Wenn Frauen Manner-kleidung tragen

Lehnert, Gertrud. Wenn Frauen Mannerkleidung tragen: Geschlecht und Maskerade& in Literatur und Geschichte. MUnchen: dtv, 1997. 223 pp. DM 24.00 paperback Stoll, Andrea, and Verena WodtkeWerner, eds. Sakkorausch und Rollentausch: Mannliche Leitbilder als Freiheitsentwiirfe von Frauen. Dortmund: Ebersbach, 1997. 240 pp. DM 38.00 paperback, Sparked by theoretical contributions of Judith Butler and by Marjorie Garber's research, motif of cross-dressing has become a focal point in discussions on essence and nature of gender. The debate, which originated in United States, now finds its continuation in Germany. Both publications being reviewed here must be seen as part of an effort to import figure of transvestite into German Studies. Lehnert's study develops many aspects that author had already discussed in Maskeraden und Metamorphosen: Als Manner verk1eidete Frauen in der Literatur (1994). Lehnert defines cross-dressing as a transitional phase that can open up space for emergence of meaning. But she is equally ready to admit that this emancipatory potential can be absorbed by dominant discourse so that, rather than destabilizing traditional gender stereotypes, cross-dressing may actually reinforce them. Transvestites per se, Lehnert concludes, are neither inherently subversive nor inherently affirmative. Lehnert's approach is both comparative, spanning spectrum of German, French, Italian, English and American literature, and interdisciplinary, comprising film, art, and history. Lehnert aims to introduce readers to highlights within this encyclopedic historical and thematic range and sketches a rough periodization that traces major changes in development of motif of cross-dressing over time. Lehnert claims that before 1800 literary cross-dressing served a distinct purpose and was often used to strengthen male supremacy. This situation changed around 1800 with what Lehnert calls the invention of gender as we know it. In course of this redefinition of gender, cross-dressing started to assume a destabilizing potential as it drew attention to inconsistencies in existing gender hierarchy. Lehnert refers to texts by Schiller, Kleist, and Wieland to prove her point. In contrast to eighteenth century fascination with transvestite figure, nineteenth century literature lost interest in cross-dressing. Lehnert traces this change back to fact that new gender dichotomy was safely established by then. In twentieth century, cross-dressing was often employed to thematize gay and lesbian identities. Lehnert claims that it is in this context that masquerade fully develops its subversive potential as it is uniquely suited for representation of queer desire. It is also in this context that Lehnert herself best employs her analytical powers. Her sophisticated comparison of Judith Butler's and Sue Ellen Case's theories is an important contribution to conceptualization of a feminist subject that is not restrained by a heterosexualist discourse. While Lehnert's discussion of theoretical concepts attests to a profound understanding of issues at stake, her historical generalizations are not always entirely accurate. The assumption that motif of cross-dressing was practically non-existent in texts by women authors before twentieth century ignores texts by Therese Huber, Dorothea Schlegel, Caroline de la Motte Fouque, Friederike Helene Unger and others. Her claim that nineteenth century literature lost interest in figure of transvestite is also controversial as cross dressers do in fact appear in several texts by Eichendorff, Stifter, Keller, Grillparzer, Meyer (Lehnert in fact discusses Gustav Adolphs Page) and others

Art · German Literature and Culture Studies · Philosophy