on a plane of alternative social order, embodying a new world counter-construction of government" (112). The ship and communities of sailors, pirates… must be read as a site in which one could find "the world turned upside down"(Rediker 2004, 61). The ship is where we find the structures of landed power contested and subverted "a place to which and in which the ideas and practices of revolutionaries… escaped, reformed, circulated, and persisted"(Linebaugh and Rediker 2000, 144-145).

"a fluid matrix" which "interrupts and interrogates the facile evaluations of a linear mapping disciplined by the landlocked desires of unilateral progress and homogeneous modernity" (Chambers, "Maritime Criticism" 681).

Nassau can certainly be read as "a space where national boundaries and landed aristocracies become effaced, where former politicos, banished nobles, and lost souls can recreate themselves"(Crosby 111).

According to this reading, if Simms' vision of New Providence is that of a society divorced from history and traditions, one could argue that Simms could not distance his vision from and nation-state building. "While the sea itself may offer a model for an insurgent epistemological shift away from categories of the nation-state, it nevertheless remains a space that is always subject to inscription and organization by nation and capital. Oceanic fiction, through the "Brothers of the Coast", may offer a lens through which we might examine how the nation produces itself in part through its efforts to contain more seaborne models of community, intimacy, and belonging"(Drysdale 314). Such reading, promoting »The Brothers of the Coast » as a product of hydrophobia itself, would make sense, since it has been recognized that pirates could be used as flexible figures to articulate