![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
The novels of Octavia Butler and Samuel Delany provide a compelling critique of socio-economic slavery, but these novels also go beyond critique in order to describe positive, ethical forms of power and slavery. For Butler and Delany, erotic power exchange and consensual slavery stand as vibrant alternatives to the ethically bankrupt forms of non-consensual power. These two authors thus offer us a way to begin healing the wounds which non-consensual slavery has left upon our culture and its philosophy of ethics.
Notes
On power in prisons and military barracks, see Foucault Citation1979. On power in mental institutions, see Foucault Citation1965.
Masoch used the mechanism of the contract to explore the concept of consent in his famous 1870 novel Venus in Furs. Although the contemporary S/M community is diverse enough to make universal agreement a rare phenomenon, the community is fairly united on the issue of consent. For Patrick Califia, consent is a basic part of the definition of S/M: ‘the only requirements are that nothing happens that both parties don't agree to beforehand, and nobody gets hurt (mentally or physically) unless they want that experience’ (Califia Citation2001, p. 5). For Jay Wiseman, ‘consent is one of the most important issues, perhaps the most important issue, in SM’ (Wiseman Citation1996, p. 47). Dossie Easton and Catherine A. Liszt are even more forceful; they declare that ‘respect for consent is mandatory’ (Easton and Liszt Citation1995, p. 46). And John Warren goes so far as to say that ‘consent is more than just an ideal for BDSM relationships; it is a touchstone, an axiom, a sacrament’ (Warren Citation2000, p. 33).
I use the phrase ‘speculative fiction’ rather than ‘science fiction’ so that Delany's Nevèrÿon books, which describe vital components of his philosophy of power, may be included in the discussion. The attempt to move beyond the arbitrary disciplinary boundaries of those who police ‘science fiction’ is clearly a major part of Delany's critical project. He is right to argue that ‘our very insistence that our genre might be susceptible to “rigorous definition” functions today as a ready-made admission that the genre must be substantially less complex and vital than any of the literary genres.’ (Delany Citation1999, p. 240).
For a good account of the enormous dilemmas which female slaves faced, especially with respect to issues of sexuality and reproduction, see White Citation1985.
White Citation1987, p. 65.
Hutcheon Citation1988, p. 105.
Elias 2001.
Ibid., p. xvii.
Hutcheon, Poetics of Postmodernism, p. 160.
Delany's argument suggests that paraliterature—which includes not only science fiction, but also comic books and pornography—is that which is always already outside of literature. This structural relationship between the literary and the paraliterary has a definite political significance. In one sense, paraliterature is the ghetto against which the ivory tower and its canon are defined. However, because the relationship between literature and paraliterature is above all a power relationship, it may be reversed at any time. Thus Delany argues that science fiction ‘has used its marginal status as a position from which to criticize the world’ (Delany Citation1999, p. 150).
Butler Citation1995, p. 15.
Ibid., p. 75.
Ibid., p. 158.
Ibid., p. 134.
Ibid., p. 68.
Butler Citation1978, p. 161.
Butler Citation1999, p. 184.
Butler Citation1978, p. 97.
Ibid., pp. 92 – 93.
Ibid., p. 55.
Ibid., p. 96.
Butler Citation1999, p. 150.
Butler Citation1978, p. 101.
Ibid., p. 188.
Ibid., p. 155.
Ibid., p. 217; emphasis added.
Ibid., p. 220.
Barr Citation1987, p. 77.
Roberts Citation1993, p. 107.
Alaimo Citation1998, p. 126.
Butler Citation1999, p. 90.
Ibid., p. 92.
Ibid., p. 176.
Ibid., p. 196.
Ibid., p. 94.
In a well-known section from The Phenomenology of Mind (1807) entitled ‘Lordship and bondage,’ Hegel examined the richly intricate ways in which masters and slaves came to depend upon one another. He concluded that since the consciousness of the master must always be mediated through the consciousness of the slave, the master cannot attain true independence, but only a ‘dependent consciousness’ (Hegel Citation1967, pp. 234ff).
Ibid., p. 259.
Ibid., p. 260.
Russ Citation1981, p. 83.
Broderick Citation1995, p. 120.
Ibid., p. 138.
Delany 1994b, p.140.
Delany Citation1985, p. 215.
Delany Citation1994b, p. 136.
Delany Citation1999, p. 118.
Ibid., p. 119.
Delany Citation1994b, p. 46.
Ibid., p. 71.
Delany Citation1979, p. 224.
Ibid., p. 221.
Ibid., p. 225.
Ibid., p. 135.
Ibid., p. 137.
Ibid., p. 143.
Or, if we prefer to use the language of the S/M community, ‘everybody's a switch.’
Delany Citation1979, p. 234.
Ibid., p. 237.
Delany Citation1984, p. 77.
Ibid., p. 87.
Delany Citation1985, p. 123.
Fox Citation1996, p. 52.
Delany Citation1985a, p. 9.
Delany Citation1979, p. 238.
Delany Citation1994a, p. 24.
Ibid., p. 34.
The emphasis which Delany places on negotiation is not surprising. The S/M community typically regards negotiation as one of the most important skills. Jay Wiseman calls it the most important (Wiseman Citation1996, p. 57). Pat Califia points out that the community uses negotiation for everything from individual scenes to entire relationships (Califia Citation2001, p. 25).
Delany Citation1994a, p. 74.
Ibid., p. 34.
Ibid., p. 54.
Ibid., p. 57.
Ibid., p. 174.
Ibid., p. 65.