Even in its effervescent qualities, writing begins in and with the body. Yet writing brings
attention to the metaphysic recesses of body, soul, and experience we may not otherwise
“see.”
“Maybe
I have written to see…from the tips of fingers that transcribe by the sweet
dictates of vision. From the point of view of the soul’s eye: the eye of a
womansoul.”
(HC, Coming
to, p. 4)
To trace “birth” and writing, in and with Hélène Cixous, I begin with the body. Also, the female
body and Cixous’ contemplations of how she-body-writes.
One of Cixous' early
tracts dates to 1970s feminism. Her essay, Laugh
of the Medusa, was/is well know to North American audiences. This is likely
due to its speedy translation at the time, and its absorbing qualities, being a
writing-manifesto towards women-of-the-time. All those who voices had been
silenced, or not given to the page:
“By
writing herself, woman will return to the body which has been more then
confiscated from her….Write yourself. Your body must be heard. Only then will
the immense resources of the unconscious spring forth.”
(HC, Medusa,
p. 880)
“To
become at will the taker and initiator, for her own right, in every symbolic
system, in every political process” (p. 880)
SYMBOLIC
systems. A pressing idea for me. The importance of symbols and symbolism we
live by. Linguistic signing, also coming from my current gift economy
reading. The notion that there is a “symbolic order of the mother” (L. Muraro,
in Vaughan, 2015), a maternal symbolic order, that is either hidden and/or
repressed by the phallocentric. Where the “symbolic order” is usually associated
with psychoanalytic theory (Lacan) and the absence of the mother (who is "the real"), and a lot of
theory I have to work at more to represent herein. In Lacan, language is the domain of the father, and the "law" (Freud).
The “symbolic” has to do with
language, and our need of symbols for communication in community and culture. In
other words, to re-claim a “symbolic order of the mother,” is to say that mothers direct a symbolic order, through introduction of language, symbol, and communication.
I'm coming back to "mothers" over and over in this blog. As the organic inquiry of my research, mothers are arising as a locus of this work. I get it. I am "paying" attention!
In seeking
symbolic female/feminine systems, what could be more obvious then birth and
birth giving? “Birth” is that ever present and completely under-theorized,
under-represented topic of inquiry, from female/feminine philosophical
perspectives of its ACTUAL experience, and mothers’ self-described stories of
such.
The immediacy
with which Cixous recognizes and writes birth (and what I mean by this is
female/feminine, woman-centred birth, not the pain-glorified, fear-full,
biblically-induced, popular culture version of such), suggests her
close and investigative relationship with the topic. Early on in Cixous' life, this
was via Eve, her mother. Her mother-the-midwife, who for many years of Cixous’ youth
and young adulthood (after the death of the father), ran a birth-clinic serving an Arab, not-French population, in Algeria. Cixous may have attended and witnessed many birth-givings with
her mother.
She notes this
midwifery in her writing:
“I
give birth. I enjoy giving births. I enjoyed birthings—my mother is a
midwife—I’ve always taken pleasure in watching a woman give birth. Giving birth
“well.” Leading her act, her passion, letting herself be led by it, pushing as
one thinks, half carried away, half commanding the contraction, she merges
herself with the uncontrollable, which she makes her own. Then, her glorious
strength!”
(HC,
Coming to, p. 30)
This paragraph
goes gloriously on and on in its birthing:
“Giving
birth as one swims, exploiting the resistance of flesh, of the sea, the work of
breath in which the notion of “mastery” is annulled, body after her own body,
the woman follows herself, meets herself, marries herself. She is there. Entirely, mobilized, and this is
matter of her own body, of the flesh of her flesh. At last! This time, of all
times, she is hers, and if she wishes, she is not absent, she is not fleeing,
she can take and give of herself to herself.”
(HC,
Coming to, p. 30-31)
This description reaches for the internal experience of birth. What midwives and experienced birth-givers can tell other women of its territory. To surrender to the experience, to be completely present as it demands of us. Yet the feeling of pure focused intensity which birth brings us, which we can both surrender to and direct. The truth of meeting one-self. Doing away with (annulling) the notion of "mastery," which Cixous also goes beyond in her writing.
Cixous writes MORE, more of birth, and I love it all. Go, go, Cixous!
“It
was in watching them giving birth (to themselves) that I learned to love women,
to sense and desire the power and resources of femininity; to feel astonishment
that such immensity can be reabsorbed, covered up, in the ordinary.”
(HC, Coming
to, p. 31)
And so her
mother’s midwifery-based birthing brings Cixous to women, and a feminine
understanding of life/power that is "hidden" in the everyday fact of birth. This factor of “loving women” (and babies) is
common to midwives who attend birth after birth. The connection,
inter-connection, and availability of birthing energies to instill a common
grace among women. We welcome the new child earth-side through the incredible
efforts of the birthing mother, running the line of life and death. Does the midwife-woman recognizes the female
effort of the m/other as sacred, as blessed and fierce in its vulnerability,
seeing a mirror of her-self, her own potential?
“Loving women”
is not a central factor of medical practice, which tends to exploit the
vulnerability of women giving birth in power-over relations. Perhaps based in the
exchange economy of medical work, where the medical officer must give something
that the woman herself does not have (i.e. machine-based assistance, meant to
alleviate female experience of itself). There is something in midwifery of
being mother to women, of which medical practitioners cannot, do not, or will
not “give” in their practices (is it a missing gift economy, that only that
midwife can practice?). There are exceptions of course. Some doctors may
practice the gift, and view women lovingly. I would like to add Cixous’
paragraphs into midwifery and medical school curricula.
What do you
think? Who does birth belong to, in our human condition? Cixous also asks, who
does writing belong to? Writing being akin to birth. The creation of other
beings—our relationship to creation in its effort, anguish, and ecstasy.
“—just
like the desire to write: a desire to live from within, a desire for the
swollen belly, for language, for blood…the unsurpassed pleasures of pregnancy
which have actually been always exaggerated or conjured away—or cursed—in the
classic texts. For of there’s one thing that’s been repressed here’s the place
to find it: in the taboo of the pregnant woman.”
(HC, Medusa, p. 891)
And so Cixous
conjures the pregnant, birthing text, source of life, and new (old) ways of
writing body/soul. I suppose, without in my own life making the jump from art
to midwifery, and back to art again (adding the craft of writing), would I so
admire these passages. The declaration of female creativity they evoke from
within the female birthing body. To claim and fall into writing is both an
anguish and divine pleasure. The pregnant, birthing pleasure of women and goddesses.
“She
gives birth….She has her source. She draws deeply. She releases. Laughing. And in the wake of a child, a squall
of Breath! A longing for text!....A child! Paper! Intoxications! I’m brimming
over! My breasts are overflowing! Milk. Ink. Nursing time. And me? I’m hungry
too. The milky taste of ink!”
(HC, Coming
to, p. 31)
Breath / Text
Child / Paper
Milk / Ink
Ahhhhhhhh……The
milky taste of ink!