![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Hello hi it has been ages. I am here in a rush because I just remembered I had this account. I forgot to post my feelings about the yuri zine and now I have to reread it because I forgot a bunch but quick question! Is anyone archiving these things? Is there an archive for like, academic fandom meta like this because if not I am suddenly desperate to make some. dead serious
Because I am very normal, I like to use my jstor access to read scholarly articles about history a whole lot. Mostly medieval history, but I do like to dabble, and I’m always interested in queer history. Recently, I’ve become very interested in a poem called simply Na Maria by a trobairitz called Bieiris de Romans. It is a very sweet and romantic poem, I think, and one written from one woman to another. I love it so much I’m writing historical fiction about it. This is what I like to do anyway (my fanfiction magnum opus is a 95k word lesbian historical au. With footnotes. And a bibliography.)
Anyway because I am writing historical fiction about this medieval poem, I am trying to read as much scholarship as possible on this medieval poem. And it has gotten EXHAUSTING, because scholars have spilled like three million buckets of ink on how it couldn’t possibly be gay, because it’s “about the Virgin Mary,” (this, at least, scholars have debunked, as well as one guy who asserted everyone was misreading the name Bieiris and it actually said “Alberic”), or that they’re “actually arguing over a man,” or, most popularly, that it reflects the language of courtly love poems between women that just express friendship which means that the language cannot possibly also reflect romance.
I do think this argument has some merit; intimate language between women was apparently normalized at the time. That Being Said, I’m also getting really annoyed at some of these scholars, who are I guess just presuming that ambiguous language can’t possibly hold multiple meanings. And who are all ignoring the very wonderful lesbian letters between nuns compared to the poem by John Boswell, who observes that they are similar in language. Thanks John Boswell. There’s probably an argument to be made that lesbian letters between a pair of medieval german nuns may not really be relevant to a medieval French poem, but I saw another scholar compare the poem to courtly literature that was like half a millennium older than it and also German, and about men (Charlemagne and one of his vassals, and jeez does it get homoerotic (but apparently this is a purely platonic descriptor that expresses courtly ties), so I kind of think this comparison is fine, actually.
Anyway I think I’m so mad about this because looking at the poem it feels so obvious to me, and yet people are hemming and hawing and writing entire academic papers to prove that it’s not even remotely possible that the poem could have even a grain of lesbian desire in it. What’s wrong with a poem being ambiguously queer? Why are we always required to “prove” queerness in history, but never straightness? Can one scholar sit down and point to me where the heterosexuality in this poem is? I have had enough.
Here’s a translation of the poem, translated by I think Marcelle Theibaux.
Lady Maria, your worth and excellence,
joy, understanding, and exquisite beauty,
the warmth of your welcome, your excellence and honor,
your elegant conversation and charming company,
your gentle face and amiable gaiety,
your gentle gaze and amorous mien—
all these things are yours, without deviousness.
And these things have drawn my truant heart to you.
For this reason I plead with you— if true love pleases you—
and my joyfulness and sweet submission
could elicit from you the succor that I need,
then give me, lovely woman, if it’s pleasing to you,
the gift in which I have most joy and hope.
For in you I have fixed my heart and desire,
and from you I have derived all my happiness,
and from you— so many times— my painful yearning.
And since your beauty and worth enhance you
above all women, so that no other is superior,
I plead with you— please! It would bring you honor,
too, not to love some suitor who’d betray you.
Glorious lady, woman, enhanced by worth, joy,
and gracious speech, my verses go to you.
For in you are gaiety and happiness,
and every good that one demands of a lady.
I wanted to let the poem speak for itself, but I have a bit of an observation. Something I noticed on this particular reread was Bieiris’ employment of the language of submission. That is a courtly trope- a knight in courtly love was expected to venerate, and yes, submit to, his lady. Why can’t Bieiris employing it here have a romantic meaning for her, too?
Anyway because I am writing historical fiction about this medieval poem, I am trying to read as much scholarship as possible on this medieval poem. And it has gotten EXHAUSTING, because scholars have spilled like three million buckets of ink on how it couldn’t possibly be gay, because it’s “about the Virgin Mary,” (this, at least, scholars have debunked, as well as one guy who asserted everyone was misreading the name Bieiris and it actually said “Alberic”), or that they’re “actually arguing over a man,” or, most popularly, that it reflects the language of courtly love poems between women that just express friendship which means that the language cannot possibly also reflect romance.
I do think this argument has some merit; intimate language between women was apparently normalized at the time. That Being Said, I’m also getting really annoyed at some of these scholars, who are I guess just presuming that ambiguous language can’t possibly hold multiple meanings. And who are all ignoring the very wonderful lesbian letters between nuns compared to the poem by John Boswell, who observes that they are similar in language. Thanks John Boswell. There’s probably an argument to be made that lesbian letters between a pair of medieval german nuns may not really be relevant to a medieval French poem, but I saw another scholar compare the poem to courtly literature that was like half a millennium older than it and also German, and about men (Charlemagne and one of his vassals, and jeez does it get homoerotic (but apparently this is a purely platonic descriptor that expresses courtly ties), so I kind of think this comparison is fine, actually.
Anyway I think I’m so mad about this because looking at the poem it feels so obvious to me, and yet people are hemming and hawing and writing entire academic papers to prove that it’s not even remotely possible that the poem could have even a grain of lesbian desire in it. What’s wrong with a poem being ambiguously queer? Why are we always required to “prove” queerness in history, but never straightness? Can one scholar sit down and point to me where the heterosexuality in this poem is? I have had enough.
Here’s a translation of the poem, translated by I think Marcelle Theibaux.
Lady Maria, your worth and excellence,
joy, understanding, and exquisite beauty,
the warmth of your welcome, your excellence and honor,
your elegant conversation and charming company,
your gentle face and amiable gaiety,
your gentle gaze and amorous mien—
all these things are yours, without deviousness.
And these things have drawn my truant heart to you.
For this reason I plead with you— if true love pleases you—
and my joyfulness and sweet submission
could elicit from you the succor that I need,
then give me, lovely woman, if it’s pleasing to you,
the gift in which I have most joy and hope.
For in you I have fixed my heart and desire,
and from you I have derived all my happiness,
and from you— so many times— my painful yearning.
And since your beauty and worth enhance you
above all women, so that no other is superior,
I plead with you— please! It would bring you honor,
too, not to love some suitor who’d betray you.
Glorious lady, woman, enhanced by worth, joy,
and gracious speech, my verses go to you.
For in you are gaiety and happiness,
and every good that one demands of a lady.
I wanted to let the poem speak for itself, but I have a bit of an observation. Something I noticed on this particular reread was Bieiris’ employment of the language of submission. That is a courtly trope- a knight in courtly love was expected to venerate, and yes, submit to, his lady. Why can’t Bieiris employing it here have a romantic meaning for her, too?
Me, Yuri, and Fandom
Feb. 17th, 2024 12:34 pmWhen I made this account, it was a out of a lot of excitement and thoughts in my head that I wanted to share. I still have a lot of that, but I wasn't sure what I should actually post here, because it might not be all that interesting. I guess I could do stuff more relevant to novel or fanfiction writing (there's a thought), or try to talk about art or my research (right now the topic of my personal, fiction-related research is 12th century southern France), but apparently the second real post I'm making is one out of annoyance. I guess that's the thing other than passion that gets me going. I'll try to be more positive next time.
Anyway, this post is happening, because over the past months (perhaps even year) I have had a very tiny tumblr that I just like to post art to occasionally. My relationship to tumblr has been pretty unhealthy in the past, so these days I try to stay off it as much as possible (I am always three seconds away from deleting it on a whim), and just briefly visit occasionally to post a little bit of art to about 3 or 4 notes and then leave. But I will, on occasion, go browse the yuri tag. Not just by top, but by recent, too. And I have noticed a bit of a trend.
There sure are a lot of pairings that are decidedly not yuri in the yuri tag.
I do want to be clear; I know that there's some interesting, scholarly discussions to be had about yuri and yaoi and what they can be. I know that there's girl yaoi and guy yuri, and intringuing analysis out there of the dynamics of the genre and how they interact with gender. That's all fine and I have no problem with it. I find it fascinating and I'm curious to see where that discussion goes. I also know there's a yuri zine out there that may answer some of my questions, but it's sold out and I don't know where to read it.
So for now, I'm just going to do some complaining.
I think that meme-ification of yuri ("this too, is yuri"-- admittedly, this is a very fun joke and I make it all the time) has lead to this perception that now literally any pairing or anything can be labeled as yuri. And it's gotten very irritating for me, specifically. For what reason am I be seeing people just tagging m/f or m/m couples as yuri, without any context, jokes, or irony? No "they're so guy yuri to me" or jokes about old man yuri or anything? Just some fanart or discussion about a completely unrelated thing, and then boom. Yuri tag.
Like, everything is just yuri now. I had to block the petrigrof (a pairing from Adventure Time) tag at one point because everyone was joking that they (a m/f couple) were doomed yuri. I spoke to one person on this subject at least who headcanoned Simon Petrigrof (the male character in the show) as nonbinary, but I had no indication that this was the case for every single person tagging them that way. So to me, who did not carry that headcanon, I felt like I was just seeing an influx of something that was decidedly not yuri to me being mistagged as yuri.
And I feel like that's been part of a trend I've noticed, where this thing that was about wlw, that has always been important to me as a lesbian as a way to explore and express myself and have my own space, is being also filled with a slow and steady stream of people who, before yuri also became a meme, never cared about it and would not have cared about it. And, because they seem to have little interest in yuri or f/f pairings but want to participate in the joke/movement, they make it now about, well, men, I guess. And sometimes the women who love them. And I have nothing against them or their interests, but it does get on my nerves that they are in this space without being invested in it.
(Although, if the reason these pairings are being tagged as yuri is because they see one or both characters as trans, I wish they would bring this up in that post, so I could see that and be happy. I do also want to specify that I'm not here to complain about nonbinary headcanons or trans headcanons either, or genderbends. I love things like that, and that isn't where my annoyance stems from.)
Is this problem as big a deal as I'm making it out to be? No, it really isn't. Ultimately, the yuri tag is still mostly full of art and writing about women loving women (and also about characters and people named yuri, who I usually block the tag for but carry no resentment about their presence there).
And, for all I know, the meaning of yuri and yaoi is changing, and I am having trouble adjusting to those changes. If so, I'll just have to get over it at some point. I do worry I sound particularly mean, especially since I am mostly just complaining about people mistagging things.
But I guess here's my final takeaway to this waayyyyyy too long post: as beloved as they can be, f/f pairings are not particularly popular compared to their counterparts. They are often relegated in fanworks to background pairings (there is a post in me about the "functional lesbian background couple babysitting useless main m/m couple" trope that I feel like I see a lot in fanworks, but that is not for today), or talked about as something universally beloved by the fandom but without any real passion behind creating for them.
There are popular f/f pairings, and there is a community that loves yuri. In it, I have made a space for myself. My worries might be completely unfounded, but I just don't want it to get smaller.
Anyway, this post is happening, because over the past months (perhaps even year) I have had a very tiny tumblr that I just like to post art to occasionally. My relationship to tumblr has been pretty unhealthy in the past, so these days I try to stay off it as much as possible (I am always three seconds away from deleting it on a whim), and just briefly visit occasionally to post a little bit of art to about 3 or 4 notes and then leave. But I will, on occasion, go browse the yuri tag. Not just by top, but by recent, too. And I have noticed a bit of a trend.
There sure are a lot of pairings that are decidedly not yuri in the yuri tag.
I do want to be clear; I know that there's some interesting, scholarly discussions to be had about yuri and yaoi and what they can be. I know that there's girl yaoi and guy yuri, and intringuing analysis out there of the dynamics of the genre and how they interact with gender. That's all fine and I have no problem with it. I find it fascinating and I'm curious to see where that discussion goes. I also know there's a yuri zine out there that may answer some of my questions, but it's sold out and I don't know where to read it.
So for now, I'm just going to do some complaining.
I think that meme-ification of yuri ("this too, is yuri"-- admittedly, this is a very fun joke and I make it all the time) has lead to this perception that now literally any pairing or anything can be labeled as yuri. And it's gotten very irritating for me, specifically. For what reason am I be seeing people just tagging m/f or m/m couples as yuri, without any context, jokes, or irony? No "they're so guy yuri to me" or jokes about old man yuri or anything? Just some fanart or discussion about a completely unrelated thing, and then boom. Yuri tag.
Like, everything is just yuri now. I had to block the petrigrof (a pairing from Adventure Time) tag at one point because everyone was joking that they (a m/f couple) were doomed yuri. I spoke to one person on this subject at least who headcanoned Simon Petrigrof (the male character in the show) as nonbinary, but I had no indication that this was the case for every single person tagging them that way. So to me, who did not carry that headcanon, I felt like I was just seeing an influx of something that was decidedly not yuri to me being mistagged as yuri.
And I feel like that's been part of a trend I've noticed, where this thing that was about wlw, that has always been important to me as a lesbian as a way to explore and express myself and have my own space, is being also filled with a slow and steady stream of people who, before yuri also became a meme, never cared about it and would not have cared about it. And, because they seem to have little interest in yuri or f/f pairings but want to participate in the joke/movement, they make it now about, well, men, I guess. And sometimes the women who love them. And I have nothing against them or their interests, but it does get on my nerves that they are in this space without being invested in it.
(Although, if the reason these pairings are being tagged as yuri is because they see one or both characters as trans, I wish they would bring this up in that post, so I could see that and be happy. I do also want to specify that I'm not here to complain about nonbinary headcanons or trans headcanons either, or genderbends. I love things like that, and that isn't where my annoyance stems from.)
Is this problem as big a deal as I'm making it out to be? No, it really isn't. Ultimately, the yuri tag is still mostly full of art and writing about women loving women (and also about characters and people named yuri, who I usually block the tag for but carry no resentment about their presence there).
And, for all I know, the meaning of yuri and yaoi is changing, and I am having trouble adjusting to those changes. If so, I'll just have to get over it at some point. I do worry I sound particularly mean, especially since I am mostly just complaining about people mistagging things.
But I guess here's my final takeaway to this waayyyyyy too long post: as beloved as they can be, f/f pairings are not particularly popular compared to their counterparts. They are often relegated in fanworks to background pairings (there is a post in me about the "functional lesbian background couple babysitting useless main m/m couple" trope that I feel like I see a lot in fanworks, but that is not for today), or talked about as something universally beloved by the fandom but without any real passion behind creating for them.
There are popular f/f pairings, and there is a community that loves yuri. In it, I have made a space for myself. My worries might be completely unfounded, but I just don't want it to get smaller.
