Kent Academic RepositoryFull text document (pdf)

Copyright & reuse

Content in the Kent Academic Repository is made available for research purposes. Unless otherwise stated all

content is protected by copyright and in the absence of an open licence (eg Creative Commons), permissions

for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher, author or other copyright holder.

Versions of research

The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version.

Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the

published version of record.

Enquiries

For any further enquiries regarding the licence status of this document, please contact:

researchsupport@kent.ac.uk

If you believe this document infringes copyright then please contact the KAR admin team with the take-down

information provided at http://kar.kent.ac.uk/contact.html

Citation for published version

Henderson, Sarah (2018) The Blurring Effect: An Exploration of Maternal Instinct and Ambivalence. Master of Arts by Research (MARes) thesis, University of Kent,.

DOI

Link to record in KAR

https://kar.kent.ac.uk/66794/

Document Version

UNSPECIFIED

i

TheBlurringEffect:AnExplorationofMaternalInstinctandAmbivalence

BySarahHenderson

MasterbyResearch

17thApril2018

‘nowomanhasevertoldthewholetruthofherlife’1

IsadoraDu

1 Isadora Duncan quoted in Charlotte Perkins Gilman, My Life (New York: Liveright Publishers, 1955) p.3.

ii

Formychildren,

Nicholas,Alexander,HughandLucy,

withoutwhomthiswouldnothavebeenpossible.

iii

TableofContents

Foreword

Introduction

PreliminaryResearch 2

ChapterOne–Re-definingMaternalInstinctandMaternal

Ambivalence 8

ChapterTwo–ALife’sWorkonBecomingaMotherbyRachelCusk 12

ChapterThree–NightWakingbySarahMoss 14

Conclusion 16

ChapterOne–AnOverviewofMaternalInstinctandMaternalAmbivalence

Introduction 18

SectionOne

MaternalInstinct 20

1.i) DefinitionofMaternalInstinct 23

AnHistoricalRetrospectiveofMaternalInstinct

2.i) Plato 26

2.ii) Jean-JacquesRousseau 29

2.iii) TheUniversalMother 32

TheArgumentfromNature

3.i) BreastfeedinganditsRelationshipwithMotherhood 36

3.ii) TheFamilyParadigm 39

SectionTwo

MaternalAmbivalence 40

4.i) MaternalAmbivalenceinRelationto

Intersubjectivity 43

4.ii) MaternalAmbivalenceinRelationtoEthics 47

Conclusion 48

iv

ChapterTwo–RachelCusk:TheBlurringEffect

Introduction 50

i) IntertwiningGenres 55

ii) ‘Iwasonlybeinghonest’–Avoiceofdissent 60

SectionOne

1.i) Motherbaby 63

1.ii) IntersubjectivityinPregnancy 64

1.iii) DialecticalRelationshipbetweenMotherandBaby 65

1.iv) Intersubjectivity–SplittingorBlurring? 66

1.iv) Whatiswomanifsheisnotawife,amother,adaughter? 71

1.vi) Separation 73

SectionTwo

2.i) SelfandWorld 76

2.ii) SocialIntervention 80

2.iii) ChildcareManuals 81

2.iv) Choice 82

Conclusion 83

ChapterThree–Anexplorationintode-naturalisingthe‘naturalattitude’

Introduction 85

SectionOne

TheMother

1.i) AnnainNightWaking 91

1.ii) HistoryandIdeology 96

SectionTwo

Psychoanalysis

2.i) ImprintingandEthology 98

2.ii) AttachmentTheory 100

2.iii) ObjectRelationsTheoryinrelationtotheEmbodiedSubject 104

2.iv) LettingGo 107

SectionThree

3.i) Infanticide 112

3.ii) NightWaking 114

SectionFour

4.i) TheMotherintheWorkPlace 115

Conclusion 118

Conclusion 121

Afterword 130

Bibliography 131

v

Acknowledgments

Thisthesishastakenthreeyearstocreateanditwouldnothavecometogether

withoutmysupervisorDrArianeMildenbergwhogavemeaboveandbeyond

expectationsintime,wisdomandencouragement.Itwasthroughyourguidance

thatIwasabletograspadeeperunderstandingofMerleau-Pontyandrealisethe

significanceofphenomenologyforthisthesis.Thankyoualsoforallyour

assiduouseditingwhichhelpedbringclaritytomywriting.

ThankyoualsotoProfessorWendyParkins,mysecondsupervisor,whonotonly

introducedmetoRachelCusk’sALife’sWorkonBecomingaMotherbutwhose

wisewordsandobservationsintheearlystagesofmywritingenabledmeto

narrowmyfocusratherthantryingtosayitall.IalsowanttothankProfessor

GurnahAbdulrazakforgivingmetheopportunitytodothisMasterbyResearch.

Finally,Icouldn’thavewrittenthisthesiswithoutthesteadfastsupportofRorke.

ThankyouforprovidingendlessSaturdaylunchesonatrayatmydesk.Thank

youalsotomyparents–myMotherfortakingthetimeandinteresttoproofread

thisthesisandmyFatherforallhisencouragementthroughoutthisprocess.

Andtomychildren,thankyouforyoursupportandinterestandIhopethatthis

thesismayprovethoughtprovokingifandwhenyoubecomeparentsoneday.

1

Foreword

Thisthesisfocusesonwoman’slivedexperienceofpregnancy,birthandonsetof

motherhoodinrelationtomaternalinstinctandmaternalambivalence.Thisis

nottopresume,however,thatnon-birthmothersandwomen,who,forwhatever

reason,arechildless,shouldbeexcludedfromthisdiscourse.Itiswoman’s

capacitytogivebirthandcreatenewlifewhichistheonlyprerequisite.Equally,

Idonotassumethatallwomenwillconcur,empathizeorrelatetomy

conclusions.Iexpectmanychildbearingmotherswillarguevehementlyagainst

theexperiencesofwhichIspeak,simplybecause,ultimately,allwomenare

individuals.But,whatthisstudyarguesisthatthereexistsasharedlived

experience,ofwhichmychosennovelistsandfeministtheoristswrite,exposinga

patternofcommonalityconcerningablurringofautonomybetweenmotherand

childwhich,fromthepointofviewofthemother,resultsinadisruptiontosense

ofself.

Furthermore,uponfirstreading,itmayappearthatthisresearchis

hinderingfemaleprogress.Onthecontrary,theintentionistogainafargreater

insightandunderstandingofthiselusiveandwoefullyunderwrittenaspectof

motherhood.Itisnecessarytoreleasetheterm‘maternalinstinct’fromits

spuriousfoundations,removethelayersofhalf-truthsthatsurroundit,andre-

buildaparadigmthatmoreaccuratelyrepresentsthewesternizedwomanliving

inthe21stcentury.Asaresult,whatIrevealinthisstudymayseemunpalatable

butinthewordsofGloriaSteinem,“Thetruthwillsetyoufreebutfirstitwill

pissyouoff”.

1

Introduction

WhenIfirstbecameamotherintheearly1990’sIwasintriguedandperplexed

whysomeofmyfriendssuccessfullyreturnedtoworkandraisedafamilywhile

others,likemyself,attemptedtojuggleworkandhomelifeandfailed.Asmuch

asIcravedtopursuemyownsenseofpurposeintheformofacareer–for

raisingafamilygaveamothernostatusinsocietyatallandIwantedtobe

recognizedforachievingsomething–whateverthat‘something’was,itwasnot

tobe.WhenouttodinnerIdreadedthequestion“so,whatdoyoudo?”becauseI

knew,assoonasIrespondedwithmyapologistanswerthat“Iwasjusta

mother”,Iwouldeitherbepatronizedwiththereassuranceofwhatanimportant

roleitisortherecipient’seyeswouldglazeoverandallinterestwouldbelostin

askinganymorequestions.Ithastakenuntilnow,withfourrelativelygrownup

children,tocalmthatinnersenseofdeniedself-fulfillmentandjustreflectupon

thefactthatforme,whenthechildrenwereyoung,homeiswhereIinstinctively

feltIoughttobeevenifitwasn’twhereIalwayswantedtobeongivendays.

Thatismystory.EverywomanisdifferentandIbelieveitisimperativethatshe

followsherownpathway,findingwhatisbestforherandherfamily.

IndebtedtoAnneBrontë’sTheTenantofWildfellHall(1848)for

providingtheinspirationforthisthesis,twentyyearson,Ifindmyselfre-visiting

thisquestionofmotherhood.ItwasnotuntilIre-readthisnovelrecentlythat

whathadpreviouslybeenstirringontheperipheryofmyconsciousnesswas

finallyrealized.Itawokewithinme,athenunvoicedandcompletely

unstructuredinquisitivenessintomotherhoodanditsimpactonwoman’s

autonomy.Thatistosay,howitaffectswoman’sabilitytomakechoices,most

2

notablyconcerningtheirpositionintheworkplace.Theprotagonistinthe

novel,HelenGraham,isarolemodelforcontemporarymothering.An

anachronisticfigureheadsoaheadofhertime,sheisaself-sufficient,essentially

singlemother,havingabandonedthemaritalhome,workingasanartistto

supportherselfandhersoninordertoprotecthimfromhisprofligatealcoholic

father.Iamnotadvocatingthatweshouldallbesinglemothers!Butwhatthis

novelhighlights,regardlessofthelabyrinthinemalenarrativeframework,which

raisesconcernsaboutitsreliability,isHelen’sstruggletodowhatisbestforthe

childtothedetrimentofherownhappiness.Shemakesdecisionsthatwere

consideredwaybeyondhergenderin19thcenturysociety.Mostsignificantly,it

isherbattleforautonomy,notjustfromherhusbandbutinvolvingherchild,

whichignitedmyinterest.

PreliminaryResearch

Myinitialintentionwastopursuealineofenquiryastohowmaternalinstinct

hasbeenportrayedwithinthenovelsinceAnneBrontë’sTheTenantofWildfell

Hallin1848tothepresent,comparingitwithfeministtheoryandexploringthe

discrepancies,ifany,andremarkingontheshiftinthinkingduringthisperiod

withaparticularemphasisontoday.Whatbecameevident,however,isthaton

thesubjectofmaternalinstinctthereisaplethoraofgapsandsilencesinboth

feministandnovelwriting,resultinginunacceptablechronologicallapses,

thereforerenderingmyresearchunreliable.Mytwogreateststumblingblocks

werealackofformaldefinitionsfortheterm‘maternalinstinct’andadearthof

writinggenerallypositioningthemotherasthesubjectratherthantheobject.

Therefore,Ihadtoabandonmyintentiontodemonstrateaprovenancerevealing

3

thatmaternalinstincthasbeenpresentthroughoutthistimeframe,thatis1848

tothepresentday.1

So,acceptingthatanydefinitionorfoundationfortheexistenceof

maternalinstinctisunreliableandhavingexplored20thcenturyfeminist

discourseonthesubject,Ishiftedthefocusofmyresearchtothecontemporary

novel.Itwas,afterall,myintentiontogainanunderstandingof21stcentury

motherhoodanditsrelationshipwithautonomyandthereforeitwasimportant

thatmychosennovelistsreflectedthis.Frustratingly,asissooftenthecase

withinthenovel,thesubjectofmotherhoodtendstoskirtaroundtherootcause

ofmaternalambivalence,whichIwillbearguingismaternalinstinct,andfocuses

ontheformer.2Indeed,themotherfigureinmanyofthesenovelsexhibits

formulaicpatternsofambivalentbehaviour,whichisleftunexploredandtoo

oftenattributedtobeingabadmother.Forexample,inTheHours(1999)by

MichaelCunningham,LauraBrownisapost-warAmericanhousewifein1949

LosAngeles,strugglingtocometotermswithbeingamother.Herfeelingof

isolationispalpable,asisherunutterableboredom.Shemakesattemptsto

‘keepherselfbygainingentryintoaparallelworld’3readingVirginiaWoolf’s

MrsDalloway.ButCunninghamchoosesnottoexplorethisinternalconflict

1 For example, Kate Chopin’s The Awakening (1899) provides an insight in what is to become more evident with the

uprising of the feminist movement in the 20th century. Chopin places motherhood centre stage with her protagonist,

Edith Pontellier, who exhibits ambivalence towards motherhood, a rarity in 19th century writing.

2 I considered using these following texts because all of them address the question of maternal ambivalence.

However, I chose not to use them in the main body of this thesis because I felt their tacit association with maternal instinct was possibly too elusive and too difficult to draw out. However, I hope, having read this thesis it is possible to

cast a different perspective and re-consider why it is these texts engage with ambivalence. Mrs Dalloway (1925) by Virginia Woolf, To the Lighthouse (1927) by Virginia Woolf, Revolutionary Road (1961) by Richard Yates, The Hours (1999) by Michael Cunningham, I Don’t Know How She Does it (2002) by Allison Pearson, We Need to Talk About

Kevin (2005) by Lionel Shriver, Making Babies (2005) by Anne Enright, I also looked at P D James’, The Children of Men (1992) who explores the dystopian concept of human extinction due to universal female infertility. The women in the novel use dolls as surrogate babies to appease ‘frustrated

maternal desire’ (p39). In relation to this, I also explored the area of childless women and found, as Chapter Three will explore, that although some women do choose not to have children, a vast majority do not choose to be childless but have had this situation imposed upon them. Indeed, Hilary Mantel’s memoir Giving Up the Ghost (2003) is an

outpouring of grief for the child she never had. Although I do not have the capacity in my thesis to explore this trajectory of motherhood, why these two texts are important is that it reinforces the hypothesis that maternal desire exists within woman regardless of whether motherhood is realized or not. Hence, why I am keen for any boundaries

in narratives between child-bearing mothers, non birth mothers and childless women to remain fluid. 3 Michael Cunningham, The Hours (London: Harper Perennial, 2006), p. 37.

4

betweenselfandworldanyfurtherthanawomanwhocanonlyact,ratherthan

assume,thepartofmotherandhousewife.InLionelShriver’s2005novelWe

NeedtoTalkAboutKevin,themotherprotagonistEvablamesherbadmothering

forthefactthathersonisasociopath.ThenarrativeimpliesthatEvahasno

maternalinstinct.But,thetimingofherpregnancywithhersonwasnotofher

choosingandthetimingofherpregnancywithherdaughterwasentirelyofher

volition.Herrelationshipandbondingprocesswithherdaughterprovestobea

whollydifferentexperience.Butthesepolarizingexperiencesofmotherhoodgo

relativelyunexploredastheemphasisisonEva’srelationshipwithherson.The

consequencesofpregnancy,whichisnotofthemother’schoosing,willbe

addressedinChapterTwoofthisthesis.

FromtheresearchIhaveundertaken,Iamofthefirmopinionthatthere

isa‘bond’orattachmentbetweenmotherandchildwhichisofontological

standingbutcanbeeasilymaskedordisruptedbyanynumberofexterior

circumstances,suchasfamilialupbringingandhistory,alongsidesocialand

economicforcesand,perhapsmostimportantly,whetherbecomingamotherat

allwasofawoman’schoosing.Indeed,myintentionistofindawayoutofthe

impassebetweensociologyandscienceandanalysewomenandtheirlived

experienceofmotherhoodfromaphilosophicalperspective.Inordertoachieve

thismyresearchhas(unintentionally)crossedanumberofdisciplinesbutmost

significantlyphilosophy,science,sociology4andpsychoanalysis5becauseitis

withinthesesubjectsthatanexistingdiscourseonmaternalinstinctcouldbe

found.Butwhatalsobecameevidentisthatmaternalinstinctasasubjectis

4 Sociologist Alice Rossi, ‘A Biosocial Perspective on Parenting’, Daedalus, Vol. 106, No. 2, The Family (Spring 1977)

pp. 1-31.and anthropologist Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, Mother Nature: Natural Selection & The Female of the Species (London, Chatto & Windus, 1999) in particular. 5 Nancy Chodorow’s The Reproduction of Mothering (Berkeley: University of California, 1999) was my introduction

into psychoanalysis in relation to mothering as her work is ubiquitously cited within the writings of feminist discourse.

5

woefullyunderwrittenandthoughtabout.Onthewhole,ifIdidlocateitwithina

text,despiteitsabsenceinthedictionary,itwasonlyeverconsideredasa

foregoneconclusion.Mostnoticeably,itappearsthatwomenhaveblithely

acceptedmaternalinstinctforwhatitisandalthoughsomedismissitasmyth,

neveroncehaveIfoundanexplanationfororanalysisofwhattheyactually

understandittobe.Therefore,myhandwassomewhatforcedtoseekitout

withindisciplinesIhadnotreallyintendedinvestigating,suchasethology,a

subjecttowhichwewillreturninrelationtoJohnBowlby’sAttachmentTheory

inChapterThree.Inhindsight,thisblurringofdisciplinescomesasnosurprise

asthesubjectmatterofmaternalinstinctitselfconcernsablurringofthesubject

andobject,refusingtobeconfinedtoabinarydiscourse.

Crucially,whatislackingwithinfemalediscourseonmotherhoodis

whetherthereisaconnectionbetweentwosalientnarrativeswhicharerunning

concurrentlywithoneanother,butarefailingtooverlap.Thefirstchronicles

women’sexperienceofseparationanxietybetweenthemselvesandtheirchild.6

Thesecondcomprisesresearchonwhyitisthatahighpercentageofthose

womenwhoareintoppositionsarechildless.7Thereisacommonthread

runningthroughbothofthesenarrativeswhichisthatifwoman’sautonomyis

disrupted,thelikelihoodisthatitwillhaveadirectimpactonhoworifthey

pursuetheircareer,regardlessofco-parentingoranychildcareassistancethatis

6 See Chapters Two and Three of thesis for examples from Cusk A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, Moss, Night

Waking. 7 Judy Wajcman found that two thirds of female managers in the UK do not have children, compared with a third of

their male colleagues. Source: Wajcman, ‘The Domestic Basis for the Managerial Career’, The Sociological Review. 617 and Rosemary Crompton uses British census data to show that 59% of female managers do not have children in contrast to 29% of male managers. Source: Crompton, ‘Women’s Employment and the Middle Class’, in T. Butler

and M. Savage eds., Social Change and the Middle Class (London: UCL Press, 1995) in Hewlett, Hungerbaby (London: Atlantic Books, 2002), p. 20.

6

availabletothem.8Yet,thisseeminglyobviousconnectionhasheretoforebeen

overlooked.

Indeed,regardlessofgender,balancingacareerandraisingafamilyis

toughbutsocietyseemstothinkthatco-parenting,afairerdivisionofhousehold

chores(atthemomentwomenstillassumeafarhigherpercentageofchores

thanmen:80%housework,75%childcare,95%ofeldercare),9equalpayinthe

workplaceandpaternityleavewillprovidewomenwithmoreopportunityto

returntoworkafterbecomingamother.SherylSandbergacknowledges,‘itis

timeforustofacethefactthatourrevolutionhasstalled’10andascribes

commonplaceco-parentingasthepanaceaforamother’semancipationfromthe

lackoffulfillmentthatcanbeassociatedwithfulltimechildrearingand

domesticity.Thisisalsotheviewheldamongsttheoristssuchasthe

psychoanalystandsociologistNancyChodorow,thephilosopherElisabeth

BadinterandfeministauthorAnneRoiphe,allofwhomIwilldiscussinthis

study.WhatIargueisthatthispreoccupationwithcreatinganandrogynous

societyissomewhatmisguidedinrelationtomotherhood.Indeed,theliterary

textswhichIhavechosenrevealthatthissolutionisanoversimplification.

Iwillarguethatthis‘stalling,’asSandbergdescribesit,isalsoprecipitated

byamother’sinternalconflictwithherself,whichcannotnecessarilyberesolved

throughexternalmeasuressuchasco-parenting.Thisareaofmotherhoodwillbe

exploredinChapterThreeinrelationtotheprotagonistAnnaBennettinSarah

8 On 16

th March 2016, journalist Bauke Schram reported in the International Business Times that only 6% of FTSE

100 companies have a female CEO. (http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/international-womens-day-2016-six-women-smashing-glass-ceiling-uks-top-firms-1548219 [accessed 16.3.2016]). I advocate further research needs to be undertaken to

understand this dynamic, questioning whether maternal intersubjectivity can be identified as a contributor to these statistics. Hewlett argues that research reveals that only 11% of young British women choose to remain childless and in the US somewhere between a third and a half of all professional women are forced to ‘sacrifice’ children. The

use of the word sacrifice is intentional : her research reveals that women who were building a career in their twenties and thirties squeezed out the possibility of finding a partner or having children. Sylvia Ann Hewitt, babyhunger: The New Battle for Motherhood, (London: Atlantic, 2002), p.21. 9 Ibid p.15.

10 Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In, Women, Work, and the Will to Lead, (London: Random House, 2013), p.7.

7

Moss’novelNightWaking(2011).Insodoing,Ihopetoinitiateadialogue

revealingaconnectionbetweenthesestatisticsandacrisisinidentitythatthe

onsetofmotherhoodmayinitiate.Thatistosay,thisstudyrevealsthatsome

mothers,asweshalldiscussinChapterTwo,experienceanexistentialcrisis

concerningtheirautonomy,provokingambivalencebutalsoananxiety

concerningseparationfromtheirinfant.

Forexample,AmericanfeministwriterandmotherJaneLazarredescribes

thissensationinher1977autobiographyTheMotherKnot:‘[as]onlyinapassing

moment–asIwatchedhimsleepingorintrudedsuddenlyintooneofhisrare

solitarygames–didIseehimasaseparateperson,neatlydistinctfrommyself’.11

IuseRachelCusk’smemoirALife’sWorkonBecomingaMother(2008)to

exploretheconceptofintersubjectivity.Sheidentifiesawebofcomplexissues

concerningearlymotherhoodwhichiswhollypreoccupiedwithexperiencingan

inherentsenseofselfandotherness,farremovedfromanyexternalinfluences.

Indeed,throughtheactofwriting,MossandCuskdescribeabondingprocess

betweenmotherandchild,revealinganunlearnednexusbelongingtothe

‘unthought’orpre-predicativedimensionofexperience.Thesewritersmake

clearthatwhatlieswithinthe‘unthought’isasenseofblurring,aliminalstatus

caughtbetweenselfandotherness;neitherafullyformedoriginalselfnora

crystallizedmotherfigurebut‘something’unobtainableinbetween.Thatsaid,

thisblurringwithinthe‘unthought’cannotbeconsideredinpurelyontological

termsbecauseitiscontaminatedbyandoverlapswithsocialinfluences.As

NancyChodorowarguesinTheReproductionofMothering:‘wemustalwaysraise

asproblematicanyfeatureofsocialstructure,evenif–andperhapsespecially

11

Jane Lazarre, The Mother Knot, (USA: Duke University Press, 1997) pp. 99-100.

8

because–itseemsuniversal.’12Whatthisthesisdemonstratesisthatitstrikes

measanimpossibletasktofindwithinmotherhoodauniversal‘natural’state

whenthecourseofhistoryhaspreventedwomenfromparticipatinginits

documentation.Therefore,asIwillexpanduponinanhistoricalretrospectivein

ChapterOne,whatcanbedeemednaturalhasbeenculturallydisfigured;as

Beauvoirargues‘[woman]hasnopast,nohistory,noreligionoftheirown’.13

Indeed,Iamnotprofessinganyuniversaltruthtowardsthetermmaternal

instinct,buttheintentionhereistounravelsharedpatternsofbehaviour

amongstmychosennovelistsandtheoristsalike.Frenchphilosopherand

novelist,ElisabethBadinterconcedesthat

attheveryleastthematernalinstinctmustbeconsideredmalleable,abletobeshaped

andmoldedandmodifiedandperhapsevensubjecttosuddendisappearances,retreats

intocivilisation’sshadows.14

ItisthisessenceoftheunobtainableuponwhichIintendtofocus.Iwillmake

referencetothisquotationfromBadinterthroughoutthethesisbecauseitaptly

reflectstheelusivenessofthesubjectinhand.

ChapterOne–DefiningMaternalInstinctandMaternalAmbivalence

So,whatdoweactuallymeanwhenweusetheterm‘maternalinstinct’?Onthe

surface,inTheTenantofWildfellHallHelenexhibitssignsofmaternalinstinctin

itsuniversalformasweperceiveit;bythatImeananinherentabilitytonurture

andcareforherchild.Moreimportantly,however,itexposesamyriadof

complexitiesthataccompanymotherhood,whichhavesooftenbeenoverlooked.

Thetextledmetoquestionwhethermaternalinstinctisnotonly

12

Nancy Chodorow, The Reproduction of Mothering, (CA: University of California1999), p. 14. 13

Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, (Middlesex: Penguin, 1982), p. 19. 14

Elisabeth Badinter, The Myth of Motherhood An Historical Overview of the Maternal Instinct, (London: Souvenir Press, 1981), p. xxi.

9

underestimatedbut,indeed,whollymisunderstood.Asaresult,this19thcentury

novelpromptedmetopursueanumberofdifferenttrajectories,allofwhich

concernmaternalinstincttoagreaterorlesserextent,butwhichhaveresulted

inmyfocusrestingonre-visitingthequestionofits[non]existenceandits

relationshipwithmaternalambivalence.Ithasledmetobelievethatnotonlydo

thetwoco-existandareinter-dependentbutthatmaternalinstinctneedsre-

defining.WhatIintendtoquestionishowitispossibletodismissmaternal

instinctasmythwhen,historicallyspeaking,ithasonlyeverbeendefinedby

maleauthoritythroughdisciplinessuchasreligion,philosophyandliterature;

andyetitis(allegedly)uniquelyexperiencedbywomen.

ThewritingbySimonedeBeauvoirinTheSecondSexfocuseson

‘otherness’broughtaboutbythephysiologyofwoman,ElisabethBadinter’s

argumentisbasedonthepatriarchalconstruct,whilstNancyChodorow

concentratesontheconceptoflearnedbehaviourthatwomenacquirefromtheir

ownmothers.Asaresult,allthreefeministwritershavecategoricallyconcluded

thatmaternalinstinctdoesnotexist.15Sincethenonlyanexiguousamounthas

beenwrittenonthissubject.However,indismissingmaternalinstinctasnon-

existent,theyhaveignoredorattheveryleastoverlookedtheconsiderationthat

althoughitmaynotexistintheguiseinwhichithasbeendocumented,thisdoes

notmeanthatitdoesnotexistatall.InthewordsofAmericanfeministauthor

AnneRoiphe:

Iremainamotherlinked–orisitchained–byathousandthoughtstoherchildren.Itis

cleartomethatfeminism,despiteitsvastaccomplishments,hasnotcuredmeof

motherhood.16

15

Beauvoir, The Second Sex, p.526. Badinter, The Myth of Motherhood An Historical Overview of the Maternal Instinct, p. 316, Nancy Chodorow, The Reproduction of Mothering, pp.14-15. It is also worth noting that Beauvoir is unable to discuss motherhood from a point of lived experience whereas both Badinter and Chodorow were mothers

themselves. 16

Anne Roiphe, A Mother’s Eye: Motherhood and Feminism, (London: Virago, 1997) p.ix.

10

But,intheprocessofdismissingmaternalinstinctaslittlemorethanmyth,there

hasbeenanoversighttowardsadiscourseexistingwithintheconfinesoffemale

writing,revealingavisceralbondbetweenmotherandchildborneoutoftheir

co-existencewithintheirsharedembodimentduringtheperiodofgestation.Itis

thisattachmentorbond,theinstinctiveneedforphysicalcloseness,providinga

farmoreaccuratedepictionofwhatismeantbytheterm‘maternalinstinct’,

whichIintendtoexplore.

Butfirstly,itisnecessarytoconsidermaternalinstinctfromanhistorical

perspectiveinordertounderstandthiscompoundwithinitscontext.Chapter

Onewillfocusonthemannerinwhichmaternalinstincthasbeenexploredin

writing,its(lackof)definition,itsperceivednon-existenceamongstfeminist

theoryandtheconsequencesofallofthisfor21stcenturyfeministdiscourse.

ContemporaryphilosopherElisabethBadinterprovestobethemostprominent

spokespersononthesubjectofmaternalinstinct.Thus,anumberofhertexts,

mostnotablyTheMythofMotherhood:AnHistoricalViewoftheMaternalInstinct

(1981),actasalegitimatepointofdeparture.Badinterformsheropinionsusing

SimonedeBeauvoir’stheoriesinTheSecondSex(1949),arguing,inlinewith

Beauvoir,thatthematernalinstinctismythologicalinstatusandisamere

patriarchalconstruct.Furthermore,BadinterdrawsuponthewritingsofJean-

JacquesRousseau,the18thcenturythinkerwhoseworkonsocialreformincludes

thetextÉmile(1762),whichiswidelyconsideredthemostsignificantworkon

educationsincePlato’sTheRepublic.Therefore,Ishallconsiderthesethreetexts,

amongstothers,withaparticularfocusonthefamilyandtheparadigmswithin

it.AlthoughBadinter’sconclusionsareproblematic,asherresearchexcludesthe

11

voiceofthemother,sheprovidesapowerfulargumentastowhyitisthat

maternalinstinctisfoundedonmyth,thusprovidingasolidplatformfromwhich

toventurebothphilosophicallyandsociologically,inanattempttothen

contextualizematernalinstinctwithintheconfinesofthe21stcentury.

Therefore,havingconsideredmaternalinstinct,ChapterOnewillshiftits

focusontomaternalambivalenceanditsrelationshipwithmaternalinstinct.

Firstly,itisnecessarytoconsiderwhatismeantbythetermmaternal

ambivalenceandhowitmaymanifestitself.Contemporarypsychotherapist

RozsikaParkerprovidesaboldre-readingofmaternalambivalenceinhertext

TorninTwo(1995),statingthattheco-existenceofloveandhatecanstimulate

andsharpenamother’sawarenessofherselfinrelationtothechild.She

includesnewreadingsofMelanieKlein,DWWinnicottandJohnBowlby,but,

contrarytoconventionalpsychoanalysis,heremphasisconcernsitselfwiththe

mother’sperspective.AlongsideParker,IintendtoconsidertheworkofSarah

LaChanceAdams,aphilosopherwhoapproachesthissubjectas‘afeminist

phenomenologist’17drawinguponSimonedeBeauvoir,IrisMarionYoungand

acknowledgingtheinfluenceoftheworkofMauriceMerleau-Ponty.LaChance

Adams’focusisonanethicsofambivalence;hertextMadMothers,BadMothers,

&Whata“Good”MotherWouldDo(2014)citesambivalenceasfluctuating

accordingtothemother’sethicalrelationshipbetweenmotherhoodand

autonomy.Shearguesthatclashesbetweenmotherandchildfrequently‘rupture

withinthewomanherselfbetweenhercompetingdesirestonurtureandtobe

independent’18butbelievesthatethicaltheoryshouldbeabletoencompassthe

17

Sarah LaChance Adams, Mad Mothers, Bad Mothers, and What a “Good” Mother Would Do: the ethics of

ambivalence (USA: Columbia University Press, 2014), p. 7. 18

Ibid p.6.

12

ambiguityofthisrelationship.Indeed,shearguesthatitisambivalencewhich

makesthemethicalwhichIargueistooreductive.InChapterThree,Iillustrate

thatambivalencecannotjustbeconsideredasanethicalcomponentbutisinfact

alsoanontologicalreactiontomaternalintersubjectivity.Inaddition,LaChance

Adamsexploresinfanticide,arguingthatupondeeperexaminationoneofthe

mostdistinctivefeaturesisthatthemotherswhocommitthiscrimedisplaya

deepdevotiontowardtheirchildren.Iintendtoconsiderinfanticidealongside

thenarrativeconcerningthesubjectinNightWaking.

ChapterTwo–ALife’sWorkonBecomingaMotherbyRachelCusk

Itwasn’tuntilIreadRachelCusk’smemoirALife’sWorkonBecomingaMother

(2001)19thatIfinallyencounteredatextconcerningdisruptionoftheselfwith

whichIcouldidentify.Itwasthefollowingparagraphthatstoppedmeinmy

tracks,providingtheessencetowhatsomanyfemalewritershavetacitly

referredbutneveropenlyarticulated.Thissenseof‘loveandgriefinatug-of-

war’20betweenamother’snewfoundloveforherbabyandalossofaformerself

isdeftlydescribedbyRachelCuskinhermemoir:

Birthisnotmerelythatwhichdivideswomenfrommen;italsodivides

womenfromthemselves,sothatawoman’sunderstandingofwhatitisto

existisprofoundlychanged.Anotherpersonhasexistedinher,andafter

theirbirththeylivewithinthejurisdictionofherconsciousness.Whensheis

withthemsheisnotherself;whensheiswithoutthemsheisnotherself;and

soitisasdifficulttoleaveyourchildrenasitistostaywiththem.Todiscover

thisistofeelthatourlifehasbecomeirretrievablymiredinconflict,orcaught

insomemythicsnareinwhichyouwillperpetually,vainlystruggle.21

19

In the knowledge I was undertaking this research, I was recommended by an English Literature Professor to read

this memoir by Rachel Cusk, particularly since at the time I thought I would be drawing upon Virginia Woolf’s novels Mrs Dalloway and To The Lighthouse to explore the theme of motherhood and Cusk’s style of writing has often been compared to that of Woolf. Indeed, her novel Arlington Park (2007) is a thinly veiled re-writing of Mrs Dalloway. 20

Rachel Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, (London: Fourth Estate, 2008), p.145 21

Ibid p.13.

13

Uponfurtherreading,IdiscoveredthatCusk’sdescriptionconcerningidentity

wasindialoguewithvariousfeministtheorists,namely,IrisMarionYoungand

JaneLymeralongsidestalwartsoffeministwriting,AdrienneRichandJulia

Kristeva.Theyallwriteofadoubling,splittingorblurringofsubjectivityin

relationtotheirbaby.22

IrisMarionYoungandJaneLymerdrawuponphenomenology,Maurice

Merleau-Pontyinparticular,inordertodescribetheirexperiencesofpregnancy

andchildbirth.Phenomenologyisaphilosophythatdescribesthebasic

structuresofhumanlivedexperience.AsTaylorCarmonexplainsinthe

ForewordtoMerleau-Ponty’sPhenomenologyofPerception,EdmundHusserl

describesitasareturn‘tothethingsthemselves’,23bywhichhedoesnotmean

realconcreteobjectsbutrathertheideal(abstract)formsandcontentsof

experienceaswelivethem,notaswehavelearnedtoconceiveanddescribe

themaccordingtothecategoriesofscienceandreceivedopinion.Thatistosay,

theworldpresentsitselfastheworldbecauseitdiffersperceptuallyfrommyself

whenImoveaboutinit.Merleau-Pontyusesthenotionofintersubjectivity24to

describehowweareanintegralpartofaworld,areality,whichisatthesame

timedistinctfromus.So,simultaneouslysubjectsandobjectstoothers,we

interrelatewithandyetareseparatefromtheworld.Withintheirlived

experienceofpregnancybothYoungandLymerdescribethissenseof‘blurring’

22

Both Young and Lymer, who write extensively on their experience of becoming a mother, draw upon the work of phenomenologist Maurice Merleau Ponty to explore their experiences of pregnancy and childbirth and hence, this was my foray into the philosophy of phenomenology. 23

Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception, (London and NY: Routledge, 2012), p. viii. 24

I use the term ‘intersubjectivity’ to describe neither an autonomous nor a unified subject but something in between. Edmund Husserl (1859-1938), who is widely considered the founder of phenomenology, links intersubjectivity to

overcoming ‘transcendental solipsism’. He describes it as ‘constantly functioning in wakeful life, we also function together, in the manifold ways of considering, together, valuing, planning, acting together. (the Krisis, 28, 109; VI III, in The Husserl Dictionary, ed. Dermot Moran, Joseph Cohen and Joseph D Cohen, Google Books), p.171.

See Sarah Heinämaa, Toward a Phenomenology of Sexual Difference, p.44 and 140. This interpretation should not be confused with the interpretation used within the field of psychoanalysis. Intersubjectivity has also become an important addition to psychoanalysis, emerging through the work of Jessica

Benjamin and is used to consider how we experience otherness. (Lisa Baraitser, Maternal Encounters (London: Routledge, 2009) p. 29.

14

betweensubjectandobject,orselfandother,bringingaboutaheightenedsense

ofintersubjectivity,whichIrefertofromhereoninasmaternalintersubjectivity

andwhichIexploreingreaterdetailinChapterTwo.

WhenIembarkeduponthisresearch,manyreferencestomotherhood

werethroughtheconfinesofpsychoanalysis.Althoughsomeofitprovedvery

informativeinmybidtounderstandanddeconstructmaternalinstinct,

psychoanalysiswasalsoprovingproblematic.25Firstly,psychoanalysishasa

tendencytoobjectifythemother;sheisavehicleforandconstructedfromthe

pointofviewofthechild.26Secondly,inrelationtomaternalinstinctthe

problemwithpsychoanalysisisitsbelatedness.BythatImean,theexternal

forcesattributedtoanindividual’scharacteristicsmaskanyontological

perspectiveandbecausematernalinstinctlieswithinthepre-conscious(rather

thantheun-conscious),thatisthenexusoftheunlearned,itthereforearrivesor

occursbeforehand.Inotherwords,maternalinstinctbelongstotherealmofthe

pre-theoretic.

ChapterThree–NightWakingbySarahMoss

However,wherepsychoanalysisdoesbearextremerelevanceisonthesubjectof

maternalambivalenceandattachmenttheory.InChapterThree,SarahMoss’

novelNightWaking(2011)deftlyillustratesthe‘loveandgriefinatug-of-war’27

25

In particular, Nancy Chodorow The Reporoduction of Mothering (CA: University of California Press Berkeley and

Los Angeles, 1999). Sara Ruddick, ‘Thinking Mothers/Conceiving Birth’, Representations of Motherhood eds Donna Bassin, Mararet Honey and Meryle Mahrer Kaplan (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994), pp. 29-45. Ruddick led me to Iris Marion Young’s work. 26

Lisa Baraitser, Maternal Encounters: The Ethics of Interruption (London: Routledge, 2009), argues that ‘just as maternal subjectivity is on the cusp of being articulated within the psychoanalytic Iiterature, the mother appears to slip back into some manifestation of her traditional object-position as container, mirror, receptacle, p. 5. Roszika

Parker, Torn in Two: The Experience of Maternal Ambivalence (London: Virago, 1995) acknowledges that ‘not only does psychoanalytic theory militate against mothers getting a ‘fair hearing’, but clinical practice leads to an understandable tendency to form an allegiance with the child in the patient against the patient’s mother’ (p.13). I

provide further evidence of my claim that psychoanalysis has a tendency to objectify the mother in Chapter Three. 27

Rachel Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, (London: Faber and Faber, 2008), p.145.

15

thatCuskspeaksof.TheinnerturmoilofCuskisreflectedintheoutersenseof

personalcrisiswitnessedthroughMoss’protagonist,AnnaBennett.This

contemporarynoveldepictsa21stcenturyacademicandmotherinconflictwith

herself,whoisattemptingtofindawaythroughtheimpassebetween

motherhoodandself-fulfillmentbygalvanizingthepublicandprivate

machinationsofmotherhood.MossinvertsCusk’suseofinterpolationofthe

literarytextbypunctuatingthebeginningofeachchapterwithatheoretical

aphorismfromarecognized20thcenturychildpsychologist.Insodoing,it

createsadialoguebetweentheaphorismandthemainbodyofthetext,exposing

thepitfallsoftheoreticaldiscourseinrelationtoactuallivedexperience.

Mossprovidesavisceralnarrativesurroundingthequestionofguiltand

itsrelationshipwithmotherhood.Herprotagonistexhibitsanintrinsicsenseof

conflictinanattempttochoosebetweentheunremarkablerealmoffull-time

motherhoodandthestimulatingparallelworldofacademia.Thisdemonstration

ofmaternalambivalencebyAnnaBennettenablesMosstoengagewiththework

ofJohnBowlbyandAnnaFreud,amongstothers,andweaveherfindingsintothe

narrative.Firstandforemost,thisnovelisanhistoricalexplorationinto

attachmenttheoryandconsidershowitintersectsanddisruptstheabilityto

motherandthepursuitofalifeofautonomy.Despitehergeneraldislikeof

motherhoodandfrustrationatthestallingofherowncareer,AnnaBennettseeks

tocomprehendthedepthstowhichamotherandchildareinter-related,

concludingthat‘itisunnaturaltogoawayfromyourownchildren.Ithurts’.28

Withthisinmind,IintendtodemonstratehowAnnaBennett’smaternal

ambivalenceis,atleastinpart,aconsequenceofmaternalinstinct.

28

Sarah Moss, Night Waking (London: Granta Books, 2011), p.353.

16

Conclusion

Indeed,woman’sautonomyandherdecisionmakingprocesscanbealteredby

theonsetofmotherhood,revealingthatmaternalinstinctisfarfromnon-

existent;merely,itsmanifestationdiffersfromitsmorewidelyrecognized

spectraltwin.So,ratherthanconsideringmaternalinstinctasawelcomed

accompanimenttomotherhoodasthefairytaleswouldhaveyoubelieve,its

presencenotonlyposesathreattothesenseofselfbutitmakestheseparation

betweenmotherandchildproblematic,whichresultsinfeelingsofmaternal

ambivalence.Indeed,RachelCusk’sALife’sWorkonBecomingaMotherand

SarahMoss’NightWakingbothmakeitemphaticallyclearthattheirmothering

doesnotinvolveanythingintuitive.Onthecontrary,asIwillillustrate,theyboth

writeofthemotheringprocessasconfusingandcomplexandfeelunsuitedtothe

job.Theonsetofmotherhoodinstillsinthembothaneedtobephysicallyclose

totheirbabyand,equally,bothspeakofananxietythatemergesiftheyare

separatedforanylengthoftime,whichcanleadtoresentment.Thesesensations

compromisewoman’sautonomyandadirectconsequenceofthislossofidentity

manifestsasmaternalambivalence.Afterall,ambivalence,byitsverydefinition

ofdualistemotion,isindialoguewiththeconceptofthepregnant/mother

subjectas‘decentered,split,ordoubled’,29anideawhichhasbeenexploredby

JuliaKristevaandphenomenologistsIrisMarionYoungandSaraHeinämaa.

Indeed,asKristevaexplainsinheressay‘Women’sTime’,sincethe‘splitsubject’

stemmingfromtheGermanwordSpaltung,meansboth‘splitting’and

29

Iris Marion Young, ‘Pregnant Embodiment: Subjectivity and Alienation’, On Female Body Experience (OUP, Oxford, 2005) p.46.

17

‘cleavage’,30thisdividednotionis,byitsveryname,locatedwithinthefemale

body.But,ratherthanusetheword‘split’todescribeamother’ssubjectivity,I

arguethattheword‘blur’isamoreaccuraterepresentation.

Asaresult,whatauniquelyfemalediscoursehighlights,asthe

subsequentchapterswillprove,isthatitpositionsmaternalinstinctfarcloserto

maternalambivalencethananyintrinsicintuition.Asbothofmyprimarytexts–

NightWakingandALife’sWorkonBecomingaMother–reveal,motherhood

provesdifficulttoreconcilewithasenseofself.Thatistosay,thereisevidence

withinthesetextsthat,particularlyinearlymotherhood,animplicitbondexists

betweenmotherandchild,therebyheighteningasenseofintersubjectivity.This

inturncreatesanexistentialcrisisforthemotherassheattemptstonegotiate

betweenspatialproximityandautonomy.

30

Julia Kristeva, ‘Women’s Time’ in The Kristeva Reader ed. Toril Moi p.213.

18

ChapterOne

AnOverviewofMaternalInstinctandMaternalAmbivalence

Introduction

InthisstudyIarguethatforthemother,maternalinstinctarisesoutofthe

physicaldependencyofintersubjectiveembodimentbetweenherselfandthe

baby,whichresultsinherbeingneitherobjectnorsubjectbutsomethingin

between.Thisinturnchallengestheassumptionthatsubjectivityis,atalltimes,

singularandasaresultofthis,theverynotionofselfbecomesrootedin

ambivalence.SimonedeBeauvoir,ElisabethBadinterand,mostrecently,Sarah

LaChanceAdamsconsiderinstinctandambivalenceinbinaryterms,concluding

thatbecausematernalambivalenceexists,maternalinstinctcannot.ButI

questionwhyitmustbeassumedthattheyareunabletoco-exist.Ifweconsider

maternalinstinctintermsofadisruptionofself,somethingmustoccurasa

resultofit.Indeed,Irespondbyarguingthatmyinterpretationofmaternal

instinct–thesenseofself,vacillatingbetweenautonomyandintersubjectivity31

–mustbyitsverynaturebegroundedinambivalence.

Iarguethatthewayinwhichmotherhoodhasbeenhistorically

interpretedforcedthehandof20thcenturyfeministthinkingintodismissing

maternalinstinctasculturalmyth.Beauvoirblamesthefocuslaidupon

woman’sphysiologyand,accordingly,Badinterisemphaticinhertextthat

womenmustridthemselvesofamythicalfemininenatureinordertocreatea

senseofandrogyny,which,shemaintains,willhelpresolvethecurrentlackof

equality.Butequally,21stcenturyexperientialdiscourseonmotherhoodisalso

indicatingthattodenymaternalinstinctexistinginanymanifestationis

31

See p. 3 of Introduction for explanation of intersubjectivity.

19

erroneous.So,ratherthanconsideringmaternalinstinctinbinarytermsas

eitherexisting/notexisting,itisnecessarytore-consideritinmoreorganic

terms.WhatIamattemptingtodoisfindsomemiddleground–somein-

betweenness.However,itdoesrequireredefininginorderforittoalignitself

moreaccuratelywithlivedexperience.Forexample,AdrienneRichwritesinOf

WomanBorn(1976)that

institutionalizedmotherhooddemandsofwomenmaternal“instinct”ratherthan

intelligence,selflessnessratherthanself-realization,relationtoothersratherthanthe

creationofself’.32

Iamarguingthatitisnecessarytoconsidermaternalinstinct,selflessnessand

relationtoothersalongsideintelligence,self-realizationandcreationofself.

QuotingBadinter,LaChanceAdams,inher2014textMadMothers,Bad

Mothers&Whata“Good”MotherWouldDo:TheEthicsofAmbivalence,disputes

theexistenceofmaternalinstinctbecauseofthemanyformsmaternal

indifferencehastakenthroughoutthecourseofhistory.Indeed,Badinter’stext

TheMythofMotherhood:AnHistoricalViewontheMaternalInstinct(1981)

predeterminesthissamelineofargumentanditisthistextthatweturntofirst,

actingasanexusforexploringmaternalinstinctfromthepointof

contextualizingthiscompoundwithinhistoricalterms.Itseemssheistheonly

femalephilosopheroftodaywhohasmadethesubjectofmaternalinstinctthe

focusofherwriting.Thepurposeofherhistoricalretrospectiveinthistext,in

linewithBeauvoirbeforeher,istomakeattemptstoprovethattheconceptof

maternalinstinct‘hasbeentoovariedthroughouthistorytomerittheterm

‘instinct’;thatitisinstead,asociallyconditioned‘sentiment’’.33However,Iargue

thatdespiteitshistoricalinaccuraciesmaternalinstinctdoesexist.Itsuniversal

32

Adrienne Rich, Of Woman Born, (London: W W Norton & Co Ltd, 1995) p. 42. 33

Badinter, The Myth of Motherhood: An Historical overview of the Maternal Instinct, p. x.

20

representationinterpretsmaternalinstinctasanintrinsicintuitionpre-disposed

tocaring.But,drawinguponthewritingofRachelCuskandSarahMoss,

alongsidetheoristsIrisMarionYoung,JaneLymerandJuliaKristevaontheir

experiencesofmotherhood,Iarguethatthemetaphysicalconsequencesof

sharedembodimentbetweenmotherandchildinterfereswithamother’sability

tomakesenseofherownsubjectivity,thebabybeinganextensionofherselfand

yetseparate,makinganattachmentbothphysicallyandmetaphysically

unprecedented.Thisismaternalinstinct.

Thereafter,thesecondsectionofthischapterwillconcernitselfwith

maternalambivalenceanditsrelationshipwithinstinct.Iarguethatthereis

evidenceinthetextsbyCuskandMosstosuggestthatmaternalambivalenceisa

reactiontothelossofautonomytheyexperienceuponbecomingamother.

IntersectingLaChanceAdams’textandRozsikaParker’spsychoanalytical

approachinTorninTwo:TheExperienceofMaternalAmbivalencewithMoss,

Cusk,YoungandLymer,Iwishtoconsidermaternalambivalenceandits

responsetothestatusofintersubjectivity,namelymaternalinstinct.

SectionOne

1. MaternalInstinct

Itismyintentionthatthisresearchmayprovokeamoreaccuratelineof

questioningofwhatismeantby‘maternalinstinct’.Inapaperentitled

‘ReframingPregnantEmbodiment’ImogenTylercapturesthelackofknowledge

surroundingpregnancy,describingherownpregnantembodimentremaining,

withinphilosophicaldiscourse,curiouslyunmapped,unthoughtandperhaps

21

unthinkable.34Thedearthofwritingonmotherhoodfromanexperientialpoint

ofview,however,maybeattributedtowomen’sdesiretotranscendculturally

constructedgenderbarriersandwritefromapointofbeinghumanratherthan

specificallyfemale.Indeed,writingaboutwomen’spositionwithinsocietymay

merelyservetoreinforceit.ButIhaveconcludedthatthedistinctlackofwriting

onthesubjectofmaternalinstinctmayhavelesstodowithitscontroversial

natureandbemorealignedwithageneralinabilitytotranslatetheexperience

intolanguage.AsKristevaasserts,‘thepregnantsubjectstraddlesthespheresof

languageandinstinct.’35So,ifmaternalinstinctislocatedwithinthepre-

consciousitmakestranslationintoacoherentsyntaxunobtainable.BythatI

mean,languagerequiresprocessinganddecodingfortranslationintowordsto

occur;languageisthereforebelated.Instinct,ontheotherhand,occurswithin

pre-reflectiveexperiencethereforecausingaschismbetweensensingthe

phenomenaandtheabilitytoarticulateit.Indeed,theword‘instinct’originates

from‘instinguere’:meaningin-‘towards’andstingueremeaning‘toprick’.Ifone

considerstheinstancebetweentheprickofastingandthefleetinginterlude

beforetheonsetofpainseepsintotheconsciousness,itisthisvoidof

momentarysuspensionofmindfulsensationwhichisanalogoustomaternal

instinct.Aconsequenceofcourseisthatitspresencecangoundetected,

unacknowledgedorrecognizedinanysortofcognitiveform.Therefore,in

ChapterTwo,withtheaidofCusk’snarrativeinALife’sWorkonBecominga

Mother,thisthesisattemptstoexplorethe‘unthinkable’realmofmaternal

instinct.

34

Imogen Tyler, ‘Reframing pregnant embodiment’ in Transformations: Thinking through Feminism, ed. by S. Ahmed, J.Kilby, C. Lury, M.McNeil and B. Skeggs, (London: Routledge, 2000) p.290 cited in Baraitser, Maternal Encounters The Ethics of Interruption, (Routledge, London, 2009). p. 123. 35

Iris Marion Young, ‘Pregnant Embodiment: Subjectivity and Alienation’ in On Female Body Experience: “Throwing Like a Girl” and Other Essays (Oxford: OUP, 2005) p. 53.

22

So,beforewestart,inlightofitselusivenature,itmaybehelpfulto

visualizethroughartthatwhichwordscannotsay.Thissculpturebelowbythe

Mexicanartist,LizetteAguilar,whichiscalled‘MaternityataDistance’,

illustratesthe‘blurringeffect’,thestatusofmaternalintersubjectivitywhereby

themotherandherchildrenareacontinuumofeachother–thereisno

beginningorend:thetwoareindistinctandyetseparate:

‘MaternityataDistance’byLizetteAguilar(2007)

Asthetitleofthesculpturesuggests,thistriadcanonlyeverbeviewed‘ata

distance’,thatisfromtheoutside,preventinganyveritableunderstandingof

whatoccursontheinside.Thisobjectificationof‘maternityatadistance’

reinforcesthedividebetweentheprivateworldofmaternityandthepublic

perceptionofit.LisaBaraitserqueriesmaternalembodimentbychallengingthe

masculineprinciplesofindividuality,non-contradictionandsingulartemporality

thataredisturbedbythematernalandaskswhetherthereis‘somethingworth

23

chartingofthematerialist-maternalfeminine,somethingofwhatitisliketobe

“‘tied”’toachildthroughmorethanemotionalbonds.’36Baraitserarguesthat

thepsychologistDWWinnicottremindedusthattherewasnosuchthingasan

infant.Quotinghim,shehighlightsthat‘amotherandbabycannotbethoughtof

inisolationfromoneanother,butarebothessentialcomponentsofarelational

dyad’.37Baraitserisclarifyingthemeaningofthis‘relationaldyad’by

highlightingthatnoamountofphysicalseveringoftiesintheformofthe

umbilicalcordwillpreventthisbondfromcontinuinginmetaphysicalterms.The

tangibleclosenesswhichmotherandbabyexperienceduringgestationhas

ongoingrepercussionsforthisrelationship.

1.iDefinitionofmaternalinstinct

Withtheaidofthisvisualdisplayofmaternalinstinct,letusconsiderwhatis

reallymeantbythisterm.Justlikeitssubjectmatter,anyformaldefinitionfor

maternalinstinctproveselusive.Althoughevidenceofthecompoundfirst

appearedinwrittenvernacularizedEnglishasearlyas1747,38andwithin

EnglishFictionfrom1829,39itisnotacknowledgedinTheOxfordEnglish

Dictionary,TheOxfordDictionaryofPhrase,SayingandQuotationorTheConcise

OxfordThesaurus,Brewer’sDictionaryofPhrase&FablewhichIsearchedstarting

withitsfirstpublicationsin1887.40Ofcourseitmustbetakenintoaccountthat

thesereferencebooksmaynotpickuponarchivalornon-publishedworkbut,

nevertheless,althoughtheyindicateacknowledgementofthetermmaternal

36

Baraitser, p. 124. 37

Ibid p.125. 38

The term ‘maternal instinct’ can be found on p12 of a translation of The Mother-tongue: Or, Methodical Instruction

in the Mother-tongue in Schools and Families by Gregoire Girard (originally Jean Baptiste Melchior Gaspard Balthazar), (J W Parker: London, 1747). https://books.google.com/ ngrams. [accessed 7.11.14] 39

Lady Morgan, The Book of Boudoir, (Brussels: Du Jardin-Sailly Brothers, 1829) p.242

https://books.google.com/ngrams [accessed 7.11.14]. 40

The first publication of Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase & Fable was in 1870.

24

instinctwithintheEnglishlanguage,withoutanyformaldefinitionofthe

compoundandnosenseofitsorigin,itisdifficulttoarriveatanyauthentic

meaning.Synonymsfortheadjective‘maternal’include‘hermaternalinstincts’,

butthetermitselfisnotdefined.Thedefinitionofmaternalismotherly,

protective,caring,nurturing,loving,devoted,affectionate,fond,warm,tender,

gentle,kind,kindly,comforting.41

Therefore,whathasariseninplaceofanyunequivocaldefinitionisatacit

understandingofitsmeaning.Indeed,Badinterwritesacompellingnarrative,in

TheMythofMotherhood:AnHistoricalViewontheMaternalInstinct,regarding

theanomaliesrootedwithinmaternalinstinct.AsImentionedinthe

Introduction,Badinterconcedesthatthereisapossibilitymaternalinstinct

existsbutifitdoes,itisinaconstantstateofflux,thereforedifferingcompletely

fromitsuniversallyaccepteddefinition,thatofintuitionandapredisposed

abilityforcaring.Thus,itwillappearerraticbecauseitsmanifestationiswholly

dependentuponhowanindividualintersectswithsocialandculturalinfluences,

and,furthermore,whethersheperceivesitasathreattoherautonomy.

Therefore,theverynatureofmaternalinstinctensuresthatitsdefinitionwill

proveelusive.

Oneoftheearliesttextswrittenbyawomanacknowledgingtheterm

maternalinstinctwasanautobiographywrittenin1829calledTheBookof

BoudoirbyLadyMorgan.Asthetitlesuggests,thisbookwasneverintendedto

gracereceptionroomsbutmustremainwithinthesecretconfinesofawoman’s

chamber.Withintheautobiography,LadyMorganprovidesanarrativeon

maternalinstinct,whichcorroboratesthisnotionthatitsmanifestationwillalter

41

Concise Oxford Thesaurus, ed., Sarah Hawker and Maurice Waite (Oxford: OUP, 2007) p. 525.

25

accordingtotheindividual,aswellasdismissinganypossibilitythatwomenare

pre-disposedtomothering.Sheremarks:

Themoreorlesspowerfulinstinctofmaternityisanaffairoftemperament,nurturedor

modifiedbyotherinstinctsorpassions,andbycircumstancesfavourableor

unfavourabletoitsexistence[…]itisnottheinstinct,orfeeling,butthejudgmentthat

directsit,whichislaudable.Maternityisnoabstraction;andwhenpeoplesay,“sucha

oneisinjudicious,orfeeble,orshallow,butsheisagoodmother”,theytalknonsense.

Thatwhichthewomanis,themotherwillbe;andherpersonalqualitieswilldirectand

governhermaternalinstinct,ashertastewillinfluenceherappetite.Ifshebeprejudiced

andignorant,thegoodmotherwillmismanageherchildren.42

Indeed,LadyMorganismaligningtheuniversalinterpretationofmaternal

instinct.Butthecovertmannerinwhichshewritesthismemoirreinforcesthe

principalconcernofitslong,fluctuatingperiodsofinconsistenciesandsilences

duringtherecordingofitshistory.AsBaraitserargues,‘theoreticallyspeaking

[themother]remainsashadowyfigurewhoseemstodisappearfromthemany

discoursesthatexplicitlytrytoaccountforher.’43Indeed,asIhavementionedin

theIntroduction,duringtheundertakingofthisresearch,whathasbecome

evidentistheextenttowhichthereisalackofhistoricalfemalewritingonthe

subjectofmotherhood.AspsychoanalystHelenDeutschrightlyobserves

‘mothersdon’twrite,theyarewritten44’.CusklamentsinALife’sWorkon

BecomingaMotherthat‘when[she]becameamother,nothinghadbeenwritten

aboutitatall’.45Historicallyspeaking,motherhoodiswrittenbysomanywho

lackexperientialunderstanding.Furthermore,Cuskwritesthismemoirwhilst

sheispregnantwithhersecondchild,astheabilitytoexpressherselfonthe

subjectofbecomingamothereludedherafterthefirstfewmonthsofgiving

birthtohereldestchild.Sherealizeditneededtobecapturedbeforeit‘couldget

42

Lady Morgan, The Book of Boudoir, p. 242. 43

Baraitser, p. 4. 44

Susan Rubin Suleiman, ‘Writing and Motherhood’ (eds Garner, Kahane and Sprengnether), (NY: Cornell University

Press:, 1985), p. 356. 45

Cusk, p. 10.

26

awayagain’,46fullyawarethattheseemotionsareephemeral,quicklyforgotten

unlessdocumentedatthepointofexperience.Conversely,althoughBadinter

failstoincludethevoiceofthemotherinhertextsonmaternalinstinct,whatshe

doesprovideisanhistoricalaccountofmaternalinstinct,whichrevealshowit

hasbeencontextualizedandinterpretedwithinreligiousandphilosophical

discourseoverthecenturies.Therefore,Ihaveincludedabriefsectiononits

historicalorigins,firstandforemosttomakeadisparitybetweenwhathas

evolvedfrommythandwhatmustbeconsideredfarnearertothetruth.

2. AnHistoricalRetrospectiveoftheMaternalInstinct

2.i) Plato

AlongsideBeauvoir,feministwritersincludingAdrienneRich,LuceIrigarayand

SaraHeinamaa47makereferencetoPlato’swritingonfamilyandwomen,

particularlyinhisworksTheRepublic(c.375BC)andSymposium(c.385-370

BC).Platoavoidsdefiningwomaninthebinarytermsofpassivityversusman’s

activity.Onthecontrary,heheraldsasenseofequalitybetweenthesexes.

Rather,hisguidingprincipleofequalitybetweenthesexesisthissenseof

‘complementing’48eachother.Despitehisacknowledgementthatwomenarethe

46

Ibid p. 9. 47

Beauvoir makes several references to Plato in The Second Sex, two of which highlight firstly, his proposal of giving girls a liberal education. Secondly, she uses the Platonic myth, which I quote directly from Plato on page 28 of this thesis, which discusses humans comprising of three sexes, The Second Sex pp. 37, 122. Adrienne Rich makes

reference to Plato in relation to birth control in Of Woman Born (NY: Norton, 1995) p. 266. Luce Irigaray devotes an entire chapter to book VII sections 514-517a of Republic in Speculum of the Other Woman (NY: Cornell, 1985), pp. 243- 364) in which she uses Plato’s myth of the cave as a metaphor for the womb. In her re-reading of The Second

Sex, Sara Heinämaa cites Symposium in relation to Beauvoir’s view being a continuation of Plato with the inherent belief that there is a need for ignorance or lack of knowledge as an essential, indispensable element of philosophy.

Furthermore, Heinämaa refers to Platonic ideology in reference to the work of Edmund Husserl and Simone de Beauvoir in Toward a Phenomenology of Sexual Difference (Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003), pp. xiv, 8, 39,

83-84 and 130. 48

Plato, Symposium (Middlesex: Penguin, 1983), p. 87.

27

‘weakersex’,49heismakingthiscomparisonpurelyintermsoftheirphysical

strength.50Indeed,hearguesthat

thereis[therefore]noadministrativeoccupationwhichispeculiartowomanaswoman

ormanasman;naturalcapacitiesaresimilarlydistributedineachsex,anditisnatural

forwomentotakepartinalloccupationsaswellasmen.51

PlatoclarifiesthispositiondrawinguponaconversationbetweenAristophanes

andSocratesinSymposium,toexplainthathumanswereoriginallycomprisedof

threesexes,thatofmale,femaleandhermaphrodite,butZeus,asapunishment

fortheirpride,‘cuteachofthemintwo’.52Asaconsequencetheinnatelove

humanbeingshaveforoneanotherisanendeavourtoreturntotheirancient

state‘byattemptingtoweldtwobeingsintooneandtohealthewoundswhich

humanitysuffered’.53Evenifweinterpretthisexplanationinmetaphoricterms,

Plato’sprincipleofequalitybetweenthesexesisthissenseof‘complementing’

eachother.But,throughthecourseofhistory,rhetoricfromleading

philosopherssuchasJean-JacquesRousseaudistortsthisparadigm,turning

womenintobeingacomplementofman.

Inadditiontostatingtheneedforequalitywithinsociety,Platoalso

makesclearthateachwomanisanindividualandmustbetreatedassuch,

requiringthesameeducationashermalecounterpart,sharingthesame

intellectualandphysicaltraining‘inaccordancewithnature’,54but

acknowledgingthatequalityandsexualdifferencecanbeharmonious.Indeed,

Socratesascribeswomen’spositionwithinsocietybyquestioningwhetherthe

differenceinsex

49

Plato, The Republic, (London: Penguin, 2007) p. 167. 50

Indeed, 20th Century sociologist Alice S Rossi concurs that evolutionary division of labour is a direct result of

physical differences. 51

Plato, The Republic, p. 165. 52

Plato, Symposium, p. 60. 53

Ibid p. 62. 54

Plato, The Republic, p. 166.

28

initself,[is]aproperbasisfordifferentiationofoccupationandsocialfunction,and

answersthatitisnot.Theonlydifferencebetweenmenandwomanisoneofphysical

function–onebegets,theotherbearschildren.55

Butbythe20thcentury,asBeauvoirhighlights,societyhadre-definedthecouple

asopposingoneanother,describingitasa

fundamentalunitywithitstwohalvesrivetedtogether,andthecleavageofsocietyalong

thelineofsexisimpossible.Hereistobefoundthebasictraitofwoman.Sheisthe

Otherinatotalityofwhichthetwoopponentsarenecessarytooneanother.56

Indeed,Plato’svisionofaperfectsocietysetoutinTheRepublicbecomes

disfiguredasearlyasthewritingsofAristotlewhoclaimsthat‘thefemaleisa

femalebyvirtueofacertainlackofqualities[…]weshouldberegardingthe

femalenatureasafflictedwithanaturaldefectiveness’,57andthereforeheargues

thatauthorityofthemaleisanaturalphenomenaanddivineinright.As

Badinterhighlights,theseAristotelianthemeswouldbecomeunderlying

principlesofChristiantheology.Indeed,shearguesthatthecategoriesinwhich

menthinkoftheworldareestablished‘fromtheirpointofview,asabsolute’,58

documentinghistoryasalackofequalitybetweenthesexesreifiedby

apostlesandtheologians[who]areresponsibleforobfuscating,tothepointofbetraying,

Christ’swords[...]Christ’smessagewasclear:

Husbandandwifeareequalandsharethesamerightsandthesamedutieswithrespect

totheirchildren.59

Toooftenthroughoutthecourseofhistory,womanandmaternityare

consideredintermsofEve’sguilt,which,inFelicityDunworth’swords‘isevident

inthetragedythattobebornistohavetodie.Thusdeathisinscribedinthe

conditionofmotherhooditself’.60ThisseemsfarremovedfromPlato’s

explanationofmotherhoodinwhichhemaintainsthatprocreationistheobject

55

Plato, The Republic, p. 157. 56

Beauvoir, The Second Sex, p. 20. 57

Ibid p. 16. 58

Ibid p. 286. 59

Badinter, The Myth of Motherhood: An Historical overview of the Maternal Instinct, p. 7. 60

Felicity Dunworth, Mothers and Meaning on the Early Modern English Stage, (Manchester: MUP, 2010) p. 10.

29

oflovebecause‘itisthenearestthingtoperpetuityandimmortalitythata

mortalbeingcanattain’.61Indeed,AdrienneRichclaimsthatthethreatofpower

duetohavingthebiologicalabilitytogivebirthproducesadichotomous

paradigm:womanwaseitherahailedgoddessoraman’sfearofbeing

‘controlledandoverwhelmedbywomen’.62Asaresult,thesenseofpower

attributedtowomenfortheirabilitytocreatelifeisshroudedbyalackof

historicalappropriation,andinitsplaceitismorereadilyportrayedas‘the

bestialactofchildbirthandre-enactmentofthepunishmentofEve’.63But,as

Badinterhighlights,StThomas’(d.72AD)definitionofwomanasthe‘imperfect

man’64provesthatanysenseofequalitywasalreadybeingdisfiguredlongbefore

thecreationofEve.Indeed,inthe4thcentury,StAugustinesustainstheimageof

womenasbeingnaturallyevilthroughhiswritingsSongedeVerger,describing

womenas‘abeastwhoisneithersteadynorstable,fullofhatred,nourishing

madness[…]sheisthesourceofallcontentions,quarrelsandinequities’.65

TheserepresentationsofwomannotonlyresonatewiththesexesinGenesis,

whichSimonedeBeauvoirwilldrawuponinTheSecondSex,butasDunworth

argues,throughoutthecourseofhistorytherepresentationofmotherhoodistoo

oftenportrayedinbinaryterms,oscillatingbetweentheevilofEvetothedivine

statusoftheVirginMary.

2.ii)Jean-JacquesRousseau(1712-1778)

Withintheconfinesofintellectualizingthematernal,Jean-JacquesRousseauis

regardedasPlato’ssuccessor.RobertWoklerdescribesRousseau’stextEmile

61

Plato, Symposium p. 87. 62

Rich, p. 13. 63

Dunworth, p. 10. 64

Badinter, The Myth of Motherhood: An Historical overview of the Maternal Instinct, p. 16. 65

Ibid, p. 11.

30

[as]themostsignificantworkoneducationafterPlato’sTheRepublic’.66Indeed,

Rousseaugoesasfarastosaythat‘Plato’sreflections[oneducation]deserveto

bebetterdevelopedbyawriterworthyoffollowingsuchamaster’!67Itisno

coincidencethereforethatBadinterdevotesanentirechaptertoRousseauinThe

MythofMotherhoodoutlininghissocialreformsonchildcare,education,family

andmaternalresponsibility.RousseauwroteTheSocialContractin1762,which

focusedonpolitics,andhispublicationofEmileinthesameyear,‘launchedthe

modernfamily–thefamilyfoundedonmotherlove’.68However,asBadinter

highlights,RousseaubasedSophie,thecompaniontoEmileintheeponymous

novel,ontheappearanceofthesexesinGenesisandallitsprejudices,inorderto

createwhathebelievedtobethe“femininenature”,andasaresultSophiecame

torepresentwomanas‘framedforthedelightandpleasureofman’.69Indeed,

womanbecamedefinedbymanandchildandcouldonlybeconsideredin

relativeterms,epitomizedbyhiscreationofSophieas‘the“complement”ofman,

[as]anessentiallyrelativecreature:‘sheiswhatmanisnot,andformswithhim

thewholeofhumanity,whileremainingunderhiscommand.’70Indeed,with

EmileRousseauiscreatingapoliticalprogramme,whichreinforcesratherthan

reducesdifference,byadvocatingentirelydifferentformsofeducationforEmile

andSophie.Rousseauarguesthatheissanctioningthispoliticalprogrammeon

thegroundsofnaturallawinwhichthetwosexesessentiallyperform

contrastingfunctionsinthatawoman’sfunction‘isentirelydependenton

66

Robert Wokler, Rousseau (Oxford: OUP, 1996) p. 1. 67

Timothy O’Hagan, Rousseau (London: Routledge, 2003) p. 181. 68

Badinter, The Myth of Motherhood: An Historical overview of the Maternal Instinct p. 30. 69

Rousseau, Emile (London: David Campbell Publishers, 1992), p. 693 cited in The Myth of Motherhood pp. 208-

209. 70

Rousseau, Emile, p. 294.

31

maternity’.71However,Rousseau’scharacterSophiepresentsadistortedversion

of‘innatelove’,72ofwhichAristophanesspeaksinPlato’sSymposium.Rather

thanmanandwomancomplementingeachother,asPlato’swritingexploresin

TheRepublic,thisdepictionofwoman’spositioninsocietydistancesitselfever

furtherfromthisimageandisreplacedbytheassumptionthatwomanisthe

passivepartnercreatedforthepleasureofman.Moreover,TimothyO’Hagan

highlightsinRousseau,althoughPlato’simperativeconcerningwomen’s

educationwasunusualintheancientworld,RousseaudistortsPlato’s

interpretationofthedifferencebetweenthesexesbycreatinganunremitting

doctrineconcerningthematernalandhercentralitywithinthefamily,which

bareslittleornoresemblancetothesocietyPlatowritesofinTheRepublic.73

Indeed,O’HaganarguesthatRousseauispreoccupiedwiththeopposition

betweenconventionandnature.Hebelievesthatthebodyisthepointof

intersectionbetweenthenaturalandthesocialaspectsofthehumanbeing.By

drawinguponconclusionsreferringtonature,hemaintainsthatthefather’srule

overthefamilyisbasedonnaturalfeelingsratherthananypoliticalauthority.

But,attimes,Rousseau’swritingonthesubjectofmenandwomenappearto

contradictoneanother.Ontheonehand,hearguesthatwoman’snatural

equalitywithmanmustthereforemakethemsociallyequaltoo,butontheother

handherefusestoexpanduponthishypothesis.74Indeed,asO’Hagan

highlights,thisresultsinhisdiscoursebeingindirectcontrasttoPlato.

Inthissense,women’sassociationwithpassivityisindeedproblematic.In

anessayfromTheNewlyBornWoman(1996),HéleneCixousaddressesthe

71

Ibid p. 181. 72

Plato, Symposium, p. 62. 73

O’Hagan, p. 180. 74

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, First Discourse (1751), cited in Rousseau by O’Hagan, p. 180.

32

abidingissueofconfiningandlimitingwomantobinaryexplanations.She

arguesthatthoughthasalwaysworkedthroughoppositionandalloppositions

arecouples,themostsalientofallbeingman/woman.Indeed,Cixousstatesthat

sexualdifferenceistreatedthroughopposition,couplingitwith

activity/passivityand,withinphilosophicaldiscourse,itiswomenwhoare

alwaysassociatedwiththelatter.Cixousmaintainsthatoneargumentfor

womenbeingrepresentedaspassiveis,asAdrienneRichaffirms,theireternal

threatandasaresulttheymustremain‘intheshadow.Intheshadowhethrows

onher;theshadowsheis’.75Beauvoir’sargumentsarealsogroundedintermsof

polarizinggenderratherthancomplementingthem;theymustopposeeach

otherinordertoexist.Thatistosay,shehighlightsHegel’stheorythatthe

subjectcanonlybeposedifitisopposed.Therefore,thestateof‘Otherness’isa

creationofthesubjectandbyitsverynatureisa‘categoryofhumanthought’.If

werecallPlatoandhisconsiderationoftwohalvescomplementingeachother,

desiringwhatonelacks,itsituatesthequestionofsexualdifferencealongway

fromtheandrogynoussocietyhailedasthe21stcentury’sanswertogender

equality.

2.iii) TheUniversalMother

Butthisideologythatwomenhada‘natural’abilitytomothershackleshertoa

lifewithoutambitionandlittleeducation,beingdeniedanyequalrightsinthe

workplaceorinthehome.Formanywomen,thisobligationtobefirstand

foremostamotherwasinevitablyanideologythey‘didtheirbesttoimitate’.76

75

Hélene Cixous, ‘Sorties: Out and Out: Attacks/Ways Out/Forays’ in The Newly Born Woman (London: I B Tauris 7

Co Ltd, 1986) p. 67. 76

Badinter, p. 221.

33

AsO’Haganargues,Rousseau’stheorizingresultsinaphysicaldependencethat

wouldbetransformedintoamoralduty.Indeed,Badinterargues,itis

Rousseau’s‘backtonature’philosophythatmaybethemost‘commonoriginof

mutualunhappinessand,later,neurosesofmanychildrenandtheirmothers’,77

anditisthisverysubjectwhichcapturestheattentionof20thcentury

psychoanalysis.Badintermakesclearthatonehundredandfiftyyearsbefore

Freud,Rousseaudefinedthemasochisticcomponentas‘specificallyfemale:She

willdoallthisbecauseshewantsto,notoutofmoralobligation’.78Itistothe

‘tender,anxiousmother’79towhomheappealstoundertakeachild’searly

education,astheyhavethe‘milktofeedthechild’.80Aconsequenceof

Rousseauiantheorywasanintensityaffordedtochildhoodneverseenbefore,

wherehygiene,dietandareturntobreastfeedingwerethesalientissuesofthis

reform.AsphilosopherVirginiaHeldhighlights,thismakesafarceofthenotion

thatRousseauputforwardthat‘nomanshouldsurrenderhisfreedom’81by

qualifyingthatwomen‘mustbetrainedfromchildhoodtoserveandtosubmitto

man’.82Therefore,Heldconcludesthat,forRousseau,iftheessenceofbeingfully

humanwastobefreefromsubmissiontothewillofanother,womenwere

thereforedeniedtheessentialconditionofbeingfullyhuman.Butparadoxically,

asBadinterhighlights,thevoiceofnatureisactuallysilencedbyRousseau’s

theorizingashisargumentreliesexclusivelyonmoralargument,resultinginno

mentionofinstinctinhiswork.

77

Ibid p. 221. 78

Rousseau, as cited in Badinter, The Myth of Motherhood: An Historical Overview of the Maternal Instinct, Ibid, p. 212. 79

Rousseau, p. 5. 80

Ibid p. 5. 81

Virginia Held, Feminist Morality: Transforming Culture, Society and Politics, (University of Chicago Press, Chicago,

1993) p. 199. 82

Rousseau, The Social Contract; Emile, trans. B Foxley (New York: Dutton, 1911)., cited in Held, p.199.

34

InMothersandMeaningontheEarlyModernEnglishStage(2010),

DunwortharguesthatfrombeforeAugustinetoafterFreud,‘assumptionsare

revealedwhichroutinelydehistoriciseanduniversalizemotherhoodas

instinctiveandnatural’.83Shearguesthatthesequalitiesassociatedwith

motherhoodhavecometobeunderstoodasuniversalbecauseoftheparadigms

uponwhichtheyhavebeenconceptualized.Ifwelooktotheplaywrightsfor

clarity,thisrepresentationoftheinstitutionalizedmotherisdulyreinforcedby

thedramatizedmotheronstage,whoiscreatedthrougha‘consistentsetofideas

informedbyfixednotionsofwhatamothershouldbe[…]suggest[ing]alink

betweenanunderstandingofgoodmotherhoodandwhatis“natural”’.84

Beauvoirredressesthisrepresentationofwoman,arguingthatthroughout

historywomenhavealwaysbeensubordinatetomenandstressesthatthisisnot

aresultofsomethingthat‘occurred’.85Quitetheoppositeinfact,itiswoman’s

lackofhistory,theabsenceof‘thecontingentorincidentalnatureofhistorical

facts’86whichmakesothernessabsolute.Thehistoricalandliterarycultureto

whichshebelongsare

thesongsandlegendswithwhich[Beauvoir]islulledtosleep,[which]areonelong

exaltationofman.ItwasmenwhobuiltupGreece,theRomanEmpire,France,andall

othernations,[…]whoinventedthetoolsforitsexploitation,whohavegovernedit,who

havefilleditwithsculptures,paintings,worksofliterature’.87

Cuskgoesasfarastosaythat‘nothing’hasbeenwrittenonthesubjectof

motherhoodatall.AspsychoanalystNancyChodorowargues,therearealmost

nocomparativestudiesofhumansbecause‘ofmostresearchers’assumptions

83

Felicity Dunworth, Mothers and Meaning on the Early Modern English Stage, (Manchester: MUP, 2010) p. 2. 84

Dunworth, p. 4. 85

Beauvoir, p. 18. 86

Ibid p. 19. 87

Ibid p. 315.

35

thatwomen’smaternalbehaviorisnatural’88andthereforethereisnoneedfor

researchtobecarriedoutonthissubject.AccordingtoBadinter,inTheMythof

Motherhood:

motherlovehasbeendiscussedasakindofinstinctforsolongthata‘maternalinstinct’

hascometoseemrootedinwoman’sverynature,regardlessofthetimeandplaceshe

lived.89

BadinterisinfluencedbyBeauvoir’stheorythatwomenarenotenslavedbytheir

femininenaturenorboundbyabiologythat‘forcesusintoparticulardomestic

rolesandmotherlyfunctions’,90butthata‘maternalinstinct’isaconceptcreated

bymaleauthorityandimposeduponwomen.Indeed,Badinter’sdeclarationthat

amaternalinstinctdoesnotexistisacontinuumofBeauvoir’sselfsame

proclamationinTheSecondSex.InBookTwo,Beauvoirprovidesreallife

examplesofanumberofwomenandtheirexperiencesofmotherhoodwhich‘all

showthatnomaternalinstinctexists’.91Beauvoirmaintainsthatamother’s

attitudeisdependentonher‘totalsituationandherreactiontoit’.92This

observationcannotbedisputed;maternalinstinctundoubtedlyintersectswith

socialandculturalinfluences.Anyhopeofidentifyingitcanonlyberetrieved

fromexposuretowomen’sownexperiencesofit;historyhasforthemostpart

ignoredthisfactandhenceitsunstablefoundationsmakewayforhalf-truths.

88

Chodorow, p. 27. 89

Badinter, The Myth of Motherhood: An Historical overview of the Maternal Instinct, p. xx. 90

Ibid p. 152. 91

Beauvoir, p 526. 92

Ibid p. 526.

36

3. TheArgumentfromNature

3.i) BreastfeedinganditsRelationshipwithMotherhood

Probablythemostpowerfulandcertainlythemostvocalargumentsurrounding

biologicalimperatives,isthatofbreastfeeding,whichshowslittleornosignof

abatingeveninmoderndaysociety.Itisvirtuallyimpossibletoignorethe

historicalsignificancethathasbeenaccordedtobreastfeedinginrelationtogood

mothering.Rousseauarguedthatamother’saffectionforherbabywas

conditionaltoupholdingaregularneedtodischargehermilkthroughthebaby

sucklingandasaresultthishabitcreatedabondbetweenmotherandbaby.And

indeed,thecorrelationRousseauhighlightedbetweengoodmotheringand

breastfeedingremainsasresolutetodayasitbecameinthelate18thcentury.

However,asBadinterpointsout,‘iftheproductionofmilkisstopped,what

happenstomotherlove’?93ButlongbeforeRousseau,evenasearlyasPlutarch

(46-120AD),Badintermakesclearthatmaternalnursingwasseenasalawof

naturewhich,foramoralistsuchasRousseau,impliedadivinelawinwhichGod

shouldnotbedisobeyed.

Indeed,thecruxofBadinter’sargumentinTheMythofMotherhoodis

foundeduponbreastfeedingstatistics.In1780LieutenantLenoiroftheParis

policedocumentedthatonly1,000ofthe21,000babiesborneachyearinParis

werebeingbreast-fedbytheirmothers.Thechildrenoftheprivilegedfew

familieswerebeingbreast-fedbylive-inwetnurses;theremainderwere‘taken

fromtheirmothers’94andsenttowetnursesoutsideParis.Badinterarguesthat

ifamaternalinstinctexisted,thesocialtrendtoemploywetnurseswouldbefar

lesscommon.However,Iarguethatthesestatisticsaretooreductive.Firstly,

93

Badinter, The Myth of Motherhood: An Historical overview of the Maternal Instinct, p. 136. 94

Ibid, p. xix.

37

Badinterisunderestimatingthepowerofculturaldeterminism.Thatistosay,if

themajorityofwomenareusingtheservicesofwetnurses,thenthiswillhavea

profoundeffectonsocialbehaviour.Secondly,Badinterprovidesnoevidence

fromthesemothers;their‘voice’isnotdocumented.Itisnotpossibleto

ascertainwhethertheirdecisionnottobreastfeedwasaconsequenceofsocial

andculturalcoercionratherthanadecisionmadeoftheirvolition.Inherbook,

MotherNature:NaturalSelection&TheFemaleoftheSpecies,anthropologist

SarahBlafferHrdyiswaryofBadinter’s1780Parisianbreastfeedingstatistics.

BlafferHrdyadvisesthatitwasoftenthemenwhointervenedbetweenmother

andchildandorganizedthewetnurse.Indeed,manymothershadnochoicein

thematterastheyhadtocontinueworking,andbreastfeedingachildwasnota

luxuryshecouldconsider.95Inahistoricalcontext,womenarejustaslikelyto

experienceasenseofguiltforchoosingtobreastfeedaswomenoftodaywho

choosenotto.

However,fromanevolutionaryperspective,breastfeedingwascentralto

ababy’ssurvival.Associo-biologist,AliceRossiclarifies,‘acryinginfant

stimulatesthesecretionofoxytocininthemother,whichtriggersuterine

contractionsandnippleerectionpreparatorytonursing’.96Indeed,Rossiargues

thatthisclusterofcharacteristicssuggestthepresenceofunlearnedresponses.

Furthermore,sheprovidesevidenceofastudyundertakenwhichfocusesonthe

importanceofearlycontactwiththebabyinconnectionwithlevelsofmaternal

responsiveness.However,asRossiclarifiesthisisnottoarguethatthereisno

learnedcomponent.Mostimportantforthisresearchanditsrelationshipwith

95

Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, Mother Nature: Natural Selection & The Female of the Species, (London: Chatto & Windus,

1999) p. 352. 96

Alice S Rossi, ‘A Biosocial Perspective on Parenting’, Daedalus, Vol. 106, No. 2, The Family (Spring 1977) p. 6.

38

thequestionofbreastfeedingisRossi’sacknowledgementthat,contraryto

Rousseau,theseexamplesare‘justoneaspectoflearninghowtorelatetothe

infant’.97AsIstatedinmyIntroduction,whenconsideringmaternalinstinct,

althoughmyfocusisonthechildbearingmother,itisessentialthatthe

boundariesareextendedtoincludethosewomenwhoarenotyetmothers,non-

birthmothers,womenwhocannotbreastfeedandalsothosewomenwhojust

simplychoosenotto.Badinterarguesinher2006textDeadEndFeminism,

althoughBeauvoirstoppedshortofdefiningwomanthroughmotherhood,what

shedidachievewastoputbiologyinits‘rightfulplace’,98thatis,second.

AsBadinterlamentsinhermostrecentworkTheConflict(2010),21st

centurymotherhoodhasseenareturntonaturalismthroughecology,economic

downturnanda(re)calltobreastfeeding.Shearguesthatbythe1970’snursing

hadlargelybeenabandonedinfavourofbottlefeeding.Havingbeenliberatedby

contraception,abortionrightsandpowderedmilkinthelastcentury,Badinter

claimswomenareexperiencingaperiodofregressionwhilstsimultaneously

strivingforequalitywithintheworkplace.Intermsofregressionconcerning

motherhood,shearguesthatthereisacallforareturnto‘goodoldMother

Nature’,99maintainingthatecologyhasprecipitatedasubmissiontothelawsof

nature.Asaresult,womenarebeingcoercedbacktothehomethroughtiessuch

asbreastfeeding.ThispressuretodosoisfueledbygroupssuchasLaLeche

League,whichoriginatedintheUSAbutisnowaglobalorganization,promoting

theimportanceofbreastfeedingforachild’sdevelopmentandtodeepenthe

bondbetweenmotherandchild.Furthermore,LaLecheLeagueencourage

97

Ibid p. 27. 98

Badinter, Dead End Feminism, (Polity Press: Cambridge, 2007) p. 22. 99

Badinter, The Conflict, (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2011) p. 4.

39

motherstobreastfeedbeyondthefirstthreemonthsofachild’slife.Theresult

ofgroupssuchastheseisthatitcanleadwomentobelievethattheyarefailures

ornot‘goodenough’100mothersiftheydonotchoosetobreastfeedoriftheydo

soforashortperiodoftime.So,asBadinterquestionsinTheConflict:‘Howcan

oneputanendtotheinequalitiesofsalariesandofrolesiffromthestartwoman

isassignedaninstinctthatpredisposeshertostayathome?’101

3.ii) TheFamilyParadigm

Furthermore,BadintermakesreferenceinbothTheMythofMotherhoodandThe

ConflicttoAliceRossi’sworkontheconceptoftheexistingfamilyparadigm.

Rossiexecutesastudyoncommunallivingasanalternativemodeltothenuclear

familybecauseherresearchacknowledgesthatthelatterhasatendencyto

‘oppressitsmembers’.102Rossiconcludesthatalthoughthereisevidenceto

suggestthatthefamilymayhinderfemaleprogress,studiesundertakenon

communallivingthatinvolvethesharingofchildrenhaverevealedthatthis

arrangementcreatesemotionaldifficultiesformanyparents,‘particularlythe

mothersofchildren[for]veryrarelydidamotherallowamalecommunal

membertoinvokesanctionswithherchildren’.103Soformothers,although

communallivingmayenableequality,itisproblematictooasitleadstoasense

ofdisconnectionfromtheirchildren.TheresultofRossi’sresearchcorroborates

theattachmenttotheirchildrenofwhichbothCuskandMosswriteandwhich

weshallconsiderinChapterTwoandThreeofthisthesis.

100

A term associated with child psychologist D W Winnicott and his work on motherhood. 101

Badinter, The Conflict, p. 103, 102

Rossi, p. 1. 103

Ibid p. 15.

40

SectionTwo

4. MaternalAmbivalence

Thus,theattachmentbetweenmotherandchildisfundamentaltounderstanding

maternalambivalence.Generallyspeaking,maternalambivalenceisaless

complexsubjectbecauseitsexistenceisunequivocal.InChapterThreewe

explorematernalambivalencealongsideNightWaking,anovelwhichdeftly

illustrateshowamother’sreactiontosituationsarewhollydependentonher

senseofbeingatthatgivenmoment.LaChanceAdamshighlightsitwouldbe

incompletetoconsidermaternalambivalenceaspurelyanemotionalreaction,

aligningitwithMartinHeidegger’sconceptofBefindlichkeit,whichcanbe

translatedasmood,butmoreliterallymeans“howyoufindyourselfinthe

world”.104Thatistosay,howyoufindyourselfextendsbeyondtheinternalstate

andfocusesonexternalforcessuchasyourrelationshiptopeople,eventsand

facts.So,forexample,asSaraRuddickarguesinheressay‘Thinking

Mothers/ConceivingBirth’,amother’semotioncanvarywithinthecourseofa

dayandthiswilldependonthe‘behaviourofherchildren,thespace,time,and

servicesavailabletoher,andmyriadotherdesiresandfrustrations’.105Inmore

binaryterms,AdrienneRichquotesfromherjournalfromNovember1960

describingambivalenceas‘themurderousalternationbetweenbitter

resentmentandraw-edgednervesandblissfulgratification’.106ForCuskand

Moss,asweshallexploreinChaptersTwoandThreerespectively,theemotion

theyfeelfortheirchildrenatanygiventimeispredicatedonre-aligning

104

Sarah LaChance Adams, Mad Mothers, Bad Mothers & What a “Good” Mother Would Do: The Ethics of Ambivalence (NY and Chichester: Columbia University Press, 2014) p. 35. 105

Sara Ruddick, ‘Thinking Mothers/Conceiving Birth’ in Representations of Motherhood eds. Donna Bassin,

Margaret Honey and Meryle Mahrer Kaplan (NY: Yale, 1994) p. 34. 106

Rich, p. 21.

41

themselveswiththisuninvitedattachmenttheyhavewiththeirchildren,making

neitherseparationnortogethernesswhollysatisfactory.

Parkerexplainsthatmaternalambivalenceisaconceptemployedby

psychoanalysistodescribecontradictoryimpulsesandemotionstowardsthe

samepersonbutnot‘mixedfeelings’107asthewordcanoftenimplybutatthe

sametimemakingclearthat,asKleinhighlighted,ambivalenceisnotstatic:the

oscillationbetweenloveandhateisconstant.Butratherthanconsideringthese

feelingsasoneortheother,CuskinALife’sWorkonBecomingaMotherand

Moss’NightWakingdescribetheirambivalenceinmuchmoremixedorblurred

terms.Theirfeelingsofloveandhateappeartooverlap.Indeed,forbothwriters

theirvacillationbetweenloveandhateisaimedattheirownequivocalposition

concerningtheirchildren.Itisanunparalleledexistential(aswellassocial)

feelingofneedingtobeclosetotheirchildren.Thissensationisoverwhelming,

appearingtotranscendtheirvolitionastheyimposethisstatusofcloseness

uponthemselves.Forexample,Cuskdescribestimealone,awayfrom

motherhoodandreunitedwithherformerself:

myreunionwithfreedom,solongedfor,waspanickedandunsatisfactory,andnotonly

becausemydaughterexertedonmesostrongamagnetismfromherrugdownbelow

thatIwouldemergefrommystudyeveryfewminutestositonthestairsandlistenfor

signsofdistress.Therewassomethingbrutalinourseparation.108

Andindeed,Moss,throughherprotagonistAnnaBennett,alsoexhibitssignsof

ventedambivalencetowardmotherhood.Sheresentsthebondbetweenherself

andherchildrentotheextentthatthisbecomeshersolefocus,notonlywithin

thebodyofherresearchasanacademicwriteronattachmenttheory,but

spillingoverintoherownlivedexperience.Sheexploresthebondbetween

107

Rozsika Parker, Torn in Two: The Experience of Maternal Ambivalence (London: Virago, 1995) p. 5. 108

Cusk, p. 157.

42

herselfandherchildren.Thisblurringofloveandhateiscapturedinthesame

paragraphwhenAnnaarguesthat

itisunnaturaltogoawayfromyourownchildren.Ithurts.[…]WhydoIimaginethat

paidemploymentistheroadtofulfillment?BecauseIknowthatmotherhoodisnot,

that’swhy.109

ThisextractfromNightWakingissuccinctlyhighlightingtwofactorswhichcan

beattributedtomaternalambivalence.Thefirstisavisceralandinvoluntary

disruptionofselfbroughtaboutbygivingbirthto(an)other.Thesecondis

woman’spursuitofautonomyversusmotherhood.Indeed,asLaChanceAdams

claims,thisclashbetweenmotherandchild‘frequentlyactsasarupturewithin

thewomanherselfbetweenhercompetingdesirestonurtureandtobe

independent’.110Inresponsetothis,inChapterThree,ratherthanlimitthis

subjectintermsofloveandhate,Iintendtoexplorematernalambivalenceasit

presentsitselfinthismoreblurredinter-dependentorganicstate.

Inadditiontothis,LaChanceAdamsarguesthatitisassumedthatmaternal

ambivalenceisfirstandforemostanatypicalproblemtoovercome.Indeed,

Parkerclaimsitisnotambivalenceitself,whichistheproblem,butthewayin

whichamotherdealswiththeanxietyandguiltitprovokes.Shemaintainsthat

the‘sufferingofambivalence’111canpromotethoughtandinsodoing,this

thinkingaboutthebaby/child‘isarguablythesinglemostimportantaspectof

mothering’.112So,mothersneedto‘achieve’ambivalenceinrelationtotheir

children.Indeed,Parkerstatesthatmaternalambivalenceisapositivefeeling

fortherelationshipbetweenmotherandchildandshequotesfromresearch

carriedoutinAustralia,highlightingthateverytimemothersinthegroupcame

109

Moss, p. 353. 110

LaChance Adams, p. 6. 111

Ibid, p. 7. 112

Ibid, p. 7.

43

intocontactwithguiltoverdeepambivalentfeelingstheybegantodemonstrate

newinitiativesandresourcefulnesstoovercomethem.Itappearsthattheco-

existenceofloveandhateforthebabyparadoxicallyprotectsthebabyfromthe

mother’sdespairandforcesthemtofindsolutions.However,thispresentsa

consciousdecisiontoalterone’sattitudetowardsmothering,whichisputin

placeasaresultofambivalence.Thatistosay,itisastrategythatthemother

knowinglyundertakestoensurethesafetyofherchild.Resolvingthefeelingof

ambivalenceisaconsidereddecisionandmaynotalwaysbeactedupon.

Therefore,weareidentifyingtwotypesofmaternalambivalence.Oneisa

consciousdecisionwhichwillbeorchestratedthroughamother’sownethical

standing.Theother,asweidentifiedintheprevioussection,isunconsciousand

situatedwithinamother’smaternalinstinct.

4.i) MaternalAmbivalenceinrelationtointersubjectivity

So,Iamdividingmaternalambivalenceintotwosections.Firstly,andmost

importantlyforthisstudy,thefocuswillbeontheconceptof‘therupturewithin

thewomanherself’.113Thatistosay,letusconsidermaternalambivalencefrom

apointofdisruptionofself,broughtaboutbyasenseofblurringofsubjectivities

betweenmotherandchildandtheconsequentimpactthishasonwoman’s

autonomy.ConsideringthisalongsidetheworkofLaChanceAdamswilllaya

foundationforChapterTwo,whenweconsidermaternalinstinctinrelationto

Cusk’smemoir,ALife’sWorkonBecomingaMother.Secondly,theattentionwill

beturnedtoambivalenceinrelationtoethics.LaChanceAdams’sabiding

113

LaChance Adams, p. 6.

44

argumentisthatamother’sethicalorientationwillinfluencethewayinwhich

shemothers.

So,inordertogainanunderstandingofthisinter-connectionbetween

selfandother,thatismotherandchild,Ihavetakenaphenomenological

approachguidedbyLaChanceAdams.Herworkdrawsuponthewritingsof

SimonedeBeauvoirandIrisMarionYoung,whointurnhavebasedtheir

argumentsontheworkofphilosopherMauriceMerleau-Ponty(1908-1961).

ThesewritingsweshallreturntoinChapterTwowhenconsideringmaternal

instinctalongsideCusk’smemoir.Butinrelationtoambivalence,usingMerleau-

Ponty’swork,LaChanceAdamsfocusesherattentiononattainingastatusof

singularsubjectivityforthemother.SheattemptstoachievethisusingMerleau-

Ponty’snotionofdehiscenceorruptureoftheflesh.Merleau-Pontyarguesthat

eachpersonexperiencesapre-reflectivecoherencebetweenthemselves,the

worldandothers.Heconsidersallthingsoftheworldtobeofonesensibleflesh,

‘thatthepresenceoftheworldispreciselythepresenceofitsfleshtomyflesh,

thatI“amoftheworld”andthatIamnotit’.114Fleshissensiblebecauseitcanbe

perceivedbythesenses,smelled,touched,seenandsoonanditisalsocapableof

perceptionthroughuseofthenose,ears,brainetc,buttheyarealso‘apertures

uponaworldofwhichtheyarealsopart’.115Bythathemeansthatinorderfora

beingtoperceive,itisthefleshoftheworldthatenableshimtodoso:being

cannotexistinitself.Alsoinherentinthefleshisagap,orécart,116adehiscence

114

Merleau Ponty, The Visible and the Invisible (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1987) p. 127. 115

LaChance Adams, p.118. 116

Merleau-PontyinTheVisibleandtheInvisible,describesécartasnot‘toreachoneself,itisonthecontrarytoescape

oneself,tobeignorantofoneself,theselfinquestionisbydivergence(d’écart).’p.249.

LaChance Adams describes the term écartisusedbyMerleau-Ponty to describe how reversibility between oneself and the world cannot be fully realized. They eclipse at the moment of realization. That is to say, reversibility never

achieves complete or harmonious unity. There will always be a slight difference (écart)betweentwobodieswhich

preventthemeverbeingcompletelyunified,p.110.

45

betweenthesentientandthesensed,betweenselfandotherswhichprovidesa

necessaryseparation.Indeed,Merleau-Pontystatesthat‘thisfleshofmybodyis

sharedbytheworld,theworldreflectsit’,asit‘encroaches’uponmyworld,

‘overlapping’butnottotallyreversible.117Rather,hedescribesitasanin

betweenness(Einfühlung)ofperceiving-perceived.LaChanceAdamsdescribesit

as,‘[w]eareofthesameflesh,suffusedwithoneanother,evenwhileweremain

distinct’.118Assheexplains,withoutthisdivergencebetweenselfandother,the

worldwouldlacktheobjectivityendowedbythisintersubjectivity.

But,totakeLaChanceAdams’argumentonestagefurther,forthepurpose

ofthisstudy,Iwanttofocusonthisin-betweenness,theécart,andarguethat,in

isolation,maternityisanexceptiontoMerleau-Ponty’snotionofflesh.Whereas

Merleau-Ponty,accordingtoIrigaray,assumesagenderneutralbody‘unmarked

byrace,classorsexuality’,119Iarguethatitisessentialthatwedistinguish

betweenthephysiologicalimperativesofdifferentgenderswhenweare

consideringmaternityinrelationtointersubjectivityandthinkingabout

Merleau-Ponty’sdehiscenceofflesh.Indeed,LuceIrigaraycritiquesMerleau-

Ponty’slackofsexualdifferencearguingthat

fecundationisnotmutual;wedonotdivergefromacommonflesh.Thechildcomes

fromthemother’sflesh,andthisindicatesthesourceofalldifference–sexual

difference.120

So,ifweapplyécarttothemother/babydyaditpresentsthissenseofonenessthatCusk,Lymer,YoungandKristeva

speakofandyettheycanneverbecompletelyunified.AsthechapteronCuskwillattestto,thisrelationshipbetween

subjectandobjectthatMerleau-Pontyoutlinesisfundamentaltounderstandingthelackofautonomyamothermay

experienceduringpregnancy,childbirthandearlymotherhood.Itispossibletoalsoascribeécarttothestateofalterity

experiencedbymothers.Inthisinstancehowever,LaChance,isconsideringtheconsequenceofécartoccurringbetween

mothers. 117

Merleau-Ponty, The Visible and the Invisible, p. 248. 118

LaChance Adams, p. 120. 119

Ibid p. 125. 120

Luce Irigaray, ‘The Invisible of the Flesh: A Reading of Merleau-Ponty, The Visible and the Invisible, ‘The

Intertwining-the Chiasm’. In An Ethics of Sexual Difference, Tr. Carolyn Burke and Gillian C Gill (Cornell University Press, USA, 1993) p. 151-185. cited in LaChance Adams p. 124.

46

Therefore,thecommonfleshisactualizedbetweenmotherandfoetusandthe

écartorgapbetweenperceivingandtheperceivedbecomeslessdefinedcreating

aheightenedsenseofintersubjectiveblurring.Thequestionishowthemother

perceivesherselfinthisinstance,forhersubjectivityiscompromisedtoa

greaterextentthanMerleau-Ponty’sinterpretationofintersubjectiverelations.

AsLaChanceAdamshighlights,‘mothersoftenfeelasthoughtheirowndesires

aredirectedagainstthemselveswhentheyareinoppositiontotheirchild’s

needsandwishes’.121Hence,fromthemother’spointofview,pregnancy,

childbirthandearlychildhoodaregroundedinambivalence.

Furthermore,asParkerhighlights,promotingahealthystateofmaternal

ambivalenceposesaproblembecauseourcultureallowsforflexibilityinall

thingsotherthanmothering.Indeed,shemaintainsthatWesternsociety

providesnoritualssoamothermustrelyonmirroringothermothers.Rather

thanitbeingreassuring,thisprocessofmirroringcanleavemothersfeeling

insecure,competitiveandunhappy.Indeed,ifoneconsidersthemirrorstage

describedbyLacan,122nuancestothisprocessoccurifconsideredinMerleau-

Ponty’sterms.Thatistosay,asHelenFieldingarguesin‘EnvisioningtheOther:

LacanandMerleau-PontyonSubjectivity’,thisdehiscenceorécartbetween

peopleparallelstheécartbetweendifferentsenses.123So,forexample,theécart,

whichMerleau-Pontydescribesbetweentouchingandtouched,124createsa

blurringbetweensubjectandobject.Butifothernessbringsaboutasenseof

alienationandfamiliaritysimultaneously,whichMerleau-Pontyclaimsthatit

121

Ibid p. 36. 122

a process in the pre-Oedipal stage, in which the human subject’s ego is constituted through a process of identification with images: the image of the self as other (mirror image). See , eds S N Garner, C Kahane and M Sprengnether, The (M)other Tongue (Cornell University Press, London, 1985) p. 218. 123

LaChance Adams, p. 129. 124

A more extensive explanation will be provided in the next chapter.

47

will,foramothertomirroranothermothercanonlyresultinasenseof

ambivalence.

Furthermore,DebraBergoffenarguesthatthereisaunidirectional

causalitybetweenthepregnantmindandbody.Thatistosay‘thatthepregnant

body’sgenerosityinclinesthemotherherselftowardgenerosity’.125However,

LaChanceAdamsisskepticalofthispointofview,echoingBeauvoir’s

observationsconcerningthemother’sreactiontoherpregnancyandciting

CarolineLundquist’sresearchconcerningunwantedpregnancies,whichwillbe

consideredfurtherinChapterTwo.Lundquiststatesthatindeniedpregnancies

‘normalsymptoms’ofpregnancysuchasmorningsicknessandweightgainare

suppressedorreduced,whichsuggeststhatthemothermustconsciously

acknowledgethepregnancyinorderforittotakeitstypicalcourse.126So,

maternalmunificence,bothphysicallyandmentally,maywellmanifestwhenthe

mother’sreactiontohersituationisapositiveone.Butwhatisofrealinterest

hereisthatLundquist’sworkimpliesareciprocalcognitionbetweenmotherand

babyinutero.ThistheoryofreciprocitybyLundquistfeedsdirectlyintoJane

Lymer’sdialecticalphenomenainherdoctoralthesis,whichIexplorefurtherin

ChapterTwo.

4.ii) Maternalambivalenceinrelationtoethics

So,havingconsideredambivalenceviamaternalintersubjectivity,itremains

necessarytoexploreexternalforcesinordertohighlighthoweasilyamother’s

experienceofintersubjectivitycanbesoreadilymasked,disruptedor

125

Debra Bergoffen, The Philosophy of Simone de Beauvoir: Gendered Phenomenologies, Erotic Generosities (Albany, NY, 1997) cited in LaChance Adams, Mad Mothers, Bad Mothers & What A “Good” Mother Would Do p. 168. 126

Caroline Lundquist, ‘Being torn: Toward a Phenomenology of Unwanted Pregnancy’, Hypatia 23.3 (2008) pp 136-155 in LaChance Adams, p.169.

48

overshadowed.LaChanceAdamshighlightsBeauvoir’sconsiderationofsocial

andmaterialconditionsofourethicalrelations.Beauvoirarguesthat‘aperson’s

ethicalstandingisindicatedbyhowshenegotiatestheambiguity127betweenher

independenceandherresponsibilitytoothers’.128Shemaintainsthatamother’s

attitudeisdefinedbyhersituationandthewaysheacceptsit.Citinganextract

fromCusk’sautobiography,ALife’sWorkonBecomingaMother,Baraitser

corroboratesLaChanceAdams’commonlyfeltexperienceofhavingtochoose

betweenone’sownneedsandthatofthechild,whichinturncreatesanethical

dilemmabetweenbeingamotherandbeingherself:

Tosucceedinbeingonemeanstofailatbeingtheother.Thebreakbetweenmotherand

selfwaslesscleanthanIhadimagined[…]Ineverfeelmyselftohaveprogressedbeyond

thisdivision.Imerelylearntolegislatefortwostates,andtosecuretheborderbetween

them.129

Indeed,LaChanceAdamsgoesasfartosaythatbecauseofthevalidconflictsthat

existbetweentheinterestsofamotherandthatofthechild,thesetensions

inherenttomotheringprovideaninstructivecaseforthemoregeneralsubjectof

careethics.Sheviewsthedependenceofothersonourselvesas‘simultaneously

psychologicallythreateningandnecessaryforourfullhumanity’,describing

childrenasthe‘primalparasite’,130makingthisdynamicundeniablyvisible.

Conclusion

ThisChapterconsidersmaternalinstinctwithinitshistoricalcontextand

attemptsto‘de-naturalisethenaturalattitude’inrelationtomotherhood.131

Whathasbecomeclearistheuniversalimperativessurroundingtheterm

127

my emphasis 128

Sarah LaChance Adams, p.11. 129

Extract from Rachel Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, (Fourth Estate, London, 2001) p.57 cited by Lisa Baraitser, Maternal Encounters: The Ethics of Interruption (Routledge, Sussex, 2009) p. 50, 130

LaChance Adams, p.10. 131

Gail Weiss, ‘Can We De-Naturalize the Natural Attitude?’, The George Washington University, 2016, p. 1.

49

‘maternalinstinct’areunreliable.ThepurposeofincludingPlatoandJean-

JacquesRousseauwithregardtomaternalinstinctis,firstly,becausetheir

writingsareconsideredtwoofthemostseminalworksconcerningfamily.

Secondly,andmostrelevantlyforthisstudy,ithighlightshowPlato’sconceptof

society,wheremenandwomenareconsideredequal,isdistortedbyRousseau

despitethefactthathefoundedhistheoriesuponPlato’sTheRepublic.

Maternalinstinctisthisirreconcilablesensationofattachmentto

(an)otherwhilstrecognizingthelossofsingularsubjectivity,theresultofwhich

isambivalence,suggestingthatmotherhoodisrootedinconflict.Byitsvery

‘nature’,therefore,thisinherentambivalencereleasesmotherhoodfromthe

confinesofhavingapre-dispositiontocaringandnurturing.Nevertheless,the

maternalinstinctandhowitmaymanifest(ifatall)iswhollyreliantonhowit

intersectswithculturalandsocialforces.AsIwillexploreinthenextChapteron

Cusk’stextALife’sWorkonBecomingaMother,IrisMarionYoungandJane

LymerdrawupontheworkofMerleau-Pontytoclarifytheirpositionon

experientialintersubjectivitybetweenmotherandchild.Cuskherselfwrites

aboutmotherhoodinsuchawayastoprovideaspringboardforre-defining

maternalinstinct,collapsingthebinariesofits(non)existenceandenablingitto

beconsideredintermsofablurredintersubjectivity,highlightingtheimpactthis

hasonamother’sautonomy.

50

ChapterTwo

RachelCusk:TheBlurringEffect

Introduction

InthepreviouschapterIrevisedthedefinitionofmaternalinstinctandexplored

maternalambivalence,linkingandhighlightingtherelationshipbetweenthe

two.Inthischapter,Idiscussthemasco-joinedterms,blurringtheirboundaries

toillustrateacorrelationbetweenthetwo.Insodoing,itmoreaccurately

depictstheexperienceofmaternalintersubjectivitythatRachelCuskdescribes

inherautobiographyALife’sWorkonBecomingaMother(2001)andwhichis

echoedandcorroboratedbyIrisMarionYoung,AdrienneRich,JuliaKristevaand

JaneLymer.Cuskwritesapersuasivenarrativepersistentlyquestioningand

challengingwhetherwhatisdeemed‘natural’isinfactnatural.Theexperience

of(an)othergrowinginsideherbodyandgivingbirthtoit,hasprofound

consequencesonherownsenseofbeing.Theliteralexperienceofgoingfrom

onetotwopersonsandtheseparationanxietyandconfusionshefeelsthereafter

is,Iargue,fundamentaltounderstandingmotherhood.Cuskispreoccupiedwith

theliteralblurringfromoneunitintotwoduringchildbirthandtheimpactthis

hasonthesenseofself;herfeelingofbeingneitheroneselfnortwo,describingit

as‘Iknowneitherwhatitistobemyselfnortobeamother’.132Indeed,this

sensationoffeelingseparatedoralienatedfromherselfandtheworldaround

heractsasapointofdeparturefromwhichtoexploreCusk’stext.

AsIarguedinChapterOne,thereisnolegitimatefoundationtowhichwe

canreferinordertoascertainwhetherculturalinfluencesmaybeofgreateror

lesserinfluenceonmotherhoodthanwoman’spre-destinedbiologicalabilityto

132

Rachel Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother (London: Faber and Faber, 2008) p. 61.

51

bearchildren.Thestatusofmotherhoodiswhollyreliantontheindividualand

howherbeingintheworldengageswithsocial,culturalanddemographic

influences.ItreinforcesBeauvoir’stestamenttomotherhoodthatthe‘mother’s

attitudedependsonhertotalsituationandherreactiontoit[…]andthiswillbe

highlyvariable’.133AsCusk’stextillustrates,herexperiencesofmotherhood

originatedeepwithinhersenseofbeing,andthismanifestationwouldsuggest

thatitderivesfromtheontologicalaswellasanyculturaldomain.Unlikemost

motherswhojust‘getonwithit’,Cuskpainstakinglydocumentsandexplores

eachandeverystageinthephenomenaofbecomingamother,ablurringofself

andnot-self.Itisthisprocessofreflectionwhich,Iargue,revealsaconnection

betweenmotherandchildthatsimplycannotbeexperiencedbymen.Thisisnot

tosaythatmenarenotabletomakeasgoodaparentasthemother.WhatIam

statingisthatthephysicalconnectionbetweenmotherandchildmakesthe

relationshipmorecomplexandvisceral,particularlyforthemother,asitis

boundupwithherownidentity.Forexample,inRachelCusk’saccountofher

separationfromherpartnerinher2012memoirAftermath:OnMarriageand

Separation,thediscussionofcustodyofthechildrenisraised.Despiteher

partnerbeingthemainchildcarer,shedescribeshermaternalismasprimitive;

‘thechildrenbelongtome’,134articulatesCusk.Thissenseofownership

transcendsnotionsofcaringormaterialvalue,andinsteadisaresultofthem

beingaphysicalextensionofherself.Thatis,theywereonceapartofher:‘a

personnowexistswhoisme,butwhoisnotconfinedtomybody.Sheappears

tobesomesortofcolony’.135Indeed,initiallyCuskdismissesthefeelingssheis

133

Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex p. 526. 134

Cusk, Aftermath: On Marriage and Separation (London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 2012) p. 19. 135

Ibid p. 101.

52

experiencingwithhernewbornchildas‘innate’136butthenquestionsifitisnot

innateness:‘howcouldIpretendtobewhatIalreadywas’?137HenceIchose

Cusk’stexttoexplorematernalintersubjectivitybecauseshedeftlydistinguishes

betweeninnerandouterforcesasfarasitispossibletodoso.Hernarrative

resonateswithMossinthatshetooconsciouslyattemptstoseparateherown

instinctivebehaviourfromthatoflearnedbehaviour.However,Mossfocuseson

therealmofmotherhoodandtheprescriptivepracticesthataccompanyit,most

significantlytheday-to-daycaringforchildren.Conversely,Cuskpurposefully

distancesallotherhumanexistencefromthenarrative,sothatthefocalpointis,

atalltimes,justherselfandherbaby,a‘compositecreature’.138Sheexplainsin

herintroductionhowsheliterallybracketsthrough‘omission’139thepeoplewith

whomshelivesandtheotherrelationshipssurroundingtherelationshipwith

herchild.Thus,sheamplifiesthedistinctionbetweenunlearnedpatternsof

behaviourwithbehaviourthatbecomescorrupted,therebyillustratingthe

powerofculturalforcesanditspotentialforoverridingunlearnedbehaviour

patterns.Indeed,in21stcenturyWesternsociety,womenarebombardedwith

conflictingportrayalsofwhatamotheroughttobe.Withinhertext,Cusk

situatesherselfasthecenterpieceandwritesanexistentialnarrativeonher

experienceofbecomingamother.Shepositivelyandpurposefullyeschews

socialnormsassociatedwithpregnancyandmotherhood,insteadwritingher

ownexperiencewhilstrunningaparallelnarrativeonwhatsheoughttobe

doingorfeeling,accordingtoparentingmanuals,NationalChildbirthTrust

(NCT),breastfeedingclinics,Governmentliteratureonpregnancyand,lastly,a

136

Cusk, Aftermath: On Marriage and Separation (London: Faber and Faber, 2012) p. 19. 137

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother p. 18. 138

Ibid p. 99. 139

Ibid p. 10.

53

parentandbabymusicgroup.Cuskconsciouslydiscriminatesbetweenthetwo,

highlightingthatambivalencetowardsmotherhoodisnotincludedinthemore

officialnarratives.Sheoffersadistinctionbetweenthebodyasitislivedin

sensations,perceptionsandemotionsandthebodyasitisthematizedthrough

socialconstruction.

Therefore,thisChapterisdividedintotwosections.Thefirstsectionwill

considermaternalintersubjectivityfromapointofunlearnedbehaviourwhich

willillustratetherelationshipbetweeninstinctandambivalencebetween

motherandbaby,attemptingtoexcludealloutsideforces.Thesecondsection

willidentifyhowmotherhoodcanbecomecounter-intuitive,coercedinto‘un-

doing’unlearnedbehaviourandpursuingamorepoliticalagenda.So,forSection

One,IdrawupontheaccountsofintersubjectivitysetoutinIrisMarionYoung’s

essay‘PregnantEmbodiment:SubjectivityandAlienation’140andJaneLymer’s

2010doctoralthesis‘ThePhenomenologyoftheMaternal-FoetalBond’because

theirdescriptions,althoughnuanced,bestreplicatethosesetoutbyCusk.By

chroniclingtheirconclusionsalongsideCusk’sexperienceofpregnancyand

childbirth,Idemonstratehowablurringoccursbetweensubject(mother)and

object(baby).BothYoungandLymeradoptvariousapproachesusingFrench

philosopherMauriceMerleau-Ponty’sphenomenologyofintersubjectivity.

Indeed,Merleau-Pontyusesthetermintersubjectivitytodescribehowbeingin

theworldisneithercompletelysubjectivenorcompletelyobjective;both

perceivingandperceivedbyothers,theembodiedsubjectisneithercompletely

separatefromtheworldfullofotherembodiedsubjectsandneithercompletely

unitedwiththatworld;rather,intersubjectivityissomething‘in-between’

140

Iris Marion Young, ‘Pregnant Embodiment: Subjectivity and Alienation’, On Female Body Experience “Throwing Like a Girl and Other Essays (Oxford: OUP, 2005) pp. 46-61.

54

subjectivityandobjectivity.AlthoughforMerleau-Pontythisstatusof

inbetweenessisungendered,Iarguethattheintensityofthisblurringis

significantlyheightenedduringpregnancyandearlymotherhood.Inthis

instance,experiencesofsubjectandobjectoverlappingcreategreater

uncertaintyastowherethesubjectendsandtheobjectbegins,andthis

sensationismaternalinstinct.Indeed,whatdefinesthissensationasmaternal

instinct,distancingitselffromungenderedexplanationsofintersubjectivity,is

thatitsveryprocesscrossestheboundariesofperceptionintoaphysicalreality

intheshapeofchildbirth.Furthermore,assetoutinChapterOne,Iarguethat

thisontologicalstandingofbeingsubjectandobjectsimultaneouslyexposes

itselftotheworldasmaternalambivalence.Thatistosay,maternalambivalence

isaconsequenceofmaternalinstinct.

SectionTwowillfocusuponthesplitbetweensubjectandworld.The

reasonforthisistohighlightthepowerofexternalforcestowardsprescriptive

notionsofwhatmotherhoodshouldentail.Indeed,Cusktakesherselfoutsidethe

preconceivedperceptionsofmotherhoodandexplores‘thestrangeness’141in

becomingamother.Sheextendsthissenseofbeing‘outside’motherhoodfroma

literalaswellasfigurativestandpoint.Cuskrarelyconnectswiththe‘outside’

worldinthistext,choosinginsteadtofocusonhersenseofselfinrelationtoher

baby,butwhenshedoesengagewiththeworldaroundher,shedescribesitasa

‘curiousfeelingthatInolongerexistinsynchronicitywithtime,butatacertain

delay,likesomeoneontheendofatransatlanticphonecall’.142Cusk’sanalysis

concerningselfandworldwillbeconsideredalongsideKateKilpatrick’s

unpublished2015conferencepaper‘APhenomenologyofthePregnantBody:

141

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother p. 5. 142

Ibid pp. 216-217.

55

TheAnxietyofExpectation’.BeforeIembarkonSectionOne,itisnecessaryto

exploretheformthatCuskadoptstoconveyhermemoirand,secondly,to

considerwhyitisthatthefirsteditionofthetextreceivedsuchavitriolic

response.

i) TheIntertwiningofGenres

TheuseofforminCusk’stextissimilartothatwhichisadoptedbyotherfemale

cohorts143andshechoosestheautobiographytoconveyhermessage.Cusk

exploresthelackofsynchronicitywithherselfandtheworldbyavoidinga

chronologicalformat,choosinginsteadtointerweavechapterandthemesothat

ratherthanhavingcoherentchaptersfrombirthtoayearold,thechaptersfocus

onthemesthatshapeandmouldherjourneyofselfdiscoveryinrelationto

motherhood.Thus,certainthemes,suchasselfandworldresonatethroughout

thetextdroppinginandoutofthenarrative.Indeed,Cuskintertwinesher

autobiographicalwritingandextractsfromaselectionofproseandpoetry,

servingtobringclaritytoherownstorythroughtheuseofallegory.For

example,Cuskexplorestheconsequenceofsleepdeprivationandhowthisplays

tricksonthepsyche.InMoss,wewillseethephysicalmanifestationsthatcan

prevailfromsleepdeprivation,butCuskexploreshowalackofsleepduringthe

firstyearofherdaughter’slifeblurstheboundariesbetweennightandday,

realityandperception.Shecomparesherexperiencetothatoftheprotagonistin

CharlotteBrontë’sJaneEyre,who,likeCusk,learnstonavigateherwaythrough

sleeplessnights.ChoosingJaneEyre,anovelwhichstraddlesboththeRealism

andRomanticgenres,isaconsidereddecisionforCuskasnotonlydoesthis

143

I refer to them by name and in more detail on pp. 60-61.

56

gothicnovelrefusetobeconfinedtoonegenrebutJaneisoftendescribedasan

impor‘spirit’144implyingthatsheisnotofthisworld.Moreover,asCusk

highlights,forJaneEyre,thedarkrepresentsaplacewheretruthisrevealed;itis

atimewhenHelenBurnsandotheryounggirlsdieofstarvationorwhenmad

secretwivesprowlthecorridors.

Thequestionthishybridpieceofwritingprecipitatesiswhetheritcanbe

consideredaspartoftherealmofautobiographyifitborrowsfromvicarious

sourcessuchasthenovel.Itappearsthatthewritingrefusestobeconfinedby

genre,justasmaternalinstinctrefusestobeconfinedbyanameoranaction.

Cuskisinfactdeliberatelysubvertingthegenreofautobiographyinthesame

waythatsheissubvertingtherealmofmotherhood,byexposingtheduplicityin

herhead,whichisreflectedthroughhermixingofgenreandform.Cusk’swork

canbereadnotonlyasaphenomenologicalenquirybutisalsoatacitnodto

modernisttexts.AsBourne-TaylorandMildenbergargueinPhenomenology,

ModernismandBeyond(2010)argue:

bothmodernismandphenomenologysteadfastlycrystallizethesamepreoccupations

concerningsubjectivity;dislodgingitfromthehegemonyofrationalism,realismand

objectivity,theyspeakacrisisofvaluesandscientificfoundationsthatleadtoa

reappraisaloftheself.145

Cusk’swritinghasoftenbeencomparedtothatofVirginiaWoolf.146Hernovel,

ArlingtonPark(2006)isathinlyveiledmoderndayre-writingofMrsDalloway

(1925).JamesLasdunwrites:‘likeWoolf,Cuskstakeseverythingonherability

tomakeakindofstately,classicalartoutofthefrictionsanddetailsofordinary

144

Charlotte Brontë, Jane Eyre (London: Penguin, 1994) p. 203. 145

Phenomenology, Modernism and Beyond, eds Carole Bourne-Taylor and Ariane Mildenberg (Bern: Peter Lang

AG, 2010) p. 5. 146

Miranda Purves, ‘Rachel Cusk on her new novel, The Bradshaw Variations’, Elle Magazine (14 April 2010) http://www.elle.com/culture/books/interviews/a11067/book-release (accessed 23 May 2015) and Danielle Price,

“Mother Luck: A Review of A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother and The Lucky Ones’, Literary Mama (February 23rd

2005) http://www.literarymama.com/reviews/archieves/2005/02 (accessed 23 May 2015).

57

life’.147IntheIntroductiontoVirginaWoolf’sessaysinMomentsofBeing,which

wasfirstpublishedin1976longafterWoolf’sdeathin1941,JeanneShulkind

describesthelinkbetweenautobiographyandfictionas‘whenthephysical,

socialselfistranscendedandtheindividualconsciousnessbecomesan

undifferentiatedpartofthegreaterwhole’.148Woolf,inheressay‘ASketchfrom

thePast’,contemplateswhattheentry-pointforanautobiographyshouldbe.A

voraciousreaderandadvocateoftheautobiography,shequestionswhetherthe

structureshouldfollowthechronologyoflifeor,akintoherownandCusk’s

autobiographicalwriting,‘theinvoluntary,arbitraryactionofmemory?’149

So,Cusk’suseofmodernisttools,alongsidefeministtheory,isanattempt

todislodgephallocentrisminrelationtothehistoryofthemotherinorderto

exploresubjectivityfromtheaspectoflivedexperience.Cuskchoosestofocus

onaspectsofherlife‘asacanvasuponwhichmytheme,whichismotherhood,

mayconvenientlybeillustrated’.150Moreover,inlinewithmodernistthinking,

largesectionsofthetextconsistofinteriormonologueandvariouschapters

commenceinmediasres.ThisexperimentationwithformaptlyreflectsCusk’s

impressionthat‘nothing’151hadbeenwrittenaboutmotherhoodatall.She

attemptstowriteonthistopicafreshandquestionsconcerningagencycometo

theforewhendiscussingwomen’sautobiography.AsSidonieSmithandJulia

WatsonargueintheirIntroductiontoWomen,Autobiography,Theory,‘howdoes

awomanautobiographernegotiateadiscursiveterrain–autobiography–that

147

James Lasdun, The Guardian (16 September 2006) cited on back cover of Cusk, Arlington Park (London: Faber & ‘Faber, 2006) and in an interview with Rachel Cusk by Elle Magazine, journalist Miranda Purves writes that people

often compare Rachel Cusk to Virginia Woolf, ‘to me, you have a similar desire to use language as a thing in itself’, ‘Rachel Cusk on her new Novel, The Bradshaw Variations’, 14 April 2010, http://www.elle.com/culture/books/interviews/a11067/book-release-a life-s-work-on-becoming-a-mother-by-rachel-

cusk/ [accessed 23 May 2015] 148

Jeanne Shulkind, Moments of Being essays by Virginia Woolf (London: Grafton, 1989) p. 18. 149

Ibid p. xiii. 150

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, p. 11. 151

Ibid p. 10.

58

hasbeenuntilrecentlyaprimarilymasculinedomain?’152Therefore,mapping

outawomen’snarrativewithinamasculineframeworkrequires

experimentation.Cusk’snarrativeframeworkhasfluidboundaries,leaningon

extractsfromherfavouritechildhoodnovels,whichactasmetaphorsto

extrapolatemeaningintothesensationsofselfthatsheisexperiencing.Her

inclusionofthesenovelsmaybeoutofnostalgiaforherformerselforitcouldbe

thatitisalackoflanguageaffordedtowomen’sexperiencewhichhasledherto

useextractsfromliteratureinherautobiography.Forthereader,itgivesthe

impressionthatlanguageitselfisabarrier,asfarasdescribingmaternal

experienceisconcerned,andthereforetheborrowingofstoriesisnecessaryin

ordertocrystallizeunderstanding.Butthetextsshedrawsuponareveryspecific

andherinclusionofthem,asCuskherselfargues,illustratetheparticular

transformationofsensibilitythatisaconsequenceofmotherhood.Analogy,with

itstransformativepowers,paradoxicallyservesthispurpose.FrançoiseLionnet

arguesthataswomenarehistoricallysilencedsubjects,theautobiography

enablesthemtocreate“braided”textsofmanyvoicesthatspeaktheircultural

locationsdialogically.153ItisforthisveryreasonthatCusk’stextisahybridbut

theconfessionalautobiographyenableshertonavigateandtocapturethe

experienceofbeingamaternalbody,enablingtheexperienceto‘speak’foritself.

Moreover,theneedtoexpressoneselfthroughuseofanecdotalmaterial

appearstobeubiquitouswhenwomenarewritingonthesubjectofmotherhood.

SimonedeBeauvoir,IrisMarionYoung,AdrienneRich,BettyFriedan,Jane

152

Sidonie Smith and Julia Watson (eds), Women, Autobiograhy, Theory (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1998) p. 23. 153

Francoise Lionnnet, Autobiographical Voices: Race, Gender, Self-Portraiture (1989) cited in Sidonie Smith and Julia Watson (eds), Women, Autobiograhy, Theory (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1998) p. 12.

59

Lazarre154andAnneRoiphe155allresorttostoriesofthemselvesandsometimes

ofothers.Similarly,asSarahHeinämaahighlights,Beauvoir’suseofagreat

numberoftextsbyvariousfemaleauthorsenableshertoquestiontheneutrality

ofthedescriptionsofferedbyherfellow,predominantlymale,philosophers.In

TheSecondSex,BeauvoirincludesextractsfromnovelsbyVirginiaWoolf,Helen

Deutsch,SophieTolstoy,GeorgeSand,ColetteandMadamedeStaelinorderto

reinforceandshedlightuponherownconvictions.Moreover,Cixousarguesthat

thereisanintrinsicconnectionbetweenthephilosophicalandtheliterary,in

thatphilosophyconveysmeaningandliteratureisunderthecommandofit.But,

theformthatCuskadopts,thisintertwiningofgenres,liberatesherwritingfrom

thethresholdofphilosophicaldiscoursewhichhasgonebefore,andenablesher

toconsidermotherhoodanew.Understandingthepowerofhistory,sooftenre-

toldinstoryformat,CixoususestheanalogyofthefairytalerefrainOnceupona

timeandtheassociationsmadewithinthesestoriesofthefemaleprotagonist

beingputtosleepandawokenbyprinces.Sheusesthismetaphortoargue

woman’splacewithinsociety,that‘[m]ostwomenwhohaveawakened

rememberhavingslept’156andthisisthecasewithCusk:shewritesanewbut

withoutforgettingtheframeworkinwhichmotherhoodiscontainedbysociety.

Butatthesametime,itisnecessarytoconsiderwhetherCusk’s

experimentalformunderminesorenhancesanauthenticrepresentationofher

experience,butthenagain,perhapsthisisnotherprimeobjective.Thepowerof

Cusk’scarefullycraftedpiece,anartificewovenfrommanydifferentsourcesand

strands,istheimmediacyofchroniclingthesensationofbecomingamother.

154

Jane Lazarre, The Mother Knot (London: Duke University Press, 1997). Originally published in 1976. 155

Anne Roiphe, A Mother’s Eye: Motherhood and Feminism (London: Virago Press, 1997). 156

Helene Cixous, ‘Sorties’, The Newly Born Woman (London: I B Taruis & Co, 1996) p. 66.

60

Whileshemayhavemademanyeditstothefinaltext,theinstinctivenessofher

experienceisnotlostintheartisticembellishmentandherexperienceof

pregnancyandmotherhoodarevalorizedintheworksofYoung,Lymer,Richand

Kristeva.

ii) ‘Iwasonlybeinghonest’–AVoiceofDissent

Thisuseofformcausedabacklashamongstfemalereadersafterthefirstedition

ofALife’sWorkonBecomingaMotherwasreleasedin2001.The2008edition,

whichIrefertointhisstudy,includedanadditionalintroduction,outliningher

justificationforwritingagainst‘natural’motherhood.Cuskfelttheneedto

justifyherreasonsforwritingthisbookinresponsetothevitriolshereceived

whenitwasfirstpublished,‘andmostofthesecriticswerewomen’.157Itwould

appearthatforawomantovoiceambivalencetowardsmotherhoodistodefy

thelawsofnatureandtorenderher‘unnatural’.Cuskdescribesherambivalence

towardsmotherhoodasaculminationof‘loveandgrief[which]havemeina

tug-o-war’158andthefeelingofasenseoflossofherformerselfwhichdissolves

whenshelooksdownatherdaughterand‘acontrarywindoflovegustsover

[her]’.159Cusktakesgreatpainstocounteractherambivalencewithdescriptions

ofoverwhelmingloveforherchildandherseparationanxiety,reaffirming

Kilpatrick’sargumentthatthisstemsfromtheconflictawomanhaswithsociety

indecidingwhatisthe‘right’waytomother.Butthisvoiceofanxietyis

interpretedbyCusk’scriticsasanunnaturaldislikeandinabilitytomother,

restrictingtheirfocustohermorenegativemeditationsonadjustingto

157

Rachel Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, , p. 4. 158

Ibid p. 145. 159

Ibid p. 144.

61

motherhood.Forexample,itinitiatedadialogueontheMumsnetforumwebsite

formotherschastisingherforbeing‘soself-consciousandover-wroughtit

makesyouwanttopourajugofwateroverher’,‘livingonamoralhighground’,

‘unhinged’,‘hostile’,‘judgmental’,‘self-indulgent’160and‘confiningherdaughter

tothekitchenlikeananimal’.161Cuskrespondstothiscriticismstating‘Iremain

uneasyinthepublicplacesofmotherhood–theschoolgate,thecoffeecircuit–

wheretheskiescanunexpectedlyopenandjudgmentraindownonone’s

head’.162Inher2008Introduction,shedefendshertextclaimingthatthe

experienceofparenthoodisthe‘primarydisjuncture’betweenselfandothers

andthatherbookwaswrittenforthepersonwhovaluesselfdiscoveryover

institutionalrepresentation.

Cuskadmitsshewasnotpreparedforthecriticismsofthebook,which

werepredominantlyabouthermotheringratherthanherwritingskills;asCusk

herselfsays,‘Iwascitedeverywhereashavingsaidtheunsayable’.163Still,

journalistandauthorLynnBarberarguesthatsomewomenwillbeverygrateful

toCuskforarticulatingtheirownworstfeelings.BarberdescribesALife’sWork

onBecomingaMotherasprobablythemostpowerfulbookonmotherhoodever

written.164InanarticlebyRachelCuskdefendingALife’sWorkonBecominga

MotherinTheGuardianinMarch2008aptlyentitled‘Iwasonlybeinghonest’,

shearguesthatthereisacontemporarycrisisoffeminism.Highlightingtheholes

infeministdiscourseconcerningmotherhoodmerelyservestoemphasizethata

careeristheonlymeasureofparitybetweengenders.Moreover,Cuskreinforces

160

Ibid pp. 1-3. 161

Rachel Cusk, ‘I was only being honest’, The Guardian (21 March 2008) http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/mar/21/biography.women. (accessed 23 May 2015). 162

‘Rachel Cusk on the hostile reaction to A Life’s Work’ 25 March 2008, http://www.mumsnet.com/talk/in_the_news/501274-rachel cusk, (accessed 23 May 2015). 163

Ibid. 164

Lynn Barber, ‘The Interview: Rachel Cusk’, The Observer (August 30th 2009)

http://lexisnexis.com.chain.kent.ac.uk/nexis (accessed 7 April 2014).

62

thefactthatmotherhood,asitislived,ispersonal,privateandindividualandas

aresult‘deeplyundervalued’.165Itisdifficulttofullycomprehendwhatthe

underlyingfearamongstwomenisifthesanctityofmotherhoodisweakenedby

thevoiceofmaternalambivalence.Icanonlyconclude,therefore,thatif

pregnancyisconsideredtoberootedinontology,itshistoricalnarrativehas

ensuredthatforwomentovoicemotherhoodinambivalenttermswouldbe

digressingfromwhatisdeemed‘natural’.Theconsequenceofthisthereforeis

reluctanceforwomentovoiceanydiscordtowardsit.

Furthermore,formanyofhercritics,Cusk’sapproachtoherwriting

overshadowsherstrivefortheauthentic,astheirpreoccupationiswithher

solipsism,amodeassociatedwithWoolf’swork,which,onecouldargue,is

essentialinthepursuitofhonesty.TheSundayTimesjournalistCamillaLong

describesCusk’stextof‘self-absorptionandfearlessnessasanexcoriating

accountofpregnancyandmotherhood.’166However,Kristevaprovidesamore

measuredinterpretationofnarcissistictendenciesinwriting,whensheargues

thatinfact,whenfacedwithsocialnorms,‘literaturerevealsacertainknowledge

andsometimesthetruthitselfaboutanotherwiserepressed,nocturnal,secret

andunconsciousuniverse’167IarguethatthisiswhatCuskhasachieved.

165

Cusk, para.12. 166

Camilla Long, ‘On Aftermath by Rachel Cusk’, The Sunday Times (4 March 2012) http://www.theominivore.com/camilla-long-on-aftermath-by-rachel-cusk/ (accessed 25 April 2015).. 167

Kristeva, ‘Women’s Time’, The Kristeva Reader, (ed) Toril Moi (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986) p. 206.

63

SectionOne

1.i) Motherbaby

Cuskdescribesmotherandbabyimmediatelyaftergivingbirthasmotherbaby,a

‘compositecreature’168whichinitselfisanentirelysustainableunit.WhatCusk

isdescribingismaternalintersubjectivity.Moreover,Cuskdescribesthis

embodimentofmotherbaby,comprisingofneitheronenortwobutsomethingin

between,asa‘hopeofreturningusbacktowholeness’,resonatingwithPlato’s

Symposiumconcerninghumansoriginallycomprisingofmale,femaleand

hermaphroditeuntilZeussplitthemintwo,athemeIexploredinChapter

One.169Cusk’snarrativeonthebodilyexperienceofblurringdeflectsontothe

senseofbeingstrippedofself,suspendedinaliminalstatus,beingneitherthe

personsheusedtobenorthepersonsheisonthewaytobecoming.Indeed,asI

elucidatedpreviously,forCuskownershipofherchildrenisapre-requisiteof

motherhood;they‘belong’170toher.Motherandbabycreatetheirownreality,

whichisdistinctandseparatefromtheworldaroundthemandtheysubsistin

closephysicalproximity.AsfarasCuskisconcerned,ifthesebodiesarenot

unitedthroughfeedingforanylengthoftime,itbringsabout‘asortofelemental

anxietyforher’171.So,despiteherdislikeofbreastfeeding(forawhile,she

pursuesalineofenquiryinorderto‘cure’herofthis‘unnatural’sentiment),she

recognizesthatforher,breastfeedingisthelinkbetweenthetwoofthem;she

literally‘watersherwithlove’.172Becauseofheruncertaintyabouttheirmutual

distinctiveness,shecontemplateshowstrangeitmustseemtoababytobe

showeredwithlovebydayandputinadarkroomontheirownatnight.She

168

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, p. 99. 169

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, p. 109. 170

Cusk, Aftermath: On Marriage and Separation, p. 19. 171

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, p. 109. 172

Ibid p. 141.

64

remarksthatsheisphysically‘plagued’173bytheirseparationatnight.So,this

experienceofblurringintersubjectivitybetweenCuskandherbabybringsabout,

intangibleterms,Merleau-Ponty’sdefinitionofintersubjectivity.

1.i) IntersubjectivityinPregnancy

Onthequestionofintersubjectivity,MauriceMerleau-Pontycomparesthe

relationbetweenselfandothertoapregnancy.Althoughthisreferenceto

pregnancyactsasametaphor,asLisaGuentherpointsout,Merleau-Pontywrites

inawaythat‘itseemsweareallmothersregardlessofsexualdifference’,174his

descriptionoftheotherresemblesCusk’sownexperienceofintersubjectivity.He

describestheotheras‘reproducedfromme[…]areplicaofmyself[…]a

wonderingdouble’.175GuentherreinforcesMerleau-Ponty’sdesiretocompare

pregnancyandintersubjectivitybydrawinguponanextractfromhisessay

‘DialogueandthePerceptionofOther’:

Totheinfinitythatwasmesomethingelsestilladdsitself;asproutshootsforth,

Igrow;Igivebirth,thisotherismadefrommyfleshandbloodandyetisnolongerme.

Howisthatpossible?Howcanthecogitoemigratebeyondme,sinceitisme?176

Bearinginmindthathisfocusistodiscernhowemotionisanintersubjective

phenomenonthatiscommunicatedthroughbodilyengagement,hereMerleau-

Pontyattemptstodistinguishbetweenourselvesinthesubjectivesenseandthe

waysinwhichweappeartoothersobjectively.However,Merleau-Ponty’s

metaphorofpregnancyandtheblendingorblurringofthefleshresembles

Cusk’sactualexperienceofpregnancyandchildbirth.Forexample,Cusk

173

Ibid p. 188. 174

Lisa Guenther, ‘Merleau-Ponty and the Sense of Sexual Difference’ (Angelaki: Journal of the Theoretical Humanities, 16:2, pp. 19-33). p. 20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0969725X.2011.591583 (accessed 9 June 2014). 175

Ibid p. 21. 176

Ibid p. 21.

65

describesherdifficultyindistinguishingthebabyasaseparateunitexclaiming

that‘Iamapparentlyhermother’.177Thispre-reflectiveontologicallackof

distinctionortheco-existenceofsubjectandobject,towhichbothMerleau-

PontyandCuskrefer,constitutesthatofmaternalinstinct.

1.ii) DialecticalRelationshipbetweenMotherandBaby

Moreover,JaneLymer,inher2010doctoralthesis‘ThePhenomenologyofthe

Maternal-FoetalBond’makestheboldstatementthatthispointof‘blending’or

‘blurring’betweenmotherandbabycommencesinutero.178Althoughshedoes

notdiscussthisblurringintermsofmaternalinstinct,Iwouldarguethather

interpretationofthebondingprocessbetweenmotherandbabyisthatof

maternalinstinct.Drawnfromherownexperience,Lymerarguesthatthereisa

dialecticalrelationshipbetweenmotherandfoetusandasaresult,thebonding

processbeginsingestationwithinwhichtransferenceofemotionscantakeplace

throughthebodyschema.ForMerleau-Ponty,thebodyschemaisthemannerin

whichhumanscanmoveknowledgeably,effectivelyandefficientlyintheworld

withoutbeingreflectivelyawareofdoingso.Lymerarguesthatthereisa

dialecticcorporealengagement,whichhasadevelopmentalcapacityinhowit

impactsuponthefetalbodyschema,whichisnotabiologicalunfoldingbut

transpiresthroughtheindividualfoetus’sexperientialengagementwithinthe

maternalbodyschema.Therefore,shemaintainsthatformotherandbabypost-

birththeyare

enactingofabondthatisalreadyhighlydevelopedoralreadyexperiencing

difficulty.Whenamotherandinfantcometogetheratbirth,theyare

continuingaprocessortakingthenextstepinarelationshipthatalready

177

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother p. 61. 178

Jane Lymer, ‘The Phenomenology of the Maternal-Foetal Bond’ (Wollongong: University of Wollongong, 2010) p. 42.

66

hasahistory.179

Ifthisisthecase,thenLymer’sobservationsmerelyservetounderwritemyown

argumentwhichfocusesonthebondingprocesspost-birth.

1.iii) Intersubjectivity–SplittingorBlurring?

Inheressay‘PregnantEmbodiment:SubjectivityandAlienation’,IrisMarion

Youngalsoimpliesthatthereisaretrospectiverelationshipinuterobetween

motherandfoetusbyclaimingthat‘thesplitsubjectappearsintheeroticismof

pregnancy,inwhichthewomancanexperienceaninnocentnarcissismfedby

recollectionofherrepressedexperienceofherownmother’sbody’.180Buther

useoftheword‘split’suggestsaseveringhastakenplace.IconcurwithLymer

thatthesubjectiveexperienceofpregnancybeingoneofmaternal‘splitting’

erroneouslysuggestsadivisionorfracturetosomethingthatisalreadypresent

orunified.Rather,Lymerargues,itisan‘emergenceofanotherthrougha

processthatrequiresamaternalsubjectiveextensionintonewexperientialrealm

and,quiteliterally,anewexistence.’181Therefore,maternalsubjectivity,as

experiencedduringpregnancy,canbebetterunderstoodnotasasplit,butasan

overlapping,whichinturnsuggestsacrossoverofexperientialsubjectivity

betweenthetwobutequallyimpliesthatitcanneverbepossibletofully

experiencethesituationofanother.Youngreflectsonherownpregnancyas,

feel[ing]alittletickle,alittlegurgleinmybelly.Itismyfeeling,myinsides,anditfeels

somewhatlikeagasbubble,butitisnot;itisdifferent,inanotherplace,belongingto

another,anotherthatisneverthelessinsidemybody.182

179

Ibid p. 304. 180

Iris Marion Young, ‘Pregnant Embodiment: Subjectivity and Alienation’, On Female Body Experience, (Oxford: OUP, 2005) p. 47. 181

Lymer, ‘The Phenomenology of the Maternal-Foetal Bond’, p. 160. 182

Young, p. 49.

67

ButYoung’sargumentisproblematicbecauseshecritiquesMerleau-Ponty’s

phenomenologyofbodilyexistencebychallenginghis‘implicitassumptionsofa

unifiedsubject’,which,accordingtoher,‘preserve[s]adistinctionbetween

subjectandobject’becausehe‘assume[s]thesubjectasaunity’.183Incontrastto

this,Youngsuggeststhatitispossibletoexperiencethebodyasbothsubjectand

objectbutwiththeabilitytodistinguishbetweenthetwoexceptinpregnancy

whenYoungdescribesthetwoasindistinguishable.Ironically,however,Young

seemstomisrepresentMerleau-Ponty’snotionofthe‘unifiedsubject’which

impliesaunifiedsubject-objectstructure.ForMerleau-Pontythesubjectiveand

theobjectiveaspectsoflivedexperiencearealwaysalreadyinseparable,meaning

thatthereisalwaysanoverlappingorblendingofsubjectandobjectinthatthe

subjectisatonceaperceivingsubjectintheworldandanobjectperceivedby

others.Hedescribesthefleshoftheworldasfollows:‘mybodyismadeofthe

samefleshastheworld(itisaperceived),andmoreover[…]thisfleshofmy

bodyissharedbytheworld’.184Merleau-Pontygoesontodescribethisinability

toseparatethe‘inside’andthe‘outside’byusingasanexamplethehandwhich

canbothtouchandbetouched:

HowdoesithappenthatIgivetomyhands,inparticular,thatdegree,thatrate,andthat

directionofmovementthatarecapableofmakingmefeelthetexturesofthesleekand

therough?Betweentheexplorationandwhatitwillteachme,betweenmymovements

andwhatItouch,theremustexistsomerelationshipbyprinciple,somekinship,

accordingtowhichtheyarenotonly,likethepseudopodsoftheamoeba,vagueand

ephemeraldeformationsofthecorporealspace,buttheinitiationtoandtheopening

uponatactileworld.Thiscanhappenonlyifmyhand,tangible,formyotherhand,for

exampleifittakesitsplaceamongthethingsittouches,isinasenseoneofthem,opens

finallyuponatangiblebeingofwhichitisalsoapart.185

183

Ibid pp. 47-48. 184

Maurice Merleau-Ponty, The Visible and the Invisible, (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1968) p. 248. 185

Ibid p. 133.

68

Workingbackfromthis,itseemstomethatYoung’semphasisonthesplittingof

thesubjectinpregnancyisactuallymoreakintoablurring.Youngdescribes

pregnancyas‘challengingtheboundariesofmybodyexperiencebyrendering

fluidtheboundarybetweenwhatiswithin,herself,andwhatisoutside,

separate.186Moreover,whatisimportanthereisthatYoungrecognizesthather

bodyisactingasbothobjectandsubject,recountingthebirthingprocessasan

‘extremesuspensionofthebodilydistinctionbetweeninnerandouter’.187In

Merleau-PontyandDerrida:intertwiningembodimentandalterity(2004),Jack

ReynoldsquotesMerleau-Pontybydescribing‘manasaknotofrelations’when

referringtotherelationshipofsubjectandobject,inwhichhearguesthattogain

anunderstandingofthesubjectandavoidknowingnothingoftheobject,we

mustattainanunderstandingof‘theparadoxofthetranscendencein

immanence’:188’insideandoutsideareinseparable’writesMerleau-Ponty,‘The

worldiswhollyinsideandIamwhollyoutsidemyself’.189Childbirththerefore,is

anactualizationofintersubjectivity;itassumesavisualpresenceintheformof

twobeingsco-joinedbyacord,acordthatiseventuallyknottedwhenthetwo

beingsbecomephysically,butnotnecessarilymetaphysically,separated.Hence,

thisphysicalmanifestationcreatesclosetieswithMerleau-Ponty’s

phenomenologyontheinterdependenceand‘mutualencroachment’ofobjects

ontosubjects.190So,ifweconsiderAdrienneRich’sexperienceofpregnancy

alongsidethisthinking,shearguesthatforwomen,theyareattunedtoboth

186

Young, p. 49. 187

Ibid p. 50. 188

Jack Reynolds, Merleau-Ponty and Derrida: intertwining embodiment and alterity, (Ohio: Ohio University Press, 2004) p. 24. 189

Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception, trans. Colin Smith (London: Routledge, 1962). p. 407. 190

Ibid p. 27.

69

‘inner’and‘outer’becauseforthem‘thetwoarecontinuous,notpolar’.191She

indicatesthatthechildthatshecarriesforninemonthscanbedefinedneitheras

‘me’noras‘not-me’andusestheword‘blurring’192todescribetheboundary

betweenbodyandbody.Cuskreinforcesthisunderstandingofblurring,

describingitasbecoming‘briefly,bothchildandparent,bothindividualand

other,anditwasthisrareandfleetingexposureofthepsychethatIsoughtto

captureinALife’sWork.’193

Moreover,themindandbodyloseseparatenesstoo.AsCuskexplains,‘in

pregnancy,thelifeofthebodyandthelifeofthemindabandontheeffortof

distinctnessandbecomefatallyandhistoricallyintertwined[…]motherhood

promisesfromitsfirstpagetobealongerandmoredifficultvolume’,194which

revealsinCuskaconspicuousmoveawayfromCartesianthinkingtowardsa

moreindistinctwholeness.Indeed,asBeauvoirargues,thebondinthe

individualthatconnectsthephysiologicalandthepsychiclife‘isthedeepest

enigmaimpliedintheconditionofbeinghuman,andthisenigmaispresentedin

itsmostdisturbingforminwoman’.195Shequestionsthatevenwomenmight

findthemselves‘quiteindefinable’196becauseinthisdomainthereisnotruth

andIwouldarguethatthisdescriptionisparticularlyrelevanttothestatusof

motherhood.Whetherindeedwomencanbedefinedorexplainedisopento

doubtbytheverynatureofthisunfamiliarityandstrangenessofself.Butthe

inabilitytoimposeobjectivemeaninguponthisexperienceofmaternalinstinct

doesnotexcludeitfromexisting.Cusk’suseoftheword‘fatally’whenreferring

191

Rich, Of Woman Born, p. 64. 192

Ibid p. 63. 193

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, p. 5. 194

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, (my emphasis) p. 21. 195

Beauvoir, p. 286. 196

Ibid p. 287.

70

toalackofdistinctnessbetweenherselfandherbabyimpliesthatforherthe

onsetofpregnancyistosuggestthedeathofselfassheknowsit.AsCusk

laments,‘tosucceedinonemeanstofailatbeingtheother[…]Ineverfeelmyself

tohaveprogressedbeyondthisdivision.Imerelylearntolegislatetwostates

andtosecuretheborderbetweenthem.’197So,althoughtheintensityof

intersubjectivitydissipateswithtimeasthebabymatures,anysenseofplenitude

oftheformerselffailstoreturn.Instead,itseemsthatreconciliationbetween

formerandnewselftakeplace.InSymposium,DiotimaexplainstoSocratesthat

whenweusethewordrecollectionitsuggeststhatknowledgehasdepartedfrom

us:‘forgettingisthedepartureofknowledge,andrecollection,byimplantinga

newimpressionintheplaceofthatwhichislost,preservesit,andgivesita

spuriousappearanceofinterruptedidentity’.198Thisdescriptionproposedby

Diotimaofidentity,suspendedandthenresumed,butinanalteredstate,chimes

withCusk’sdescriptionofavaledictiontoherformerself.

Cusk’suseoftheterm’becomingamother’inthetitleofher

autobiographysuggeststhatsheisstillintheprocessofdoingso.Buildingupon

Merleau-Ponty’snotionthatmanis‘notanaturalspecies:heisahistorical

idea’,199Beauvoirarguesthatwomanisnota‘completedreality,butrathera

becoming’.200Ifweconsiderthisconceptalongsidepregnancy,Iquestion

whetheritiseverpossibleforwomento‘become’iftheyareinaconstantstate

ofbecomingsomethingelse.Cuskisatpainstoemphasisethatthissuspension

ofbodilydistinctionbetweenmotherandbabyistemporary,butatthesame

timeshefindsthelengthoftimeofthephysicalprocess,whichdetachesherfrom

197

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, p. 63. 198

Plato, Symposium p. 89. 199

Beauvoir, p. 66. 200

Ibid p. 66.

71

herself,disconcerting.Yet,thisprocessispresentingitself,everincreasingly,as

reality.Ratherthanreturningtoherformerself,Cuskrealizesthateachstageof

thechild’sdependenceonherisa‘newandpermanentreality’:201

Icohabituneasilywithmyself,withthepersonIwasbefore.Ilookatthisperson’s

clothes,herthings.Igothroughhermemories,likeanimposter,prurientandfaintly

scandalized.202

Cuskdescribesthissensationashaving‘nosubjectivity’203andindeed,ifone

considersembodimenttoincludethecarryingofsomebodyelseinsideoneself,

whoisthereforeseparateandyet,atthesametime,partofthatbody,thismust

resultinanexperiencethattranscendsafinitesenseofself.

1.iv) Whatiswomanifsheisnotawife,amother,adaughter?

Nevertheless,CuskconfessesinheroriginalintroductiontoALife’sWorkon

BecomingaMotherthat,

ifatanypointinmylifeIhadbeenabletofindoutwhatthefutureheld,Iwouldalways

havewantedtoknowwhetherornotIwouldhavechildren[…]thiswasthequestion

whosemysteryIfoundmostcompelling.204

SheborrowsaquotationfromEdithWharton’s1905novelTheHouseofMirthin

ordertoaskthequestion‘ofwhatawomanisifsheisnotawife,amother,a

daughter’?205Cuskturnsthisquestiononitsheadandaskswhatisawomanif

sheisamother;andwhatamotherinfactis.ShedrawsuponEdithWharton’s

noveltomeditateonthecorollaryofeventswhichoccurredtoherownsenseof

selfonbecomingamother.InreferencetoWharton’stext,whatisimplicitin

Cusk’sinterpretationofitisthatforwomanasenseofcompletenesscanonly

201

Ibid p. 214. 202

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother p. 103. 203

Ibid p. 103. 204

Ibid p. 7. 205

Ibid p. 51.

72

comeaboutonceshebecomesamother.TheorphanedLilyBartinTheHouseof

Mirthreliesonherbeautytonavigateherwaythroughlifebutwithnosenseof

belongingwhichafamilycanprovide.Herlifeisshort-lived,endingina

boardinghouse,pennilessandalone.Thechildlessprotagonistdiescradling

anotherwoman’sbabyandexperiencesasenseofcontentmentandtranquility

thathadeludedherduringherlifetime.Cusk’sanalysisofthisscenearguesthat

itisnotjustsymbolicof‘Lily’sexclusionfromthehumanlife-cycle[…]itisalso

thevisionofhersquanderedfemininity.’206ButCuskimpliesthatbecominga

motherismorethanjustadesireforcompleteness.Shealignsherselfwith

Kristeva’ssentimentsthatinfactmotherhoodis‘indispensabletotheir

discovery,notofplenitude,butofthecomplexityofthefemaleexperience’.207

TheworkinggirlwhosebabyitisthatLilyiscradlingseemstotheprotagonistto

have‘reachedthecentraltruthofexistence.’208

Cusk’stextreinforcesthatthisstateoffluxconcerningidentity,becoming

heightenedandatitspinnacleduringandimmediatelyafterchildbirth.Contrary

toBeauvoir’sinterpretationofdefectiveness,thesensationofbeinginaconstant

stateof‘becoming’whenselfandbeingintheworldareinfluxmustbe

consideredasapositive,dynamicandprogressiveexperience,continuingthe

processoffemaleimmanenceinherentwithintranscendence.Indeed,Cusk

describesitasarealizationthatinfactparenthoodisameansbywhich‘theself’s

limitsarebrokenopenandanentrancefoundtoagreaterlandscape’.209Itis

necessarytoliberatetheperceptionsofmotherhoodandmakesomesortof

attemptsatconsideringwoman’sabilitytogivelifeasanunderlyingstrength.As

206

Ibid p. 55. 207

Julia Kristeva, p. 205. 208

Edith Wharton, The House of Mirth Cusk, cited in A Life’s Work on Becoming, p. 53. 209

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming A Mother, p. 147.

73

Beauvoircorroborates,‘ifwomanseemstobetheinessentialwhichnever

becomestheessential,itisbecausesheherselffailstobringaboutthis

change.’210Moreover,asmuchasBeauvoir’ssenseofothernessmaywellbe

consideredjusta‘fundamentalcategoryofhumanthought’,211thesamecannot

beconsideredforpregnancywhenonebodybecomestwo.Indeed,Cuskreveals

thatitisconsciousnessitselfthatisunseatedandunderminedbytheprocessof

reproductionandthereforeanyattemptstoretainherselfarefutile.She

maintainsthathavingababycreatesa‘rivalconsciousness’,whichensuresthat

herbondofduty‘holdsherinanenfeeblingtithe’.212Thisdescriptionoftheself,

thistithetowhichsherefersonmorethanoneoccasion,suggeststhatithas

beenimposedonher,thatitprecedesvolitionandbelongstotheunthoughtor

pre-predicativedimensionofexperience.Althoughreflectionofanexperience

canneverbethesameasthelivedexperienceitself,thereisenoughevidence

heretoassociatethisstateofambivalencetotheexperienceofablurring

betweensubjectandobject.

1.v) Separation

ThesubjectofseparationisonethatpreoccupiesCuskandMoss.Whatbecomes

evidentisthat,forthemother,evenwhenthephysicalseparationofmotherand

childhavetakenplace,maternalintersubjectivitytranscendsthephysical

boundariesofchildbirth.Itsmanifestationislocatedinmaternalambivalence

butthishangoverofblurringofthesubjectandtheobjectisacontinuationof

maternalinstinct.Therefore,evenaftermotherbabymakeswayformotherand

baby,whenCuskcanidentifyherdaughterfromherself,shecontinuesto

210

Beauvoir, p. 19. 211

Beauvoir, p. 17. 212

Ibid p. 139.

74

experienceseparationanxietybetweenherselfandherdaughter,particularly

duringtheirfirstyeartogether,andthisisaconsequenceofmaternalinstinct.

Cuskexploresseparationthroughtwonovels,TheSecretGardenby

FrancesHodgsonBurnettandMadameBovarybyGustaveFlaubert.As

mentionedinChapterOne,ElisabethBadinterfoundedherargumentforthere

beingnomaternalinstinctonstatisticsfromParisin1780,revealingthatonly

1,000outof21,000babiesborneachyearwerebeingbreast-fedbytheir

mothersasthemajorityweresentoutsideofParistowet-nurses.Similarly,Cusk

highlightstheconsequencesofearlyseparationbetweenmotherandbabyby

illustratingEmmaBovary’sdecisiontosendherbabydaughtertolivewithawet

nurseoutsidethetownforthefirstfewmonthsofherbaby’slife.Cuskimplies

thatthisdecisionpreventsanyhopeofabondbeingsecuredbetweenEmmaand

babyBerthe.ThetextimpliesthatBerthe’sdownfallinlifeisaresultofalackof

maternallovegiventoher.However,Cuskmaintainsthatatayearold,their

daughterhas‘arrivedtoclaimherself,totakeherselffromus,andthis

separatenessmarkstheendofonekindofloveandthebeginningofanother’,213

butthedifferencehereisthattheirdaughterhasdonethisseveringonherown

termsratherthanhavingherparentsimposeituponher.Theimportanceofa

mother’sabilitytoletgoofherchild,andtheconsequencesifshedoesnot,isa

subjecttowhichweshallreturninthenextChapter.

ButwhatCuskisalludingtoisthefactthattheirdaughterneededthelack

ofseparationinherfirstyearinordertonegotiateherautonomythereafter.As

Cuskdemonstrates,MaryLennoxinASecretGarden,havingbeenunlovedasa

youngchild,findssalvationinregeneratingagarden,therebylearningtolove,

213

Ibid p. 97.

75

despitehavingbeenuprootedandreplanted.Cuskdescribesthepainfulprocess

ofseparation,commencingwiththecessationofbreastfeedingasasenseofloss,

aphysicalconflationbetweenmotherandbaby,whichhasbeendisconnected.

Everytimesheleavesherbabysherecounts:‘theworldbearsthetaintofmy

leaving,sothatabandonmentmustnowbesubtractedfromthesumofwhatever

Ichoosetodo’.214Cuskconsidersseparationas‘brutal’andthemuchlongedfor

momentsoffreedomfrommotherhoodprovetobe‘panickedandwholly

unsatisfactory’.215Sherelatesatimesoonafterherdaughter’sbirthwhenshe

attemptstogotoaconcertoneeveningwhich,ratherthanattendingtheconcert

hall,resultsinsteadinvisitingnumerousphoneboxesintheWestEndduetoa

‘mountingsenseofwrongdoing,asifIhadstolensomething[and]fall[ing]upon

thenearesttelephoneasifitwereanoxygenmask’.216Herneedtocalland

checkonherdaughteroverridesanydesiretobepartofasocialevent,

describingthosearoundherasignorantofthe‘strife-tornregioninwhichInow

live:theyareasremotefromitasifitlayontheothersideoftheworld’.217

Afurtherrealizationdawnsuponherthatchildcareisnotthesimple

solutionshepresumeditwouldbe.Inabidtobereconciledwithherformerlife,

feeling‘stuck’likeawalluponwhichherdaughtergrowslikeavine.218Cusk

expressestheneedtore-trainherdaughterontosomethingelsesothatshecan

absentherselffromtimetotime.Butattemptstofindapart-timenannygives

birthtoawholenewrangeofsensibilities,suchasguilt,lossandanxiety.The

personCuskhasinmindforthejob

214

Ibid p. 93. 215

Ibid p. 157. 216

Ibid p. 92. 217

Ibid p. 92. 218

Ibid p. 149.

76

hadnoearthlyexistence,butsortofmaterializedonmydoorstepeachmorning,tookthe

babyreassuringlyfrommyarms,wipedawaymytearsandsaidthingslike,youjustgooffandenjoyyourself,we’llhavealovelytimehere,won’twe?Shewastheprojectionof

myconflictedself.219

Moreover,thosehourswhichCuskhastoherselfprove‘damagedandsecond

hand’describingtheinability‘tofitmyworldintoaspacecarved,asitseemedto

me,frommydaughter’sownflesh’.220Indeed,forCusk,intheearlystagesof

motherhood,itbecomesincreasinglyobviousthatphysicalseparationfromher

daughterisprofoundlydifficult,describingthisattemptedinterventionbetween

motheranddaughter‘asagulfIhadputbetweenus’.221Afterseveralfailed

attemptsathiringnannies,Cuskresignsherselftothefactthat‘Iwasn’tready,it

seemed,toletherlovesomebodyelse’.222

SectionTwo

2.i) SelfandWorld

AlthoughCuskdoesproviderelativelydetaileddescriptionsofthethreenannies

shehires,thepurposefordoingsoistohighlighttheconflictshesensesin

relationtotheworldaroundher.Cusk’swithdrawalinto‘civilization’s

shadows’223fostersaphenomenologicalapproachasshe‘brackets’224herself

fromtheworldaroundher,inordertobeabletoseeclearlywhatherexperience

reallyisinordertorelateitbettertoobjectivenotions.Thus,Cuskisnotdenying

interactionwiththeoutsideworldwhichwouldleadtoamind/worldsplit:on

219

Ibid p. 153. 220

Ibid p. 163. 221

Ibid p.163. 222

Ibid p. 163. 223

Badinter, The Myth of Motherhood, p.xxi. 224

As I have stated in Chapter One, the term ‘bracketing’ is the act of epoché , a phenomenological procedure in

which ‘the preconceptions and theoretical notions ruling our daily world of fact are never left behind but are temporarily withheld […] the practice of ‘bracketing’, then, does not reject the real world, leaving the subject alienated and isolated; rather, it brings to light the condition that underlies experience and makes it possible.’ (Carole Bourne-

Taylor and Ariane Mildenberg eds, Phenomenology, Modernism and Beyond (Bern: Peter Lang AG, 2010) pp. 5 and 12.

77

thecontrary,sheremainsasmuchintheworldassheeverwas,butthe

differenceisthatshehasshiftedthefocusfrompreconceivedideasontoherown

livedexperienceofherconsciousnessandworld.MauriceNatansonexplains,in

phenomenologicaltermsthiscrucialshiftthatepochéaccommodates:‘[s]he

reflectsselectivelyonwhat[s]hehadhithertosimplylived,thoughboththe

reflectingandthelivingcontinue,sidebyside,inthelifeofconsciousness.’225

AndindeedCusk’snarrativedisclosesthatshefeelsatoddswitheveryoneand

everythingwithwhomshecomesintocontact.Thereisalackofunderstanding

betweenCusk’ssenseofbeingintheworldandtheanticipationofexpectation

fromtheworldtoher,whichis,Iargue,theresultofontologicalexperienceof

intersubjectivityatwork:itisatoddswiththemoreprescriptiveworldinwhich

welive.Cuskalludestothisdiscrepancybetweenwhatawomanisexperiencing

inpregnancyandchildbirthandwhattheworldthinkssheisexperiencing.She

(un)intentionallywithdrawsherselffromsocietybecauseofherownsenseof

alienationfromit.Despitechoosingtosynchronizeherwritingatthesame

momentofexperiencingmotherhood,theworldaroundherisinnoway

synchronizedwithherexperienceofbecomingamother.Indeed,thetextis

unequivocalaboutherlackoffitintheworldandatitsmostpronouncedina

chapterentitled‘Don’tforgettoScream’,referringtothelastlineofthenursery

rhyme‘Row,row,rowtheboat’butalsoalludingtohowCuskfeelsinsidewhen

sheattendsamusicgroupinherlocalvillagehall.Hernarrativecreatesa

distancebetweenherselfandtheotherattendees,describingthemas‘species’,

choosingtositonherownratherthanengagewiththeothermothers.Butshe

doesdrawsomecomfortfromthismusicgroupasshewatchesherdaughter

225

Maurice Natanson, Edmund Husserl: Philosopher of Infinite Tasks (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1973). p. 57.

78

interactwiththegroupwhilstsinging.Cuskis‘clutch[ing][her]daughter’s

warmlittlebody’,remarkingthat‘sheandtheworldforgottheirquarreland

convenedtoassuremethatIcouldprotecther,encloseher,lookafterher’.226

Moreover,Cusk’sinclusioninhermemoireofextractsfromWarand

PeaceandAnnaKareninafurtherservetoillustratethatselfandworldcannotbe

reconciled.AsCuskhighlights,itseemsfittingtousetwo19thcenturynovelsas

theyservetoreinforcethepowerofhistoricalnarrativeanditsabilityto

separateitselffromthetruth.TheextractfromTolstoy’sWarandPeacefocuses

onadescriptionoftheheroine,Natasha,nowthatsheisanestablishedmother:

Shehadgrownstouterandbroader,sothatitwasdifficulttorecognizetheslim,lively

Natashaofformerdaysinthisrobustmotherlywoman[…]nowherfaceandbodywere

oftenallthatonesaw,andhersoulwasnotvisibleatall.227

Natasha’sconcealedsoulhasbeenseparated,retreatinginto‘civilization’s

shadows’228afterbecomingamotherandCuskisvisiblyempatheticassheisalso

experiencinglifeasalostsoulwithregardtomotherhood.Thusshesituates

theseextractsfromTolstoyalongsideherownmeditationsoncorporealityand

intersubjectivityonlearningofherownpregnancy.Thiswithdrawalofthesoul,

whichNatashaexhibitsandCuskconsciouslyundertakes,isduetothisvoidand

discrepancybetweentheirexperienceofselfanditstranscendencefrom

empiricistnotionsofmotherhoodwhich,aswehavealreadydiscussed,is

mythologizedthroughhistoricalnarrative.AsCuskhighlights,thisdescriptionof

NatashaiswrittenattheendofWarandPeace(1869);Tolstoydoesnotwritea

volumeconcerningNatashaasamotherbutinsteadchoosestowriteAnna

Karenina(1877),whichhighlightstheconsequencesoffemaletransgression.

Cuskasserts‘motherhoodisacareerinconformityfromwhichnoamountof

226

Cusk, p. 178. 227

Ibid pp. 20-21. 228

Badinter, The Myth of Motherhood, p.xxi.

79

subterfugecanliberatethesoulwithoutviolence;andpregnancyisitsboot-

camp’.229Shehighlightsthatintoday’ssociety,thesedidactic19thcenturynovels

havetheabilitytoconfineaswellasliberate,actingasaconspiratortouphold

societalnormsaswellassubvertthem.Throughtheseliteraryexamplesfrom

Tolstoy,shehighlightsthediscrepancybetweenvoicedsocialnormsand

unvoicedsubjectiveexperience.

Indeed,whenCuskchoosestoshareherexperiencesofengagementwith

theworld‘outside’inrelationtomotherhood,itisusuallytocritiqueit.Herfirst

forayintocontactwiththeworldconcerningherpregnancydescribesher

experiencewiththesonographerwhoundertakesthefirstpregnancyscan.

‘Comeon,thesonographerurgesthecreatureharshly,let’sseeyoumove[…]I

feelIshouldbeprotectingitfromitstormentsofthissortbutIsaynothing’.230

Thisharbingerofsilencetowardsmedicalintervention,whichCuskalsoextends

toavarietyofinstitutionsassociatedwithchildrearing,isrepresentativeof

women’sreluctancetovoicetheirdissent.AsCarolineLindquistargues,

contemporarydiscourseonpregnancycontinuestosilencewomenwhoare

unabletodescribetheirexperienceinunambiguouslypositiveterms.231So,I

arguethatwomenchoosetodisengagetheirownsubjectivityandremainsilent

fromculture’sdiscourseonpregnancy.Initsplace,likeCusk,they‘becomea

cocoon’232andtheirsenseofbelongingintheworld,akintoNatashafromWar

andPeace,isnothingmorethanaphysicalpresence.

229

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, p. 21. 230

Ibid p. 30. 231

Caroline Lindquist, ‘ Being torn: Toward a Phenomenology of Unwanted Pregnancy’, Hypatia 23 (3), 136-55 in Kate Kilpatrick’s paper ‘A Phenomenology of the Pregnant Body: The Anxiety of Expectation. p. 7. (27 March 2015)

http://pages.uoregon.edu/uophil/files/Caroline_Lundquist_Writing_Sample.pdf. (accessed 24 April 2015) 232

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother p. 29.

80

2.ii) SocialIntervention

Moreover,Cuskmakesclearthatthislackofbelongingintheworldisaproduct

ofsocialconstruction.Althoughthisstudyfocusesontheontologicalratherthan

havinganypoliticalagenda,itisworthconsideringtheconsequencesof

interventionintermsofhowitmaydisruptormaskmaternalinstinctwith

society’severincreasinginterferencewithpregnancyandchildbirth.AsYoung

argues,‘pregnancydoesnotbelongtothewomanherself[…]sheis[merely]the

container’.233Indeed,Cuskdescribessociety’sgrasponherpregnancylikebeing

‘tagged,asifelectronically[…]mywomanlymovementsarebeingclosely

monitored’.234Cusksatirizestheplethoraofinformationleafletssheishanded

onherfirstvisittothehospitalrangingfrom‘diet,acupuncture,yoga,antenatal

classes,parentcraftclasses,hypnotismandwaterbirth[…]withtherulesand

regulationsofpregnancylaidoutinavolumeentitledEmma’sDiary.’235Cusk

criticizesthesenselessnotionofhomogenizingwomen’sexperienceof

pregnancybyquotingfromEmma’sDiary,thecontentofwhichissoevidentlyat

oddswithherownencounter.Emma’sDiaryisapowerfulpieceofpropaganda,

whichtacitlyshiftsownershiporresponsibilityofthefoetusfromthemother

ontothestate.Indeed,Cusktacklestheliteratureonpregnancybyhighlighting

themanydecisionsthatsocietymakesforyouandthefearitimbuesifyou

transgressonissuessuchasdiet,smoking,alcohol,drugfreelabourandastrong

emphasisontheimportanceofbreastfeeding.AsCuskmocks,ifbelievingthat

pregnancyistheonlytimeinawomen’slifewhensheisallowedtobefat,then

shemustthinkagain,andproceedstolistavastarrayoffoodswhichthe

233

Young, p. 46. 234

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, p. 31. 235

Ibid p. 30.

81

literatureclaimswouldnotbethe‘bestbite[she]cangive[her]baby’.236This

naturallyraisesthequestionastowhomdoesthefoetusbelong?Ifthemedical

worldchoosestotreatthefoetusandthemotherastwoseparatepatients,itisof

nosurprisethatwomenretreatintothemselvesinordertomaintainownership

oftheirpregnancyandmaketheirownchoices.237

2.iii) ChildcareManuals

Inresponsetothisliterature,Cuskdevotesanentirechaptertoherown

experienceofchildcaremanuals.Intheiropeningparagraphs,bothYoungand

Cuskobservetheobjectificationofthemotherwithinchildcaretexts.Citing

Kristeva,Younglamentsthatthereisnotext‘concernedwiththesubject,the

motherasthesiteofherproceedings’.238Rather,conversely,Cuskremarksthat

themoreshereads,‘themoreherdaughterrecedesfrom[her]andbecomesan

objectwhoseuseImustre-learn’.239Moreover,shereinforcestheinauthenticity

ofthesetextswherebytheworldasweknowitvanishesandisreplacedby

anotherwhoseprinciplesneedtobelearned.Shedescribesthis‘vanished

world’240asthemother’sown.Cuskarguesthatthesetextstreatyouasifyouare

thefirstmotherandthisisthefirstbookandanythingthatwentbeforemustbe

forgotten.Moreover,albeitwithanairofacerbity,Cuskattemptstofollowsome

oftheadvicegivenbyDrSpock’sBabyandChildCare.Atonepointshe

purchasesanothermanualnamedYourBabyandChildbyPenelopeLeachinthe

hopethatitwillhelpherre-engagewithherdaughter,asothertextshavecaused

236

Ibid p. 36. 237

For further reading concerning pregnancy and medical and cultural intervention see Clare Hanson, A Cultural History of Pregnancy, Medicine and Culture, 1750-2000 (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004). 238

Kristeva, ‘Motherhood According to Giovanni Bellini’, Desire in Language (New York: Columbia University Press, 1980) p. 237 in Iris Marion Young, ‘Pregnant Embodiment: Subjectivity and Alienation’, On Female Body Experience p. 46. 239

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother p. 117. 240

Ibid p. 117.

82

themtobecomedisconcertinglyseparated!Cusk’sencounterwithchildcare

manualscomestoanabruptend;sherealizestheironyofthesituationwhen

catchingherdaughtersiftingthroughherclothbooksalonewhilstshesitsfor

hoursreadingchildcaremanuals.However,asCusklamentsinherIntroduction

tothe2008edition,‘thechildcaremanualistheemblemofthenewmother’s

psychicloneliness’.241

2.iv) Choice

Iarguethatchildcaremanualscanexacerbateratherthanappeaseanyconcerns

newmothersmayhave.Thearrayofliteratureonchildrearingisbothextensive

andconflicting.Therefore,whicheverchildcaremanualamothermaychooseto

follow,anotherwillcontradictit.Onecanconclude,therefore,thatwhichever

approachamotherchoosestotake,tocertainsectionsofsociety,itwillbethe

wrongone:choiceinitselfposesaproblem.Indeed,asKateKilpatrickargues,

evenifwomenchoosetheirpregnancy,theyarechoosingtheunknown.

Kilpatrickmaintainsthattherearemanypregnantsubjectswhohavehadtolive

‘unchosen’consequencesoftheir‘choices’.Thatistosay,ifawoman’sideaof

identityistomothersuccessfullybutthelivedexperienceofpregnancyand

childbirthprovetobeanythingbutpositive,itcanprecipitateasenseoffailure

andambivalence.242

DrawingupontheworkofYoungandCarolineLundquist,Kilpatrick

arguesinherpaperonthephenomenologyofpregnancythatwomenseem

reluctanttoexpressambivalenceintheirpregnanciesdespitethefactthat

ambivalentfeelingsareanordinarypartofmostpregnantwomen’sexperiences.

241

Ibid p. 5. 242

Kilpatrick, p. 6.

83

AsCuskalludestoinherautobiography,theexperienceofpregnancyformany

womenisfarremovedfromtheWesternideologyofpregnancyandtherefore

theneedtosplitorpeeloneselfawaybecomesanecessityforthesakeofsanctity

ofself.Interventionperhapsmasksamoreauthenticfemaleexperienceof

motherhoodwithinwhichmaternalinstinctandmoreoverafemininenature

disappearsfromsociety’sgaze,asawoman’sfearthatherownexperiencedoes

notmatchthatofmoreprescriptivevaluesisenoughtosecureahidden

‘individuality[from]thepreyofoutsideforces’.243AsCuskhighlights,whatis

strikingaboutparenthoodisthatitisthemalevoicewhichisdissident.Cusk

notesthatitisrareforwomentovoicetheiranxietyorambivalenceaboutthe

lackofsleeportimetothemselvesthatmotherhoodpreventsthemfromhaving.

But,assheargues,thisdoesnotmeanthattheydonotthinkit.Moreover,Cusk

considerswhetherthefemalesexcontainsa‘Darwinianstopuponourpowersof

expression,ourabilitytorenderthetruthofthissubject’.244AsCuskknowsto

herowndetriment,tospeakoutofturnonthesubjectofmotherhoodisto

ignoreafemale‘parturitionalapartheid’.245

Conclusion

Maternalinstinctisborneoutofablurringeffectthatoccursbetweenmother

andbaby,whichIrefertoasmaternalintersubjectivity.Theeffectofthis

blurringproducesasenseofambiguityofself,manifestinginmaternal

ambivalence.Cuskprovidestheevidencetocorroboratethistheorythroughher

descriptionsofdisruptionoftheselfinregardtoidentity.Furthermore,she

243

Beauvoir, p. 64. 244

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, p. 136. 245

Ibid p. 136.

84

highlightsacleavagebetweentheselfandsociety,splittingtheprivateand

public,theformerbeinghiddenfromsociety’sgazeandthelattervisibletothe

outsideworld.Thus,Cuskdestabilizesandunderminestheuniversal

representationofmotherhood.

85

ChapterThree

NightWaking–Anexplorationintode-naturalisingthe‘natural’attitude246

Introduction

InthepreviousChapter,weexploredtheconceptofintersubjectivityinrelation

topregnancyandchildbirth,arguingthatitsmanifestationisaliteraldehiscence

oftheflesh.Indeed,Iarguethatthisphysicalrupturingofwoman’sbodyelicitsa

metaphysicaldehiscenceofself.Thisexperienceofintersubjectivity,whichisan

overlappingorblurringbetweensubjectandobject,hasaprofoundeffecton

woman’ssenseofautonomy.So,sheisneitheronenortwobutmustberesigned

tosomethinginbetween.LisaGuentherdescribesthisstateofalterityasa

‘mutualfecundationofselfandother,adivergencefromonecommonflesh,such

thatneitherInortheothercanbedesignatedasfirstorsecond,activeor

passive.’247

Indeed,AnnaBennett,theprotagonistmotherinNightWaking,describes

hernostalgiaforthetimewhensheandheryoungerson,Moth,were‘newand

notseparate’,248echoingCusk’sdescriptionofhersenseofbeinga‘composite

creature.’249Theuseoftheword‘creature’suggestssomethingalienand

unfamiliar,failingtoabidebyprescriptivebinarygenderstructures.

Furthermore,intermsofintersubjectivity,thiscompositecreaturehasbeen

alienatedfromacademicdiscourse;shefallsinbetweenmotherhoodand

feminism,belongingtobothandneither.ButasIexploredintheprevious

246

Gail Weiss, ‘Can We De-Naturalize the Natural Attitude?’, title of paper given at one day Symposium on ‘Cross-

Disciplinary Phenomenology: A Readiness for the Questionable’, June 2016 247

Lisa Guenther, ‘Merleau Ponty and the Sense of Sexual Difference’, Angelaki: Journal of the Theoretical Humanities, 16.2, (2011) : pp. 19-33. p. 21. 248

Sarah Moss, Night Waking, (London: Granta, 2011) p. 80. 249

Rachel Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, p. 99.

86

Chapter,Young,Lymer,KristevaandCuskproveanexceptiontothisrulebut

onlyuptoapoint.Indeed,whatremainsintheshadowsoftheirdiscourseis

howthissenseofintersubjectivitymayaffecttheirdecisionmakingprocess,

particularlyconcerningtheirpositionintheworkplace.

NightWakingprovidesaninroadtothisarea,chroniclingamother’s

pursuittoreconcileherformerlifeasahistorianwiththatofbeingamotherof

twosmallboys.Indeed,NightWakingmakesevidentacorollarybetween

maternalambivalenceanditsintersectionwithmaternalintersubjectivity.Anna

Bennett,theprotagonist,describesbeing‘obsessed’250withherchildrenandher

career.Shewrestleswithherownsenseofselfwhichistornbetweenadesireto

‘restoreaworldthatdidnotrevolvearoundababy’smouth’251and‘thecord,the

filament,thatjoinsmetoMothandRaphael[as]itisunnaturaltogoawayfrom

yourownchildren.Ithurts.’252Indeed,itisworthbeingremindedofthisextract

thatIquotedintheIntroductioninwhichCuskdescribesthisself-sameconflict

concerningmotherhood:

Anotherpersonexistedinher,andaftertheirbirththeylivewithinherjurisdictionof

herconsciousness.Whensheiswiththemsheisnotherself,whensheiswithoutthem

sheisnotherself;andsoitisasdifficulttoleaveyourchildrenasitistostaywiththem.

253

So,therearethreesalientissuesthatNightWakingraisesinrelationtothe

questionofmaternalintersubjectivityandambivalence.Firstly,Annaisthe

personificationofmaternalambivalence,whodesiresnothingmorethanto

returntoworkbutspeaksofanattachmenttoherchildrenthatishinderingthis

process.Indeed,Annaconfessesshe‘doesnotlikemotherhood’254butwhatsets

250

Moss, p. 153. 251

ibid p. 327. 252

Ibid p. 353. 253

Cusk, A life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, p. 13. 254

Moss, p. 130.

87

thistextapartfromothernovelsisthatithighlightsthatevenareluctantmother,

desperatetoreturntoalifeofautonomy,isunabletometaphysicallydetach

herselffromherchildren.So,sheisaparadox:thephysicalmanifestationof

ambivalence,trappedwithinthisliminalstatusofintersubjectivity.Iarguethat

thissenseofambivalenceisdueasmuchtothisintrinsicattachmentwithher

childrenasitistosocio-culturalpractices.Indeed,thisneedtoclarifybetween

theinteriorandexteriorworldsisintensifiedthroughthenovel’sgeographical

settingtothesouthoftheInnerHebrides.Itreinforcesandparodiesthe

Rousseauianparadigmofanidealized,uncontaminatedclimateforraising

children.Thatistosay,theHebridestransportsAnnaawayfromculturaland

socialinfluencesanddepositsherin‘natural’surroundings.Thefictitiousisland

ofColsayisbasedontheislandofKilda,‘theislandontheedgeoftheworld’255

anditstopographyprovidesafertilebackdropfortheprotagonisttoexploreand

experimentwithherownsensibilityconcerningthenurturingofchildren,far

removedfromsociety’sgaze.

Andindeed,Annaconfrontsmotherhoodonherownterms,refusingto

engagewithsocialconditioninginrelationtomotheringbuteventhis‘idyllic’

locationcannotprotectherfromacriticalresponsefromthosefewpersonswith

whomshecomesintocontact.Theyassumesheisnotagoodenoughmother

becauseshedoesnotconformtosociety’sinterpretationofmothering,servingto

highlighttheproblemsmothersfaceiftheydonotdefaulttoprescriptive

behaviour.Indeed,inasimilarmannertoCusk,thereliesadiscrepancybetween

interiorandexteriordialogues,thelatterofwhichmaskstheconflictAnnais

experiencingbetweenhowsocietyexpectshertomotherandhowthisunsettles

255

Charles Maclean, The Story of St Kilda, 1972 p. 376 of Night Waking.

88

herattemptsatmothering.Thereisadisparitybetweenwhatsheperceivesas

importantstrategiesinraisingchildrenandthoseimposedbysociety.Indeed,

Mossdeftlyidentifies,exploresandseparatesexteriorforces,suchastheimpact

ofpatriarchalrule,genderstereotyping,andpsychoanalyticobservations

concerningfamilialinfluences,particularlyconcerningthemother/daughter

dyadand‘lettinggo’ofyourchildrenwhentheyareolder,fromthe‘stuff’256that

ispreoccupyingAnna’sconsciousness.AsIhavepreviouslystated,itis

impossibletoseparatetheontologicalfromthefabricofculturalandsocial

forces.ButthroughitsnarrativeframeworkanditsgeographicalsettingNight

Wakingexaggeratesthedisparitybetweenthemoreartificiallayersofcultural

influences,suchasgenderstereotyping,andthatofAnna’ssenseofself.Thisis

illustratedthroughahyperboleofgenderstereotypingandpatriarchalrule,

whichresonatethroughoutthenarrativeframework.

Secondly,psychoanalysis,attachmenttheoryinparticular,isintegralto

theunderlyingthemesinNightWaking.Indeed,eachchapterisheadedupbya

pithyextractfrompsychoanalysts,JohnBowlby(1907-1990)andAnnaFreud

(1895-1982)amongstothers,enablinganexchangeofdiscourseonthesubject

ofattachmenttheorybetweentheseaphorismsandthemainbodyofthetext.

ThroughoutthenovelAnnareflectsonherownfeelingstowardsattachment

withherchildren.Thisreflectivediscourseisenabledthroughsynchronized

narratives,exploringAnna’srelationshipshehasestablishedwithhersonsin

relationtoherneighbour,JudithFairchild,andtherelationshipshehaswithher

grown-updaughter.Inaddition,Mossinterpolatesthisnarrativewithanother

256

A term originated by Lisa Baraitser in her text Maternal Encounters: The Ethics of Interruption, through an exploration of the relationship between maternity and stuff (such as nappies, comfort toys etc), she envisages the maternal subject as a subject of both heightened sentience and also of viscosity (that is a fluid’s internal friction or

resistance to flow), signifying the notion that the mother is a new embodied subjectivity beyond that of the pregnant or feeding body. pp.125 -126.

89

discoursebetweenfamilyversusinstitutionaspartofAnna’songoingresearch

forherbookwhichconcernstherelationshipbetween‘theRomanticcelebration

ofchildhoodandthesimultaneousincreaseintheresidentialinstitutionsforthe

young:boardingschools,orphanages,hospitalsandprisons’.257Moss’useof

interiormonologuenotonlyinitiatesadialecticofwhetherthefamilyor

institutionmaybetterservetheneedsofchildren,butitalsocreatesamore

generalnarrativeonthe‘natural’imperativesimposeduponmotherhood,

polarizingAnna’sinnerturmoiloffrustrationandresentmenttowardssocial

forcesfromothercharacterswhoexhibitconformitytowardsthem.

HencetheopeningofthenovelbeginswithanextractfromAnnaFreud’s

1965textNormalityandPathologyinChildhood,withinwhichsheexplainsthat

animportantcorollaryofthepleasureprincipleistherealityprinciple,aprocess

wherebytheindividualmustprogresstothelatterinordertoguarantee

socialization.Therealityprinciple‘seekstoobtainpleasurebutpleasurewhich

isassuredthroughtakingaccountofrealityevenifitispleasurepostponedor

diminished.’258AnnaFreudmakesclearthatthisadvanceinitself‘guarantees

socialization’259andasaresultthisprocessisnotreversible.Accordingtothis

model,theunconsciousmindisgovernedbythepleasureprinciple.Thisisthe

unrulypartofthemindnotgovernedbytheconstraintsofrealitybutwhichis

thenexusoffreeassociationandfantasy.Mosssituatesthisextractonthe

pleasureandrealityprinciplewiththeopeningsceneoftheprotagonist

witnessingaflockofseaswans‘driftingaspapercut-outsagainstwavesblurred

257

Moss, p. 9. 258

Donald C Abel, Freud on Instinct and Morality, (New York: State University of New York Press, 1989) p. 6 - quotation from Sigmund Freud’s The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud ed.

and trans. by James Strachey, Vol 16 p. 357. 259

Moss, p. 1.

90

bydusk’,260makingtheconnectionbetweenthepleasureprinciplewiththe

naturallandscapeoftheInnerHebrides,counteringtheswanslearned

behaviour,demonstratingtheirtransferencetotherealityprinciple.

Furthermore,theswansarefigurativeofthestudyofgoslingswhichhelpedform

JohnBowlby’sethologicalbehaviourofattachmenttheory.Thisopeningsetsthe

sceneforwhatistobecomeanexplorationoftheontologicalversuslearned

behaviour,interweavingattachmenttheoryasitsseminalthemewiththe

narrativeframework.So,inlinewithCusk,whointerruptsherownprosewith

extractsfromherfavouritenovels,Moss’formisfragmented,digressingfromthe

normalpathwayofnovelwritingwithepithetsfromnoteworthypsychoanalysts

atthebeginningofeachchapterwhichserveasacommentarytosubvertaswell

assubstantiatethemainbodyofhertext.Theseextractsprovideapointof

departureforeffectuatingJohnBowlby’sattachmenttheoryontoAnnaandher

children.Furthermore,theseinterruptionswithinthenarrativeservetoreflect

theinterruptionsthatAnnaexperiencesduringherownwritingand,indeed,in

turn,vicariouslyechoestheinterruptionsofthisresearchbythedemandsof

motherhood.Inaddition,NightWakingenablespsychoanalysistobeconsidered

fromapointofobjectrelationstheory,whichistherelationshipbetweenobject

andsubject,andcomparedwiththephenomenologicalinterpretationof

intersubjectivitysetoutinChaptersOneandTwo,thusidentifyingthenuances

betweenthetwotheories.

Finally,whatIintendtoquestioninthischapterishowAnna’sinnerconflict

affectsherdecisionmakingprocessinrelationtoreturningtowork.The

fundamentalconsiderationthatarisesfromMossandCusk’sexperientialwriting

260

Ibid p. 1.

91

iswhethermaternalintersubjectivity,anditsoverlapwithprescriptivepractices,

disruptstheirbehaviourtowardstheworkplace.Indeed,byanalyzingAnna

BennettalongsidestatisticalanalysisprovidedbySylviaAnnHewittand

ElisabethBadinter,whatappearstoremainundetectedisaconduitbetween

maternalintersubjectivityandwomenintheworkplace.Iarguethatthere

needstobelessemphasisonco-parentingbeingtheabsoluteanswerforwomen

toreturntotheworkplacebutinstead,focusontheconflictmother’shavewith

themselvesconcerningseparationfromtheirbaby.So,Iamnotunderestimating

theimpactofsocialcoercionbutmerelypointingoutthatmaternal

intersubjectivityneedstobeaconsiderationtoo.Indeed,Badinter’stextThe

Conflict(2010)arguesthatWesternsociety’srecalltoallthatis‘natural’has

causedchildrearingtobecomearegressiveforce,tetheringwomentothehome

andfamily.Indeed,JessicaBenjaminwritesthatduetocontemporarychanging

patternsinmothering,‘WesternCultureisinthegripofasentimental

idealizationofmotherhood,dominatedbyafantasymotherwhoisan‘all-giving,

selfcontainedhaven’.261Moreover,Babyhunger(2002)bySylviaAnnHewitt

providesanecdotalevidencetohighlightthecriticalproblemsaroundwomen’s

decisiontohavechildrenandonbeingamother,inrelationtotheworkplace.

261

Jessica Benjamin, The Bonds of Love: Psychoanalyss, feminism, and the problem of domination (Virago: London

1990), p. 211 cited in Lisa Baraitser, Maternal Encounters, p. 93.

92

SectionOne

TheMother

1.i) AnnainNightWaking

WewitnessAnnaoscillatebetweenaloveforherchildrenandherresolvethat

leadshertobelieve‘Icannotdothis,motherhood.Ishouldnothavehad

children’.262Sheshuns‘mindlessdomesticity’263and‘disapprove[s]’264of

cooking,whichisamusinglyreinforcedbyavarietyofmealswhichAnna

produces;theonionandchickpeacasseroleprovingtomarkthelowestebbin

herarrayofculinaryattempts.Butitistheportrayalofennui,ofthesheer

boredomofmotheringatwoandafiveyearold,day-in,day-out,whichthistext

deftlycommunicatessuchas,

[t]herewerefivehoursandthreeminutesbeforeIcouldtakeMothforhisbath,sixhours

andthirty-threeminutesuntilRaphaelcouldlegitimatelybedeniedanyfurther

conversationalopportunitiesuntilmorning.265

Butthesesuperficialfailings,suchasdomesticskills,overshadowadeeply

inherentattachmentandlovethatAnnahasforherchildren,whichbearallthe

hallmarksofmaternalintersubjectivity.Butsocietyisnotprivytoherinterior

monologue,revealingthisdeep-rootedlove,andinsteadjudgeheronexternal

appearance.Moreover,Anna’sresearchintochildhoodandherpreoccupation

withparentingmanualshighlightthepowerthatprescriptivepatternsof

behaviourhaveovermothers.ForwomenlikeAnna,whochoosetochallenge

them,NightWakinghighlightshowisolatingandcorrosivemotherhoodcanbe.

Annaisfullyawareofwhatshe‘ought’tobewhichisinconstantconflictwiththe

262

Moss, p. 87. 263

Ibid p. 95. 264

Ibid p. 17. 265

Ibid p. 103.

93

wayinwhichsheiscapableofmothering.However,thisoutwardlyrebellious

approachtomotherhooddoesnotmakeAnnaanylessresilienttocriticismfrom

thepeoplewhosurroundher;onthecontrary,herinteriormonologuerevealsa

lackofself-beliefinherabilitytomother.Herhusband,Giles,haslittletimefor

whatheperceivesasAnna’sneurosisandtheironyisnotlostonthereader

whenheaccusesherofbeingoversensitive:‘youdotendtothinkpeopleare

judgingyou’juxtaposedwithcommentssuchas‘areyougoingtogetthatchildto

sleep?’266Indeed,withtheexceptionofJudithFairchild’sadolescentdaughter,

Zoe,Anna’sabilitytomotherisdoubtedbyallthosewithwhomshecomesinto

contact.267

Moreover,associologistMaryGeorginaBoultonstatesinher1983text

OnbeingaMother:AStudyofWomenwithPre-SchoolChildren,ahusband’sview

ofherworkasamotherwasacentralcomponentinthemeaningmotheringhad

forwomen.Forexample,ifitisthepartner’sbeliefthatchildcareoughttobe

morenaturallyenjoyable,thismadematernalambivalencemoredifficulttolive

with.268AsAnnaaffirms,

parenthoodisnolongermerelyabiologicalstate;ithasbecomeanundertakinginwhich

itispossibletofail[…]itseemsthattherelationshipbetweenthetheoryandpracticeof

parenthoodmaybeinverse.269

266

Ibid p. 98 and p. 126. 267

For example, the Librarian questions whether her children will be ‘alright’ out of her sight while she looks for a book; the policeman who investigates the baby’s skull (who refuses to call her Dr Bennett and insists on ‘Mrs Cassingham’) concludes that there will be no more need to trouble Anna, ‘unless, of course, there should be any

further concerns about the boys’.267

Anna had left Raphael and Moth in the house whilst she found a broadband signal five minutes walk away, to which the police enquired, ‘Mrs Cassingham, are you in the habit of leaving your children alone?’

267 Referring to Anna, the handyman on the island announces ‘Id gi’e my wife the back of my hand if

she treated ours the way you treat those little lads’.267

Judith Fairchild’s implied comments such as ‘Good Lord, your children are still up’ - ‘routines slip when they are not at school’

267 is reference to their decision to home school the

boys. Furthermore, through Anna’s anecdotal recollection of their former life in Oxford, she recalls a colleague at the

University asking her whether they have seen her in the college since she took ‘all that maternity leave’, recalling how in their day they had to choose between work and children ‘[a]nd if you chose to have children, you looked after them yourself. Better all around.’

267

268 M G Boulton cited in Roszika Parker, Torn in Two, p. 11.

269 Moss, p. 120.

94

So,IarguethatthisiswhereNightWakinghighlightshowculturalforces

overwhelmandsubsumeontologicalbehaviour.Furthermore,Anna’shusband

Gilesisrepresentativeofsociety’sconflictingdefinitionof‘co-parenting’.Atfirst

glance,Gilesseemsanoutmodedfigurefora21stcenturyfather,buthis

characterenablesMosstoaccessandengageinadialogueonthecomplexityof

historyandthelegacythishasleftmotherhood.Atthebeginningofthenovel,

GilesassumeshisworktakesprecedenceoverAnna’sbecauseasaResearch

Fellowshe‘get[s]paidwhether[she]actuallydoesanyworkornot.It’sin[her]

contract’.270Despitethefactthattheybothworkfull-time,Gilesdutifully

performstheroleofhaplesshusbandwhoseworkprecludesparentingduties.

Butduringthecourseofthenovel,herealizesthathetoomustlearntoadaptto

theresponsibilityofbecomingaparent.Moreover,Giles’benignapproachto

parentingisaconsidereddecisionbyMoss,forithighlightsthat,irrespectiveof

theubiquityofdual-careerfamilies,womenspendnearlyfivetimesaslongin

solechargeoftheirinfantsastheirpartner.271Indeed,Annaisresentfultowards

herhusband’sattitude,andthesenseofisolationshefeelsisreflectedinthe

remotenessoftheHebridianlandscape.AsBadinterandHewlettaffirm,cultural

forcesstillanticipatethemotherastheprimecarerofherchildrenregardlessof

heremploymentstatus.

Anna’slackofdesiretowardsmaternalduty(bythatImeanbeingtiedto

domesticlifeathomeentertainingtwoyoungchildren)doesnotmeansheloves

herchildrenanyless:asIhavealreadyemphasized,maternalintersubjectivityis

nottoassumethemotherwillnecessarilymakeabetterparentthanthefather.

Onthecontrary,herlossofautonomycomplicatestherelationshipshehaswith

270

Moss, p. 3. 271

Rozsika Parker, Torn in Two, p. 238.

95

herchildanditmayresult,asAnnaexhibits,inasenseofentrapment.Indeed,

Annaexemplifiesamother“tornintwo”,272thatissplitbetweencaringforher

childrenandpursuingheracademiccareer.Iarguethatthisistiedupwith

Anna’sintersubjectivesenseofself,whichIdefineasmaternalinstinct.Shehas

nodesiretobeamotherwhoisnotinemploymentbutsomethingdeep-rooted

withinherselfismakingitverydifficulttoleaveherchildrenandreturntowork:

itisthissenseofdisquietthatismaternalintersubjectivity.AsbothCuskand

Mosshavehighlighted,thetietotheirchildrenremainsinplacelongafterthe

cordhasbeencut.

So,thisnarrativeframeworkhighlightsamoreinherentproblem

occurringirrespectiveofpatriarchy’sinfluenceonmotherhood.Ascultural

forcesstilldeterminethemotherastheprimecarer,notonlymustshenegotiate

herdecision-makingprocessconcerningtheworkplacearoundsocial

imperatives,but,morefundamentally,shemustaddresstheconflictofself.As

wewitnessinNightWaking,Annastrugglestonegotiatestay-at-homemothering

whilstattemptingtowriteabookinhercapacityasanacademicandhistorian,

andreconcilingthetwooftenresultsinfailure.Thisfailurereinforcestheconflict

womenfaceinattemptingtodoboth.So,althoughatacitquasi-Platonicdialogue

debatingbetweenmotherhoodandreturningtoworkvacillatesthroughoutthe

novel,itiswithoutresolution,suggestingthatachievingequilibriumis

unobtainable.Thissenseofincompletenessisimportant,asitisinlinewithmy

ownargument,inthatMossisnotofferingasolutionbutmerelycogitatingthe

questionofwhetherwomen“canhaveitall”.Furthermore,thenovel’s

relationshipwithmaternalintersubjectivityismanifestedinAnna’s

272

Torn in Two (1995) is the title of Rozsika Parker’s book on maternal ambivalence.

96

metaphysicalattachmenttoherchildren,givingprominencetothisgenuine

concernwomenmayfacewhendecidingtoreturntowork.Indeed,alltoooften,

thesilentworldofmaternalintersubjectivityisovershadowedbycultural

interference.

Ultimately,however,NightWakingcouldbeviewedasabildungsroman

inwhichwewitnessAnnadevelopfromamothersappedofself-esteemanda

lackofbeliefinanabilitytomother,toawomanwho,throughthought,learnsto

acceptthatthereisnolinearanswertoreconcilinghercareeralongside

motherhood.Indeed,whetherAnnaacceptsanewacademicpositionsheis

offeredremainsinconclusive.However,thepenultimateparagraphofthenovel

witnessesheracceptancethatshe‘willneverbakecookiesorkeepbabywipesin

theglovecompartment’whileherelderson,Raphael,‘tuggedatmymind,asifhe

werethinkingofme,willingmehometohim.’273Thisjourneytowards

inconclusivenessisAnna’sacceptanceinunderstandingthatthereareno

emphaticanswerstoanythingaboutmotherhoodandthatshemustworkoutfor

herselfwhatwillultimatelyresultinacompromise.

1.ii) HistoryandIdeology

Indeed,Annamustnavigatebetweenthehistoricalideologyonmotherhoodwith

thatofherownsenseofwhatshefeelsisright.InNightWaking,thefocusof

theseexteriorforcesisonpatriarchy,usingthehistoryofColsaytoidentifyits

macro-impact.Themicro-effectsareillustratedthroughAnna,recountingan

eveningforexample,justafterheryoungersonhadbeenborn,inwhichshefeels

compelledtoattendadinnerforfearoflosingherResearchFellowship.The

273

Moss, p. 375, 374.

97

Principalhasreprimandedher‘questionable’274commitmenttotheUniversity,

resultinginAnna’sattemptstoreconcileherworkwithherroleasamother.Itis

indeedamatterwhichappearsoflittleinteresttoamalePrincipal.Thisdinner

coincidesattheexacttimeofdaywhensheshouldbebreastfeedingherbaby.

Inevitably,itresultsinherbreastfeedinginthepatriarchalcorridorsofOxford

University,ametaphorforothernessanditsexclusionfromtheinnersanctuaries

ofgovernmentandpower.Annafeelsshemustconcealherdualrolefromher

superior,asifhavingababytocareforissomethingforwhichsheshouldbe

ashamedandasaresultitmustbeshroudedinsecrecy,exilingitfromher

workplace.

Furthermore,shecorroboratesthispersonalexperienceconcerning

patriarchalideologywithabroaderargumentusingtheislandofColsay.

Historicalnarratives,twohundredyearsapart,collidewhenAnnaandherson,

Raphael,discoverababy’sskullwhichisburiedintheirappleorchard;Anna

aptlynamesthebabyEve.AlongsideAnna’sownthoughtsconcerning

infanticide,thisdiscoverydistractsherfromherownresearchandinsteadshe

focusesonthehistoryofColsay.Althoughthepoliceareinitiallysuspiciousthat

itisAnna’sbaby,ittranspiresthattheskullisofa19thcenturybabywhose

FatherwasarelativeofGiles.Hence,thisillegitimatebabyfoundbyAnnahad

notbeengivenafuneralorburiedinthechurchyardandwasinsteadfurtively

buriedinthebackgardenoftheCassinghamhome.Thisresultsinthenarrative

frameworktransportingusbetweencontemporarysocietyonColsayandthe

islandanditsinhabitantsinthelate19thcentury.Ittranspiresthatthe

Cassinghamshavebeenownersoftheislandforthreegenerationsandit

274

Moss, p. 155.

98

becomesevidentasthenovelunravelsthat,duetotheirabsence,theislandhad

beenmismanagedandtheinhabitantsmistreatedbytheirestatemanager.This

resultedinabjectpovertyandmiseryfortheislanderswholivedthere.Asa

consequence,between1860and1880,eighty-fivepercentofthebabiesbornon

Colsaydied,whichissubsequentlyrevealedasaconsequenceoftetanus.The

damagingconsequencesformothersandchildrenofpatriarchallaw,suchas

havingachildoutofwedlockasaresultofseductionbytherulingclasses

abusingtheirdroitdeseigneur,arehighlightedinNightWakingbythe

underlyingblurringandoverlappingofthenarrativeframework.The

interruptionbypatriarchyofthelivesoftheinhabitantsresultsindeathof

humanityonColsay.Indeed,thediscoveryofababy’sskullissymbolicofthe

complicationintheseveringofhistoryfromthelegacythatitleavesbehind,

changingthecourseofAnna’sresearch,leadinghertoconcludethat,

colonialarroganceandnativesuperstitionhavebothbeenblamedforthepracticesthat

killedeighty-fivepercentofbabiesbornonColsaybetween1860-1880beforetheywere

afortnightold,andthefactthatbothreadingsarepossibleoffersasharpillustrationof

theimpossibilityofuntanglinghistoryandideology.275

Indeed,thisintertwiningofhistoryandideologybetweenpatriarchyand

superstitionreplicatetheaforesaidprobleminChaptersOneandTwo,of

severingmotherhoodfrompatriarchyinordertocreateamoreexperiential

paradigm.

275

Moss, p. 370.

99

SectionTwo

Psychoanalysis

2.i) ImprintingandEthology

Mossnotonlyillustratestherepercussionsofpatriarchalhistoryforthemodern

daybutalsointerweavesintothenarrativehistoricalpsychoanalyticaltheory

withparticularemphasisonattachmenttheory.Bothoftheseareaspreoccupy

Anna’sthinkingthroughoutthenovel.Itisnocoincidence,therefore,thatGilesis

researchingpuffinsontheislandofColsay,studyingtheirbehaviourtopredict

futuremovements.Hisstudyofpuffinsisnotonlyrecognitionofthecontribution

ethologymadetoevolutionarygeneticscience,butitrevealsthatitisalsothe

genesisofJohnBowlby’sethologicaltheoryofattachmentbehaviour.Thestudy

ofethologywasfoundedbyKonradLorenz(1903-1989)inthe1950s,whichis

thestudyofanimals,placingparticularemphasisoninstinctualbehaviour.

Lorenzwasfamousforhisstudieson“imprinting”whichwastheprocess

wherebygoslingsandducklingsfollowandbecomeattachedtothefirstmoving

objecttheyencounterafterhatching.Indeed,Lorenzhadducklingsimprintedon

him.276But,asMariaVicedo-Castellohighlightsinher2005doctoralthesison

maternalinstinct,Lorenz’spopularityintheUnitedStateshastobeunderstood

inthecontextofthewidespreadinterestinmaternalinstinctsandtheheated

debateaboutworkingwomen.

276

As Robert and Cynthia Shilkret highlight in their chapter on ‘Attachment Theory’ in Inside Out and Outside In: Psychodynamic Clinical theory and Psychopathology in Contemporary Multicultuarl Contexts, 4

th eds. Berzoff,

Melano Flanagan and Hertz (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016) p. 197, Lorenz showed that early behaviour was a response to the particular speed (relatively slow) that the mother walked, not due to the mother’s shape, her odour, other characteristics. Indeed, the picture of Lorenz walking slowly around his laboratory followed by a line of

ducklings, who had been removed from their mother immediately after hatching and having imprinted on Lorenz instead, made him famous.

100

However,BowlbyappliedLorenz’sconceptof“imprinting”tothe

attachmentofinfanttomother.277HewasinterestedinLorenz’sworkbecauseof

hiseffortstotryandseparatetheinstinctualfromthelearned.Whatethological

theoryofattachmentbehaviourarguesisthatthemother-infantdyadisan

instinctualrelationshipnecessaryforthesurvivalofthespecies.Moreover,this

conceptoftherebeingtwokindsofbehaviour,namelyinstinctiveandlearned,

wastobecomethefoundationforBehaviouralEcology.Butwithinanhistorical

context,sciencehasplayedanimportantroleinthedebatesurroundingthe

questionofmothering.AsEckhardHHessexplainsinhis1973textImprinting:

EarlyExperienceandDevelopmentalPsychobiologyofAttachment,before

Darwin’stimeitisclearthatinstinctwaspurelyaphilosophicalconcept,buthis

theoryofevolutionputinstinctivebehaviourunderthemicroscope.278For

CharlesDarwin,JamesHerbertandWilliamJames,theevolutionaryframework

ofinstinctsprovidedevidencetomaintainthedifferencebetweenthesexeswith

regardtoemotion,intelligenceandvolition.279ButProfessorJohnKrebbs,

PrincipalofZoologyattheUniversityofOxford,whoworkedalongsideProfessor

RichardDawkinsonthe1976evolutionarytext,TheSelfishGene,explainsonBBC

RadioFour’s‘InOurTime’280,thatseparatinginnateandlearnedbehaviour

provedafalsedichotomyasnobehaviourappearswithoutanyenvironmental

experienceorinfluence.Sopurelyinnateorpurelylearnedbecomeblurred.

However,whatKrebbsdoesclarifyisthatsomethingsaremoredependenton

environmentalinfluenceandsomelessbutthatinnatenesshasnovalueany

277

Maria Margarita Vicedo-Castello, ‘The Maternal Instinct: Mother Love and the Search for Human Nature’,

(Proquest, USA, 2006) p. 27. 278

Eckhard Heinrich Hess, Imprinting Early Experience and the Development Psychobiology of Attachment, (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co, 1973) p. 3. 279MariaMargaritaVicedo-Castello,‘TheMaternalInstinct:MotherLoveandtheSearchforHumanNature’,p.3.

280 Professor John Krebbs, speaking on In Our Time, ‘Behavioural Ecology’, BBC Radio 4, aired 11

th December 2014.

101

more.Thatistosay,genesmaycreateapropensitytobehaveinacertainway

butthatpropensityisnotimmutableorindependentfromanyenvironmental

experience.Everythingdependsonamixtureofgenesandenvironment;the

questionthatisnowbeingaskediswhatistherelationshipbetweengeneticand

environmentalinfluence,whichiswhatweareattemptingtoexploreinthis

section.Asaresult,thequestionariseswhethermaternalinstinctcanbedefined

asauniversaltruth.Whatisclearisthatifitdoesexistasauniversaltruth,

maternalinstinctwillatbestfluctuateandatworstbelatentandappearnon-

existent,inaccordancewithanindividual’srelationshipwithsocietyandculture.

2.ii) Attachmenttheory

Butitisattachmenttheory,whichisBowlby’sattempttounifyethologywith

psychoanalysis,thatreallypreoccupiesNightWaking.Itbeganandstillis

primarilyatheoryofdevelopment,recognizingtheimportanceofearly

parentingexperiencesinthesubsequentdevelopmentofthechild.AsR.andC.

Shilkretmakeclear,Bowlbyproposedthatallcomplexorganisms,including

humans,haveanattachmentsystemthatishighlyadaptiveinthatitkeepsthe

youngincloseproximitytoanolderanimalwhomtheyoungseekoutintimesof

danger.However,inhiscapacityasapsychologist,Bowlby’sresearchwaswith

childrenraisedininstitutions,commentatingupontheiraffectionlesscharacter

andantisocialbehaviour,whichherelatedtoearliermaternaldeprivationand

separation.Indeed,hisresearchledtothedeclineinorphanagesinfavourof

fostercareplacement.DuringWorldWarIIpsychoanalysiswastransformedas

AnnaFreudhelpedsetupwarnurseriesandwitnessedtheconsequencesof

separatingchildrenfromtheirmothers,whichprovedmoretraumaticforthe

102

childthanseparationfromthefather.AnnaFreudwentontoseverelycriticize

thegovernmentfortheirfailuretorecognizethedistresscausedinevacuating

childrenawayfromtheirmothers,andinlinewithBowlby’swork,her

involvementwiththewarnurseriesresultedinchildrenbeingprovidedwith

additionalsupportwithinthefamily,orfosterfamily,ratherthanthe

institutionalsystem.ReinforcingthisunderlyingthemeinNightWakingisAnna’s

useoftheWildBoyofAveyronasapointofdepartureforherbook.281

However,attachmenttheoryfocusesitsattentionontheconsequences

separationhasforthechildnotthemother.AsSuleimanargues,‘itisasif,for

psychoanalysis,theonlyselfworthworryingaboutinthemother-child

relationshipwerethatofthechild’.282Andbecausepsychoanalystswritefrom

thepointofviewofthechild,Mossdeliberatelyjuxtaposestheirresearchwitha

mother’sexperiencetowardsseparationfromherchildren.Ittranspiresthat

Annadisplaystraitsofanxietywhensheisseparatedfromherchild[ren]sothat

herresearchon19thcenturychildhoodensuresthenarrativeconcerning

separationanxietyspillsoverfromthebooksheiswritingtoherreallife

experiencesasamother.

ButMoss’novelisanexplorationofontologicalcandourintoattachment

theoryfromthepointofAnna’sownexperience.Shedescribesseparationas

feeling‘thecord,thefilament,thatjoinsmetoMothandRaphael,stretching,and

thinningandthinning’,283thephysicalseveringoftheumbilicalcordas

281

The Wild Boy of Aveyron, was found sleeping rough in the woods around Aveyron, in the French Alps, in 1797. He was about twelve, had a deep scar ear to ear; and had no clothes or words. He became a popular figurehead for

philosophical enquiry into a human being raised without society. 282

Susan Rubin Suleiman, ‘Writing and Motherhood’ cited in The (M)other Tongue: Essays in Feminist Psychoanalytic Interpretation, eds. Shirley Nelson Garner, Claire Kahane and Madelon Sprengnether (London:

Cornell University Press, 1985). p. 356. 283

Moss, p. 352.

103

something,which‘shouldhavehurt’.284Andindeed,whatisevidentand

distinguishesitselffrompsychoanalytictheoryisthatAnnadislikesbeing

separatedfromherchildrenfornootherreasonthanthatitfeels’unnatural’285.

Accordingtopsychoanalysis,themother’sabilitytoattachherselftoherchild

willbeheavilydependentonherownexperiencesofherattachmenttoher

motherorprimarycaregiver.AsParkeraffirms,therewillexistareason,suchas

guilt,echoesofabandonment,fearorbereavement,whichwilldictatethewaya

motherbehavestowardsseparation.Psychoanalysisrefusestoidentifythe

individualasasingularsubject;itisalwaysburdenedbyexperiencesofothers

fromearlychildhood.Andindeed,fromAnna’sresearchonpsychoanalysis,its

rhetoricwouldleadhertobelievethatherownabilitytomotherhas

implicationsforfuturegenerationswhenshelamentsthat‘failureatmotherhood

isforlifeandbeyond,thateverythingthathappenstomychildrenandmy

children’schildrenismyfault’.286OneofthekeycomponentsofMelanieKlein’s

(1882-1960)workwasthatmaternalambivalencewasborneoutofare-

experiencingoffeelingsawomanholdsinrelationtoherownmotherduring

childhood.But,asParkerargues,thereneedstobesome‘prisingopenofthe

relentlesslybackwardsmovementofpsychoanalytictheorizingofthe

developmentofmaternity’.287Indeed,Parkeruncouplesmaternalexperience

fromthemother’sowninfantileexperiencetherebyenablingustoconsiderthe

motherasautonomous.AdrienneRichdescribesitasamatraphobia,whichcan

284

Ibid p. 140. 285

Ibid, p 353. 286

Ibid, p. 130. 287

Lisa Baraitser, Maternal Encounters: The Ethics of Interruption, p. 54.

104

beunderstoodasa‘womanlysplittingoftheselfinthedesiretobecomepurged

onceandforallofourmothers’bondage,tobecomeindividuatedandfree’.288

Indeed,Annarevealsthatherownupbringingwaslessthanhappy,

witnessinghermothersubstitutingherself-fulfillmentforthatofherhusband

anddaughter’s.So,MossdoesacknowledgealinkbetweenAnnaandherown

mother,highlightingtheinherentnatureofthisrelationship,but,likewiseAnna’s

responseisreactive;sheusesherexperienceofbeingmotheredtosteerherown

motheringinadifferentdirection.AndinlinewithParker,whatIamclaimingis

evidentinNightWakingisthatAnna’sresponsetobeingseparatedfromher

childrenisdueasmuchtoherinherentmaternalintersubjectivityasitistoany

recollectionofherownchildhood.Althoughsheacknowledgesthatthe

relationshipwithhermotherwaslessthangood,thisconversationisnot

situatedinthetextnearherownmeditationsontheexperienceofseparation

fromherchildren.So,although,asProfessorKrebbsargues,itisnotpossibleto

distinguishbetweenwhatisofenvironmentalinfluenceandwhatisnot289,I

arguethatmutationsinattachmentbetweenmotherandchildwillalsodepend

onherownontologicalstanding.AsLisaGuentherargues:

Toadmitagapbetweenmotheringasanethicalandpoliticalpractice,andthemotheras

anontological,biological,orsocialidentity[…and]recogniz[ing]thatitispossibletobe

like(oralsounlike)amotherevenwhileone“is”amother,werecognizethedifference

betweenontologyandethics,betweenbeingandtheotherwise-than-being.290

2.iii) ObjectRelationsTheoryinrelationtotheEmbodiedSubject

Therearenumerousschoolswithinpsychoanalysiswhichanalyse

representationsofthemother,suchasdrivetheory,egoandselfpsychology,but

288

Adrienne Rich, Of Woman Born, p. 236. 289

Professor Krebbs speaking on In our Time on Radio 4 on the subject of Behavioural Ecology aired on 11th

December 2014. 290

Lisa Guenther, from Devoir Être, cited in Sarah LaChance Adams, Mad Mothers, Bad Mothers & What a “Good” Mother Would Do: The Ethics of Ambivalence, (new York: Columbia University Press, 2014), p. 88

105

thecentraltenetsofobjectrelationstheorymakeitthemostrelevantwhen

consideringintersubjectivity,orattheveryleast,therelationshipbetweenobject

andsubject.ButitisworthmentioningthatthetraditionofObjectRelations

Theoryinpsychoanalytictheoryandpracticeextendsthefunctionofexternal

realityinstructuringtheinternalworldoftheinfant.AsLauraMelanoFlanagan

explainsinthe2016text,InsideOutandOutsideIn:PsychodynamicClinicaltheory

andPsychopathology,objectrelationstheoryis

thebeliefthatallpeoplehavewithinthemaninternal,oftenunconsciousworldof

relationshipsthatisdifferentandinmanywaysmorepowerfulandcompellingthan

whatisgoingonintheirexternalworldofinteractionswith“real”andpresentpeople

[…]objectrelationsthusrefersnotonlyto“real”relationshipswithothers,butalsothe

internalmentalrepresentationsofothersandtointernalimagesofselfaswell.291

Further,MelanoFlanaganstatesthatobjectrelationstheoryisastudyofselfand

other,exploring‘theprocesswherebypeoplecometoexperiencethemselvesas

separateandindependentfromothers,whileatthesametimeneedingprofound

attachmenttoothers’.292Itblurstheboundarybetweenthematerialrealityof

theexternalworldandmostrelevantly,forthisresearch,it‘fleshesoutthe

relationalaspectoftheobject’.293Thereisanoverlappingofdialoguebetween

MelanoFlanagan’sdefinitionofobjectrelationstheorywithMoss’distinction

betweeninteriorandexteriorworlds:whattheypresenttotheoutsideisnot

necessarilyreflectiveofwhatisgoingoninside.ButforMoss,andindeedCusk,

thisisduemoretomarketforcesandless,asobjectrelationstheorysuggests,to

interferenceofthepsyche.However,thefundamentaldifferencebetweenthe

phenomenologicalrelationshipbetweenobjectandsubjectandthatofobject

relationtheoriesisthatthelatterdistinguishessubjectfromobject.It

291

Laura Melano Flanagan, ‘Object Relations Theory’ in Inside Out and Outside In Psychodynamic Clinical Theory and Psychopathology in Contemporary Multicultural Contexts, 4

th Edition eds. Joan Berzoff, Laura Melano Flanagan

and Patricia Hertz (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2016). p. 125. 292

Ibid, p. 123. 293

Ibid p. 125.

106

distinguishesbetweensubjectandobjectinverymuchdichotomousterms,

whereanoverlappingbetweenthetwodoesnotoccur.Indeed,within

psychoanalysisthemotherissooftenperceivedasthe‘object’inthechild’s

developinginternalworld.Moreover,thelanguagefosteredbyobjectrelations’

theoriespreventsmothersbeingseenassubjectsintheirownright.AsJessica

Benjaminhighlights,objectrelationstheoryoftenimpliesthatthemotheris

someonewhoissubmissive,accommodating,andapassiveobject,existingto

meettheneedsofothers,andnotapersonwhoisrecognizedashavingherown

agencyordesires.294Indeed,Baraitseraffirmsthat

Justasmaternalsubjectivityisonthecuspofbeingarticulatedwithinpsychoanalytic

literature,themotherappearstoslipbackintosomemanifestationofhertraditional

object-positionascontainer,mirror,receptacleforintolerablefeelings,abodywithbits

attached,orwithsupposedlyvitalbitsmissing,anobjecttoberepudiated,hatedor

feared,theonewhobearsdestructionandabandonmentandstillremainsintact,more

recentlyaneffectiveandreliablecortisolmanager,butultimatelyshewhomusttosome

degreebeleft,ormoreforcefullyabjectedorkilledoff,inorderthat‘thesubject’(so

oftenthechildinpsychoanalysis,gatheredupretroactivelybythechild-now-adult

throughtheprocessofanalysis)canemergeunscathed.295

ThenearestIgottodetectinganacceptanceinpsychoanalysisofanysenseof

maternalintersubjectivity,resonatingwithdescriptionsbyCusk,Moss,Lymer

andYoung,iswhatistermedtheSymbioticPhasefirstpostulatedbyAmerican

psychologist,MargaretMahler(1897-1985).Althoughitisfromthepointofview

ofthechild(betweensixweeksandtenmonths),Mahlerdescribesthesymbiotic

phaseasa‘timeinlifewhencaregiverandbabyseeminglyexistinoneorbit.’In

factshedescribesthehallmarkofsymbiosisas‘omnipotentfusionwiththe

representationofthemotherand,inparticular,thedelusionofacommon

boundarybetweentwophysicallyseparateindividuals’,296implyingthatthis

294

Ibid p. 276. Extract from Jessica Benjamin, The Bonds of Love: Psychoanalysts, Feminism and the Problem of

Domination (New York: Pantheon, 1988). 295

Lisa Baraitser, Maternal Encounters The Ethics of Interruption (London and New York: Routledge, 2009), p. 5. 296

M Mahler, F Pine and A Bergman, The Psychological Birth of the Human Infant, (New York: Basic Books, 1975),

p. 450 cited in Laura Melano Flanagan, ‘Object Relations Theory’ in Inside Out and Outside In Psychodynamic Clinical Theory and Psychopathology in Contemporary Multicultural Contexts, 4

th Edition, p. 156.

107

sharedexperienceismutual.But,inobjectrelations’terms,itisnot‘real’but

merelya‘delusion’,whereas,thephenomenologicalinterpretationofthissense

ofintersubjectivityisactualizedandthusitalignsitselfwiththeexperiential

writingsofMossandCusk.

Furthermore,MelanoFlanaganstatesthat‘itisimportanttoremember

thattheveryconceptof“self”isasocialconstructrootedintime,placeand

culture’.297Thiscategoricalstanceisproblematic,obscuringordenyingthatany

ontologicalstandingcanexistwithinthestructureof“self”.Flanagandiscusses

theselfintermsofitbeingaseparatelineofdevelopmentthatshouldideally

leadtoacreative,lovingandcohesivewhole.Inpsychoanalyticalterms

therefore,theselfisaconstructionbeingdenieditsownagencyoutsidethe

boundariesofhomogeneity,failing,asGuentherargues,torecognizethe

differencebetweenethicsandontology.Andindeedif,asMelanoFlanagan

claims,“self”canonlybeconsideredasasocialconstruct,itcontradictsthe

writingsofCusk,Kristeva,Young,LymerandMosswhodiscussmotherhoodin

morevisceralterms.Moreover,inNightWaking,thecombinationoflandscape

andhistoricalnarrativeinconjunctionwithAnna’sinteriormonologuecreatesa

hyperbolebetweenwhatis‘real’andwhatisconstructed,destabilisingthis

psychoanalyticalframework.

2.iv) Lettinggo

So,usingAnnaandJudithFairchildtoillustrate,Mosschartsattachmenttheory

fromearlyinfancythroughtoadolescence.JudithFairchildisjuxtaposedwith

Annaasherfoil,notleasttohighlighttwopolarizednotionsontheideologyof

297

Ibid p. 169.

108

motherhood,foreshadowingAnna’sfearofwhatshemightbecomeifshestaysat

hometoraiseherchildren.Amothermayindeedmakethetransitionfrom

workertocarer,butletusconsideratwhatstagesheisexpectedtowithdraw

intotheshadowsofachild’slife.InthewordsofHelenDeutsch,theone

permanenttragedyofmotherhoodisthatchildrengrowup.298Rousseauargues

thatassoonastheneedceasestoexist,thenaturalbondbetweenmotherand

childdissolves,but,asBadintercounterargues,ifthisisthecase,whatdoesthat

sayaboutlove?Ifitispossibleforlovenottoexistortoceasetoexistthenlove

must,byitsverynature,ceasetobeunconditional.Inaccordancewith

psychoanalysis,thecordorfilamentthattiesmotherstotheirchildrenshould

indeedbecomeweakenedaschildrenmatureandthisiscorroboratedbyCusk

whosememoirdescribestheneedtowriteatthepointofexperience,‘beforeit

couldgetawayagain’,suggestingthattherewouldbeaneedtorelyonmemory,

thetiebecomingmoredilutedastheinfantgrowsup.299

Atfirstglance,Judithappearstorepresentthesomewhatoutdated20th

centurymother,emblematicofthosewomenwho‘sacrificed’theirownlivesfor

thesakeofthefamily.Psychoanalyticaltheoryrelegatesthemotherfigureasan

agentoraconstructbyandforthechild,amereshellkilledoffwhenthechildis

nolongerinneedofher.ForMoss,Judithisrepresentativeofthe

psychoanalyticalemptyshell,theshadowcastasidenowthatherdaughterisno

longerinneedofmothering.Indeed,sheisadistortedsymbolofwhatDeutsch

definesasthe“femininewoman”whichconsistsofthreeessentialterms:

passivity,masochismandnarcissism.Usinganalogy,SigmundFreudand

298

Susan Rubin Suleiman, ‘Writing and Motherhood’ in The (M)other Tongue: Essays in Feminist Psychoanalytic

Interpretation, (London: Cornell University Press, 1985) p. 355. 299

Cusk, p. 9. Italics – my emphasis.

109

Deutschdescribethepassivecharacteroffemalenatureto‘themobileand

passiveovumincontrasttotheactivelymobilesperm’.300Badinterassertsthat

allstagesofreproduction,thatis,thesexact,birthandmotherhoodareall

closelylinkedtosufferingandthatthistheoryoffemalemasochismmakes

sufferinganaturalprocessforwomen.ButBadinteraccusesDeutschofasserting

theexistenceofamaternalinstinctanddefiningthemotheras‘”theFeminine

Woman”whoseequilibriumofnarcissistictendencieswithmasochistic

capabilityenableshertotoleratesufferingbecauseitis(supposedly)

counterbalancedbythe“joysofmotherhood”’.301Deutschmaintainedthat

failuretoacceptthemasochismassociatedwithmotherhoodwouldresultin

thosemothersexperiencingasenseofguilt.Judithassumesthemasochistic,

submissiverolethatsocietydemandswhichexposesherasanexampleofhow

passivity,masochismandnarcissismfailin‘reality’.PositioningJudith,whohas

attemptedtoassumeallthequalitiesofthefemininewomanofwhichDeutsch

speaks,alongsideAnna,whodeliberatelyrefusestoacceptanyofthem,is

emphasizingthatwhatmayworkintheorydoesnotnecessarilysucceedin

practice.Onthecontrary,Anna’srelationshipwithherchildrenisanauthentic,

uncomplicatedlovebecauseshehasnotattemptedtomotherinanyotherway

thanshefeelsableto.ButJudith’scharacterservestohighlighttherepercussions

ofawomanwhochoosestoplayouttheprescriptivemotherthatsocietyso

encourages.Indeed,Deutschwasinitiallylessinterestedinwomen’spsychology

andmoreinterestedin‘inauthenticity,whichsheassociatedwiththose,like

Judith,whodisplaywhatshecallsaphoneyidentity.

300

Badinter, The Myth of Motherhood: An Historical View of the Maternal Instinct, p. 269. 301

Badinter,, p. 273.

110

Thisfemalemasochismalongsidenarcissistictendencyisunderstoodby

FreudandDeutschfortheneedtobeloved:theyperceivednarcissisminagirlas

atransferenceofloveofselfintothedesiretobeloved.302ItledDeutschtobe

interestedintheeffectsonmothersoftheconflictthatarosebetween

narcissisticself-loveandmotherlyloveofothers.AsVicedo-Castellohighlights,

Deutschacknowledgesthissenseofconflictfortheego,whichprevailswiththe

onsetofmotherhood,suchastheeffectsofpregnancyversusfreedom,beauty

andmotherlinessversuseroticismandintellectualaspirations.These

observationsdoindeedfeedintothedialecticofself-fulfillmentversusmaternal

dutiesthataredebatedthroughoutNightWaking.Forsome,asillustratedby

JudithFairchild,itresultsinwomenfalselyseekingtoinflatetheirself-esteemby

fosteringanotherpersonality.Thisquestionofwomenimitatingratherthan

beinggoodenoughmothersispersonifiedbyJudithwhosephoneyidentityasa

stayathomemotherisexposedthroughhertumultuousrelationshipwithher

anorexicadolescentdaughter,thelatterofwhomhasbeenstarvedofautonomy

asJudith’sabilityto‘lethergo’isthwarted,notbecauseofherloveforZoebut

becauseshefeelssheisowedherloveinreturn.Asthetextreveals,this

approachtomotheringisnotaccompaniedwithahappyeverafteroutcome:Zoe

repayshermotherforallherdutifulworkby‘hating[her]’.303Judithviolates

Deutsch’sparadigmof’amaternalwillingnesstosacrifice’,304believingthatshe

hasprovidedtheidealupbringingforachildbecause,asastayathomemother,

shecooked,shopped,tookhertopianolessons,paintingandiceskating,made

costumesandcakes,ranthePTAforeightyearsatschool,listenedtoreading,

302

Badinter, p. 271. 303

Moss, p. 332. 304

Parker, p. 150.

111

helpedwithhomeworkanddrovethemtouniversityinterviews,butatnostage

doesJudithFairchildmentionanysenseofself-fulfillmentorenjoymentinher

role.Moreover,MosssituatesanextractfromAnnaFreudatthebeginningof

ChapterTen,‘TheMoreHighlyOrganizedFormsofLove’,whichopenswiththe

entranceofJudith:

Oneimportantinstinctualneed,thatforearlyattachmenttothemother,remainsaswe

knowmoreorlessunsatisfied:consequentlyitmaybecomeblunted,whichmeansthat

thechildafterawhileceasestosearchforamothersubstituteandfailstodevelopallthe

morehighlyorganizedformsoflovewhichshouldbemodelledonthefirstpattern.305

AsAnnawritesinherbook,‘institutionsconstituteanattempttoratifya

brighterfuture,toachievewhatindividualhouseholdscannotencompass’,306

echoingAnnaFreud’sconclusionsthat‘somechildrendidbetterinintelligently

runinstitutionsthaninfamilies’.307Bothreferencesareimplicitlydirectedat

JudithFairchild.Moreover,whilstAnnalistenstoJudithderidingherown

daughterforherlackofgratitude,shecontemplatestheworkofAnnaFreudwho

waskeentoliberateadolescentsfromtheirparentsandarguedthat‘sometimes

thebestthingmothersmightdofor[their]childrenistostayaway’.308

Moreover,JudithactsasawarningtoAnnathatshemustfollowherownsenseof

selfratherthantheimperativesimposeduponherthroughculturalforces.As

Deutschasserts,achildwillknowifamotherisassumingaphoneyloveforthem

ratherthanonethatisimbuedwithauthenticity.

Infact,Cusk’stitletohermemoirisrevealinginitself.ALife’sWorkon

BecomingaMotherdoesnotsuggestthatitisatemporaldomainthatwomen

enterwhichdisappearswhenthechildisnolongerinneedofmothering.This

305

Dorothy Burlingham and Anna Freud, Infants Without Families: the Case for and Against Residential Nurseries, p.22 cited in Moss’ Night Waking p. 194. 306

Ibid p.9. 307

Ibid p. 330. 308

Ibid p. 333.

112

notionof‘becoming’,indeedthistransienceconcerningmotherhoodisatheme

uponwhichMossdwellsinconjunctionwithpsychoanalysisinNightWaking,

deftlyillustratingthedifficultyof‘becoming’amotherandyettherealization

thattiesmustbeloosenedinorderforthechildtobeindependent,despitethe

factthatawomanwillalwaysbeamother.LisaBaraitseraffirmsmotherhoodis

thelifelongprocessof‘beingtheretobeleft’,whoneedstoremainpartlyinthe

shadows,inordertograduallybutappropriately‘fail’,309suggesting,

paradoxically,thatyouhavesucceededatmotherhoodbutperhapsatthecostof

yourownselffulfillment.Whatthissituationistacitlyhighlightingisthatfora

mother,suchasAnna,tofollowherownpursuits,overandabovemothering,

maymake‘lettinggo’ofone’schildrenlessdifficult.Annacanrecognizethatself-

sacrificeisnotasuccessfuloutcomeforherfamilyasherduel/dualinthenovel

illustrates.Finally,Mossisnotdismissingpsychoanalytictheorybutchallenging

theconceptthat,ifthe“femininewoman”isremovedfromtheassumptionsor

constrictionsofpatriarchyandinsteadresidesinfemaleexperience,whetherthe

naturallyself-sacrificing,devotedmotherfiguretrulyexists.Itisnecessaryto

considerwhyitisthatMossfeelstheneedtohighlightthedetrimentalway

externalrealityreinforcesamother’spsychicreality.Parkerarguesthatthe

psychicconflictgeneratedbythedynamicsofauthoritycanleadtoafailureto

recognizethediscreteindividualityoftheother,particularlyinmothering.

SectionThree

3.i) Infanticide

Andindeed,asIstateinChapterOne,maternalambivalencewillalsobe

dependentonamother’ssenseofbeingatthatgivenmoment,orasHeidegger

309

Baraitser, p. 5.

113

describesit,howyoufindyourselfintheworld(Befindlichkeit).Mosssituates

extractsoninfanticidefromacademictextalongsideherprotagonist’sown

meditationsonthesubject.Anna’sdesiretolearnmoreaboutinfanticideis

promptednotonlybyherownprivatefantasiesbutalsobytheveryreal

inferencebythepolicethatthebaby’sskullfoundintheirgardenishers.These

connectionsprovideaforayintothesubjectofinfanticide,whichare

substantiatedthroughthetheoreticaldiscourse.Moreover,Anna’sown

preoccupationwithinfanticidemaybeheightened,perhapsunconsciously,by

sharingwiththereader,butnotherhusband,thatsheundertookanabortion

soonafterhersecondsonwasborn,confessingthatgivenherhistoryitwasnot

difficulttopersuadetwodoctorsthathermentalhealthwouldbejeopardizedby

athirdchild.AndaccordingtoBeauvoir,evenabortioncangiveriseto

ambiguousandambivalentfeeling:‘thisinterventionshedemandsisoneshe

oftenrejectsinherownheart.Sheisdividedinsideherself[…]therearemany

womenwhofeeltheyhavemutilatedapartofthemselves’.310So,ratherthan

assume,asLaChanceAdamsstates,thatbecauseambivalenceexistsmaternal

instinctcannot,itneedstobereconsideredintermsofco-existence.

Thatsaid,thecomplexitysurroundingambivalencecansooftenbe

misconstrued.ChapterFourofNightWakingnamed‘FearingtoHandleaKnife’

isheadedupbyanextractfroma2002text,Infanticide:HistoricalPerspectivesof

ChildMurder,whichreads:‘Sheretainedagreataffectionforthechild,atthe

sametimeevenidentifyingtheinstrumentthatshewouldusetodestroyit,

fearingtohandleaknifeevenatmealtimes.’311Withinthefirstparagraphofthe

Chapter,Annarevealsthatwhenshewasreallytiredduringmaternityleave,she

310

LaChance Adams, p. 171. Extract taken from The Second Sex, p. 531. 311

Moss, p. 39

114

wouldexitthehousesothat‘thepresenceofwitnessesmeansthatMummyis

notafraidthatshemightsuccumbtotheurgetouseoneoftheblack-handled

Sabatierknives[…]tobringaboutafewminutespeace’.312Inpsychoanalytical

terms,therealityprincipleisgoverningthepleasureprinciple,makingattempts

tosuppressthefantasticaldesireinregardtomurderingherchildren,but

neverthelessblurringdistinctionsbetweenperceptionandreality,consciousand

unconsciousthought,hoveringominouslywithinthepsyche.Indeed,welearn

fromAnnathatthereweremomentsinthefirstfewweeksofherchildren’slives

when‘IbelievedIwouldhavebeenhappytoseethemdie,torestoreaworldthat

didnotrevolvearoundthebaby’smouth’and‘couldn’tstayinthehouseany

longerbecauseIdidn’ttrustmyselfnottohurt[thebaby]’.313Accordingto

ParkerandLaChanceAdams,thisemotionaldislocationfromherchildrenisnot

onlyacommoncharacteristicofmaternalambivalencebutalso,acommon

sentimentfeltamongstmothers.Butitisalsoimportanttodistinguishthe

differencebetweenthethoughtprocessandactualizingthosethoughts.The

latterrarelyhappens:asIdiscussedinChapterOne,LaChanceAdamsargues

thatthesethoughtprocessesactasasafeguardtokeepmaternalbehaviourin

check.Moreover,inNightWakingAnnanotesthatthosemotherswhodid

suffocatetheirchildrenresultedfromaninabilitytofeedthemandawishto

desistfromwitnessingthemstarvetodeath.AndthedeathofbabyEvebearsall

thehallmarksofinfanticide,butAnna’sresearchleadshertodiscoverthatitwas

aconsequenceofbeinganillegitimatechildwhodiedoftetanusthatresultedin

EvebeingconspiratoriallyburiedintheCassinghamgarden.ButasAnna’s

researchoninfanticidereveals,mostbabiesarekilledbyfathersandchild

312

Ibid p. 39 and p. 327. 313

Ibid p. 158.

115

minders,despitethefactthatmothersaremorelikelytobeexposedtotheir

childrenforlongerperiodsoftimeandwithlesssleep.

3.ii) NightWaking

Sleepdeprivation,asthetitleofthebookindicates,hasasignificanteffecton

Anna’sabilitytomother.Shecontemplateswhatshewouldpawnforsleep:

‘[w]ouldI,giventhechoice,havepeaceforPalestineortwelvehoursinbed?

CleanwaterforthechildrenofAfricaoraweekoffmotherhood?’314Andyet,

disconcertingly,thisaspectofmotherhoodisrarelytoucheduponbyfeminist

theory.Indeed,neitherParkernorLaChanceAdamsvoiceorevenalludetothe

consequencesofthelackofsleepalongsidematernalambivalenceandyetitis

suchafundamentalcharacteristicofearlymotherhood.Thereisonescenein

particular,inwhichthetextexposestheconsequencesofsleepdeprivation.The

oneandonlytimeAnnaloseshertemperwithhertwoyearoldchildwhowill

notgotosleep,wewitnessherusingphysicalforcetopushhimbackdowninhis

cot,

Ihadonehandonhisbottomandtheotherbetweenhisshoulders.HesquirmedandI

presseddown[…]”Moth,forfuck’ssakegotosleeprightnow.Ifyoudon’tgotosleepthis

minute,I’mgoingtokillmyself.I‘mgoingtotakeaknifeandkillmyself[…]Imustnot

attackhim.MustnottouchhimorIwillputmyhandsroundhisneckandkillhim.I

cannotleavebecauseIwouldnevercomebackandIcannotstaybecauseIamaboutto

pickhimupandramhisheadintothewalluntilhestopsmakingthatintolerable

noise.315

ButitisGiles’incredulitythatshewouldconsiderharmingherchildren

whichiskeytothisscene,asithighlightshisownexcisionofblameforAnna’s

behaviour.Hisnight’ssleephasremaineduninterrupted,relyingonAnnatoget

uptowakingchildren.AsAnnalaterattemptstojustifyheractionstoher

314

Ibid p. 27. 315

Ibid pp. 48-49.

116

unsympathetichusband,sheconfessestohavinghadlessthanfivehours’sleep

inthelastthreedays.Allshewantedtobeabletodowastoputhertoddler

Mothdownforalunchtimenapinordertohave‘threefuckingminutestomyself,

Iwanttopee.Iwanttohaveadrinkofwater.Iwanttobrushmyhair.Iusedto

givelecturesandwritemybook’,describingtheimpactoftheswitchfromfull

timecareertofulltimecareras‘losinghermind’.316

SectionFour

4.i) TheMotherintheWorkPlace

Fromwhathasbeensaidsofar,itseemsthatculturalforcesremainasignificant

burdenforworkingmothers.Butitisalsonecessarytotakeastepbackand

questionwhethertheseculturalforcesareover-shadowingandmaskinganother

considerationaboutmotherhoodandtheworkplacewhichareraisedinthe

writingsofCuskandMoss.317Indeed,MossexplicitlysituatesAnna’s

contemplationsaboutmotheringalongsideherdeliberationsaboutreturningto

workandthusdemonstratinganinter-dependencebetweenattachmentof

mothertochildandhowthismaydisruptherdecisionmakingprocessin

relationtotheworkplace.BothMossandCuskarepresentingtraitsof

attachmentthatcanonlybeunderstoodinintrinsicterms,whichleadsusto

questionwhetherculturalforcesarewhollytoblameforstatisticssuchasthere

areonlysevenfemaleCEO’sinthetopFTSE100companies318andthatwomen

316

Ibid pp. 49 and 51 317

Although Night Waking is a novel, it can be no coincidence that Moss is herself an academic and wrote it having recently become a mother. 318

Jennifer Rankin, ‘Fewer women leading FTSE firms than men called John’, The Guardian, 6th March 2015.

(www.theguardian.com/business/2015/mar/06/johns-davids-and-ians-outnumber-female-chief-executives-in-ftse-100) [accessed 6.10.15].

117

onlyhold22%ofmanagementpositions.319Indeed,Iarguethatmoreresearch

needstobefocusedonthelinkbetweenmaternalintersubjectivityandtheeffect

itmayhaveondecisionsconcerningtheworkplacethereafter.Asapointof

departure,anopenandhonestdialogueamongstwomencouldachieveamore

coherentunderstandingofmaternalintersubjectivity,inthehopethatitreleases

femaleprogressfromitscurrentfalteringpositionoflife/workbalance.

Interviewingmothersnotinfulltimeemploymentalongsideworkingmothers

andlisteningtotheirstoriesmayunveilsharedpatternsofthinkingaswellas

portrayingamore‘natural’representationofmotherhood.

Furthermore,Anna’scharactergivesaccesstothedeconstructionof

psychologicalprocessessheundertakesinherattemptstomakeadecisionabout

balancingmotherhoodwiththeworkplace.Indeed,duringthecourseofmy

researchIhavereadalotofliteratureonreasonswhyprogressforwomeninthe

workplacehas‘stalled’320oreven,asBadinterclaims,regressed.Theoverriding

argumentthatSandberg,Badinter,Chodorow,Roiphe,LaChanceAdamsand

economistSylviaAnnHewlettadvocateistheneedforgenuineco-parenting.As

IdemonstratedinChapterOne,Hewlett’sstatisticsconcerningequitable

domesticandchildcareresponsibilitiesmakeforsalutaryreadingandthe

sharingofthesedutiesbetweenAnnaandGilesinNightWakingcorroborate

thesefindings.Moreover,Hewlett,inlinewithBadinter,describeswomenofthe

1970’sasthe“breakthrough”generation,havingsuccessfullycombatedsex

discriminationintheworkplaceandchampionedequalrights.ButHewlett’s

researchuncoversthatwhatmanyofthesewomenhadsuccessfullyachievedin

319

Catalyst Perspecitve, “Breaking the Barriers: Woen in Senior Management in the UK”, Catalyst, New York,

February 2001 cited in Syliva Ann Hewlett, Baby Hunger (London: Atlantic, 2002), p. 129. 320

Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In p. 7.

118

theworkplacemeantthattheyhadhadtomakedifficult“tradeoffs”intheir

privatelives.Nowonthebrinkofmenopause,Hewlettobservesthatthey

‘seemedhauntedbywhattheywereleavingbehindforever.Lettinggo–ofthe

possibilityofhavingachild,washugelydifficult,andforsomeatleast,fiercely

painful.’321Furthermore,HewlettconductedanationalsurveyintheUSA,in

associationwiththeNationalParentingAssociation,entitledHighAchieving

Women2001andonwork-lifebalanceitrevealsthatonly14%ofthewomen

chosetoremainchildless.AsHewlettexplains,womenwhowereinterviewedfor

thesurvey‘describedhowintheirtwentiesandthirtiesthestruggletobuilda

substantialcareergraduallysqueezedoutthepossibilityoffindingapartneror

bearingchildren’despitethefactthat‘thevastmajorityyearnforchildren’322

butonly16%ofthewomenbelievedthattheycan‘haveitall’intermsofcareer

andfamily.Hewlett’ssurveyrevealsthatwithintheyoungergeneration,89%of

high-achievingwomenbelievethattheywillbeabletogetpregnantintheir

forties.Indeed,asIamwritingthis,therehasbeenadramaticresponsefrom

femalejournalistsinthenationalpressafterfemalegynaecologist,Professor

GeetaNargund,leadconsultantforreproductivemedicineatStGeorge’sHospital

inLondon,madeclaimsinalettertotheEducationSecretarythatwomenhoping

toconceiveshouldtryforababybeforereachingtheageofthirtytostopa

‘fertilitytimebomb’.323Sincethesexualrevolutionofthe1960’s,particularlyin

thepasttwentyyearsormore,afeministresponsetohavingovariesanda

uterusandbeinglimitedbyherownnatureistoignoreituntilitsuitsher

schedule.AlthoughProfessorNargund’scommentselicitdebate,onematteron

321

Syliva Ann Hewlett, p. 14. 322

Ibid p. 21. 323

Article by Gregory Walton, The Daily Telegraph, Monday 1st June 2015, p. 4.

119

whichhercriticsareunanimousistheuncompromisingfactthatwomentoday,

despiteexperiencingthemostfreedominhistory,cannotoverridenature.Cusk

acquiescestothisfact,quotingthefirstlineofAdrienneRich’stext:‘Allhuman

lifeontheplanetisbornofwoman.’324Thisfactcannotbeoverlooked,sidelined

orinanywaytranscended:asCusklaments,today’s‘womenhavechangedbut

theirbiologicalconditionremainsunaltered’.325

Conclusion

NightWakingrecordsanintimatejourneyofitsprotagonistAnna,both

externallythroughthelandscapeofColsayandinternallythroughtheartof

interiormonologue,witnessingherattemptstoreconcileherformerlifeasafull

timeacademicwiththatofherroleasamother.Anna’sliteraldistancingfrom

societyinvertsJean-JacquesRousseau’sclaimthatwecan‘learnfromthe

instinctivewisdomoftoddlers’326beforesocietycorruptsthem.Instead,rather

thanconsideringitfromthechild’sperspective,NightWakingfocusesonthe

motherwho,farremovedfromsociety’sgaze,canmothermoreinstinctively.

Although,itisnowwidelyacceptedthatitisalmostimpossibletodistinguish

betweenlearnedandunlearnedbehaviour,MosshaswrittenNightWakingin

suchawaythatithighlightstheexternalforcesinfluencinglearnedbehaviour

thatwomenmustfaceonbecomingamother:forexample,co-parenting,

prescriptivebehaviour,patriarchy,historyvsideology,geographyand

psychoanalytictheory.Theseforcesmayovershadowanyontologicalbehaviour,

suchastheintersubjectiveattachmentthatAnnaexhibits,butthisdoesnotmean

thatitdoesnotexist.

324

Rich Adrienne, Of Woman Born (New York: Norton, 1986) p. 11. 325

Rachel Cusk, p. 15. 326

Moss, p. 9.

120

Furthermore,whiletheoristssuchasLaChanceAdams,Parkerand

Flanaganpersistinfocusingtheirattentiononhowthemother’sambivalence

affectstherelationshipwithherchild,IarguethatbothCuskandMossexhibitan

ambivalencethatislessfocusedtowardsthechildanddirectedmoreatthe

intransigentpositionthatmotherhoodhasimposeduponthem.Annaconsiders

herambivalencetowardherownmaternalsenseofintersubjectivityfroma

pointofautonomy,identifyinghersingularsubjectivity.Sheillustratesthat

maternalinstinctisnotaboutanaturalabilitytowardscaringforherchildren

butacomplex,flawedanddisruptivesensation.Sheunsettlesprescriptive

maternalbehaviour,providingaglimpseofwhatisreallygoingonunderneath

thefaçadeofmotherhood.Shedoesnotenjoythephysicalandtemporal

processesofbeingamotherandthekeytogainingamoreauthentic

representationofmotherhoodistograspabetterunderstandingofthisparadox.

Inhercase,theresultisawomantornbetweenanintrinsicattachmenttoher

childrenandasenseofentrapmentthatdisruptsherdecisionmakingprocess

withregardtoherwork.Indeed,thenovelshedsalightonthefactthat

motherhood,unlikeanyotherinstitution,isirreversible:itisnotpossibletotake

itback,leave,orescapefromit.AsMichaelCunninghamdeftlyillustratesinThe

Hours(1999)throughhischaracterLauraBrown,evenifyouphysicallyfleefrom

yourchildren,theyremainwithinyourconsciousness,deathprovingtheonly

respite.AsAnneRoiphedescribesmotherhood:‘itisnotaculturalartifact[…]it

isadeepimplant,ahookthatsnaresus,aconnectionbothtreacherousand

wondrous.’327

327

Anne Roiphe, A Mother’s Eye: Motherhood and Feminism, (London: Virago, 1997) p. 67.

121

Conclusion

Theobjectiveofthisstudywastomodernizeandshifttherepresentationof

motherhoodsothatitmoreaccuratelyportrayswhatitistomotherinthe21st

century.Fromtheoutset,theintentionwastoexploremotherhoodinrelationto

woman’sautonomyanditsrelationshipwithmaternalinstinct.Therewerethree

mainfactorsthatIobservedintheearlystagesofmyresearchthatweretolay

thefoundationsforexploringthiselusiveterm.Firstly,Ihadnotanticipatedthat

theterm‘maternalinstinct’lacksanyformaldefinition,absentingfromany

referencingtexts.NeitherwasIpreparedforBeauvoirandBadintertodismiss

maternalinstinctasnon-existent.Furthermore,itprovedchallengingtofind

anythingwrittenaboutmaternalinstinctatallandwhenIdiditwaswrittenwith

thepresumptionthatthemeaningwasthatoftheprecedentwhichisrootedin

patriarchalnarrative.Aconsequenceofthisforwomen’swritingisthelackof

languageassignedtothem.Thisinfluencestheiruseofformwhendocumenting

theirexperiences.Itinvariablyleadsthemtowriteanecdotally,intertwining

factwithfiction,blurringtheboundariesbetweenthetwo,therebymirroring

maternalinstinctitself,andcreatinganambiguousandcomplexpictureof

motherhood.

Butperhapsthemostchallengingaspectofwritingaboutmaternal

instinctisthatitlieswithinpre-reflectiveexperienceandisthereforepre-

theoretic,thwartingthepossibilityofbeingtheorized.Theexperienceof

maternalinstinctslipsthroughtheconfinesoflanguageintotheunspeakable

andindefinable.Thisiswhythereisnoformaldefinition.So,toacertainextent

thisstudyisinitselfaparadoxinthatitismakingattemptstotranslateinto

language,occurrencesandexperiencesthatprecedelanguage.Ithasbeena

122

constantchallengeattemptingtomakeclearinlanguagesomethingthatoccurs

beforeitistranslatedintowords.SoinfactIhavehadtorelyonthenon-

languageinthesetexts,thesubtext,exploringthesymbolismfoundinthe

landscape,physicalinteractionbetweentheprotagonistsandothercharactersin

ordertohighlighttheirisolationandconflict.Furthermore,theillustrationof

maternalintersubjectivity,whichIhaveborrowedfromYoung’s

phenomenologicalparadigmofsubjectivity,canonlybeconsideredasa

metaphorforwoman’sexperienceofmaternity.AsKristevaclaims:

Letuscall‘maternal’theambivalentprinciplethatisboundtothespeciesontheone

hand,andontheotherstemsfromanidentitycatastrophethatcausestheNameto

toppleoverintotheunnameablethatoneimaginesasfemininity,non-languageor

body.328

So,theclosestIcouldgettotopplinganexperienceintolanguagethatderives

fromthenon-languageisthephenomenologicalpracticeofbracketingortheact

ofepoché,theprocedureinwhichourpreconceptionsandtheoreticalnotions

rulingourdailyworldoffactarenotleftbehindbutaretemporarilysuspended,

therebysheddinglightontheconditionthatunderliesexperienceandmakesit

possible.329Inturn,thispracticeofbracketingprovidesthemostaccurate

depictionofintersubjectivitywhichphenomenologydescribesasbeingneithera

unifiednoraseparatesubjectbutsomethinginbetween.Irefertothissenseof

in-betweennessas‘theblurringeffect’whichbestreflectstheexperiencesof

maternityandearlymotherhoodofwhichmychosenwritersspeak.So,writing

atthepointofexperience‘beforeitcangetawayagain’330iscrucialtocapturing

amother’ssenseofbeing.Cuskisarareexception,deconstructingand

328

Julia Kristeva, ‘Sabat Mater’, The Kristeva Reader, ed. Toril Moi (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), pp.

161-162. 329

To explain the process of epoché I have summarized the longer version laid out in Chapter Two which was an extract from Phenomenology, Modernism and Beyond, eds Carole Bourne-Taylor and Ariane Mildenberg (Peter Lang

AG, Bern, 2010) p.5 330

Cusk, A Life’s Work on Becoming a Mother, p. 9.

123

analyzingher(m)otherlinesstosuchmicro-levels.Mossequallymimicstheart

ofbracketingbyrefusingtoengagewithcertainprescriptivepractices–whilst

acknowledgingthatsheisfullyawareoftheirexistence–andexploring

motherhoodonthebasisofherowninstinct.

Furthermore,itbecameclearearlyonthattherearetwonarratives

concerningmaternalinstinct.Thefirstismoreovert,presentingtheprescriptive

versionofmaternalinstinctaswoman’s‘natural’dispositiontomother,which

BeauvoirandBadinterdismissaspredicatedonpatriarchalmyth.Asaresult,

ChapterOnewasdedicatedtoexploringmaternalinstinctthroughthecourseof

historywithinthewrittenword,revealingthevicissitudesofitspast,createdfor

thebenefitofsocietyratherthanreflectingontheessenceofbeingamother.I

chartedthetheorieslaiddownbyPlatoandtheirdistortionthroughthecourse

ofhistory,mostevidentlyinthewritingsofRousseauanduponwhichreformof

family,motherhoodandeducationweretobecomebased.Itbecameclearthatit

wasfundamentaltoreturntothegrassrootsofmaternalinstinctandre-consider

anewwhatis‘natural’mothering.Indeed,GailWeisschallengestheconceptof

ourattitudestowardswhatis‘natural’.UsingphenomenologistEdmund

Husserl’sowndescriptionregardingthenaturalattitude,shearguesthatitisnot

naturalatall;rather,itisgraduallyacquiredbyanindividualandtheseattitudes

arethemselves‘complex,dynamicconstructions,evolvingandtransformingover

time,acrossspaceand,mostimportantly,inresponsetospecific,culturaland

politicalencounters’.331Thisapproachtoconsideringwhatis‘natural’feeds

directlyintohowmaternalinstinctandambivalenceneedre-interpreting.

331

Gail Weiss, ‘Can We De-Naturalize the Natural Attitude?’, title of paper given at a Symposium on ‘Cross-disciplinary Phenomenology: A Readiness for the Questionable’, June 2016 pp. 1-2.

124

Becausewoefullylittlehadbeenwrittenbywomenontheirexperienceof

mothering,itseemedessentialtoturnthefocusofattentionontotextsbywomen

whohaveempiricalunderstandingofthesubject.ThemoreIreadofwoman’s

experienceofbecomingamother,themoreconvincedIbecamethereexisteda

secondmoremaskedandsubversivenarrative,portrayingmotherhoodin

intersubjectiveandambivalenttermsanditisthisnarrativethathasbeenthe

focusofthisthesis.Myintentionwastogainanunderstandingoftheimpact

thesesub-structureshaveonmotherhoodfor21stcenturywomen.Inreference

totheworkplace,iffemaleprogressisstallingasSherylSandbergclaims,the

researchIhavecarriedoutleadsmetobelievethatthemisrepresentationof

motherhoodmustcontributetotherootoftheproblem.Indeed,Iargueitisthe

corethatisrotten:motherhoodhas‘alteredhervaluesindeferencetothe

opinionofothers’.332

UsingTheTenantofWildfellHallasmypointofdeparture,myaimwasto

sourcenovelsthatwroteexperientiallyofametaphysicalbondsimilartothat

whichBrontëalludestothroughherprotagonistHelenandhersonArthur.

WhatIdiscoveredwasthatmanynovelscircumnavigatebutdonotmentionby

namethelivedexperienceofmaternalinstinct.Forexample,MrsRamsayin

Woolf’sToTheLighthouseengageswithmaternalambivalencewithinher

interiormonologue,LauraBrowninMichaelCunningham’sre-readingofMrs

Dalloway,TheHours,demonstratesthedangerofculturalforcesanditsconflict

withhersenseofselfand,LionelShriver’snovel,WeNeedtoTalkaboutKevin

highlightstheproblemsthatoccurwhenthechoiceofhavingababyisnotofthe

mother’svolition.Butnoneofthesenovels,whicharejustafewofmanythatI

332

Virginia Woolf, A Room of One’s Own (London: Penguin, 2004) p. 86.

125

considered,hadadiscourseonmaternalinstinctthatwassufficientlytangible.It

wasRachelCusk’smemoir,ALife’sWorkonBecomingaMother,andIrisMarion

Young’sessay‘PregnantEmbodiment:SubjectivityandAlienation’thatprovided

theinitialbreakthroughIneeded.Usingexperienceitselfasthestartingpoint

forwritingiswhatseparatesCuskfromothernovelists.

AsIexploredinChapterTwo,althoughRachelCuskdoesnotusetheterm

‘intersubjectivity’,sheis[unintentionally]describingtheexperienceofblurring

betweensubject(mother)andobject(baby),ceasingtobedistinctfromone

another.UsingtheworkofMauriceMerleau-Pontytoformthefoundationofher

argument,Youngdescribespregnancyasasplitsubjectivitythatis‘decentered,

myselfinthemodeofnotbeingmyself’333,whichareconclusionsshedrawsfrom

herownexperienceofmotherhood.Iargued,however,thatratherthanusing

theword‘splitting’,whichsuggestsaseveringbetweensubjectandobject,

‘blurring’moreaccuratelyreflectsMerleau-Ponty’sandindeedYoungandCusk’s

descriptionsofintersubjectivity.Furthermore,Idistinguishedbetween

phenomenologicalintersubjectivity,whichdiscussespregnancyinmetaphorical

terms,andmyuseofthetermmaternalintersubjectivity,whichisaliteral

dehiscenceoftheflesh,distinguishingitselffromotherinterpretationsof

intersubjectivityasthislivedexperiencecanonlyberealizedinchildbirth.In

herdoctoralthesisJaneLymerextendsYoung’sargumentonestagefurther,

chartingherownexperience,andrelatingittoMerleauPontyandYoung’swork,

ofadialecticalrelationshipbetweenfoetusandmother.DrawinguponCusk,

Young,LymerandKristevaIconcludedthatmaternalintersubjectivitydisrupts

theboundariesofwhatisasenseofself,extendingitbeyondphysical

333

Young p. 49.

126

embodimentofthemothersubject,blurringitwithherbaby/object.This

blurringeffectismaternalinstinctwhichhighlightsawebofcomplexitiesforthe

motherconcerningherautonomyandattachmenttothebaby.Asaresult,using

thewritingofMossandLaChanceAdams,Iarguedthatthisdestabilizingof

autonomymayleadtoasenseofambivalence.

HavingreadBeauvoirandBadinterfirst,myinitialintentionwastouse

feministtheorytohighlighttheconflictingmessagebetweenwhatwasbeing

writtenaboutmotherhoodinnovelsinrelationtotheoreticaltext,butYoung

openedupadiscourseonherownexperienceofpregnantembodimentwhich

substantiatedratherthanunderminedmyargumentconcerningmaternal

instinct.Thereafter,adialoguebegantakingshapebetweencertaintheorists

andnovelistsconcerningtheirexperienceofbecomingamother.Thus,ifit

weren’tforYoung,KristevaandRich,whoseownwritingscorroborateCusk’s

empiricalintersubjectiveexperience,itcouldbearguedthatusingtheformofa

memoirresultsinalackofauthorialreliability.

InChapterThree,SarahMoss’NightWakingshiftedthefocusfrom

lookinginward,turningitsattentiononmotherhoodinrelationtoself,the

exteriorworldandambivalence.ThemoreIreadaboutmaternalambivalence,

thecleareritbecamethatalthoughthereisaresoundingconnectionbetween

ambivalenceasaresultofculturalforces,itisalsoevidentthatmaternal

ambivalencearisesfrommaternalintersubjectivity.Thatistosay,despitetheir

useofdifferentformtoconveytheirexperience,Cusk,Moss,Lymer,Richand

Kristevaareonevoicewhentheywriteabouttheirownexperiencesofmaternal

intersubjectivitywhichmakelessopaquetheboundariesbetweenlearnedand

unlearnedbehaviour.Becauseintersubjectivitywillbedisruptedbycultural

127

forces,itisverydifficulttoestablishwhatisontologicalbehaviour.Butwitha

backdropofaremoteislandintheHebrides,comprisingofaskeletalsociety,

Mosspeelsoffthelayersofprescriptivebehaviourtorevealanddistinguishwhat

islearnedandunlearnedbehaviourconcerningmotherhood.Indeed,Mossis

endeavouringto‘de-naturalizethenaturalattitude’334focusingherattentionon

attachmenttheoryfromtheperspectiveofAnnaBennett’sacademicresearch

alongsideherprotagonist’sownexperienceofattachmenttoherchildren.Using

psychologyasherframework,Mossexploresattachmentbutratherthanviewing

itfromthechild’sperspective,whichpsychoanalysisisinclinedtodo,Moss

depictsattachmenttheoryfromthepointofviewofthemother.Insodoing,

Mosstacitlycritiquesprescriptiveculturalforces,whichregardthemotheras

theprimecarer,andjuxtaposesthiswithillustrationsofmetaphysical

attachmentbetweenAnnaandhertwoboys,accuratelydepictingtheconflicta

mothermayexperiencewithinherself.Asaresult,ithighlightsthatwhilethere

isaneedforacollectiveresponsibilityforthelivesofchildren,toassumeco-

parentingisthepanaceaforfemaleprogressisanoversimplification.Thereisa

conflictgoingonwithinthemotherthattranscendsexternalforces.

Moreover,inheressay‘ThinkingMothers/ConceivingBirth’,Sara

Ruddickexplorestheconceptofseparatingbirthgiversfrommothering.She

arguesthatiftheyareseenasseparateactivities,mencannolongerexcusethem

selvesfromchildcare.Ruddicktakesissuewiththetheorythatbecausebirth

giversarefemalesthenmotheringisa‘natural’femaledestiny.Thisdistinction

isimportantbecausealthoughCuskandMossbothillustratehowmaternal

intersubjectivitymayaffecthowamothercopeswithseparationandunification

334

Gail Weiss, ‘Can We De-Naturalize the Natural Attitude?’, title of paper given at a Symposium on ‘Cross-disciplinary Phenomenology: A Readiness for the Questionable’, June 2016.

128

intheearlystagesofmotherhood,itisbynomeansaforegoneconclusionsheis

suitedtotheday-to-daycareofthechild.Indeed,CuskandAnnaBennettare

representativeofwomenwhomakebettermothersbyrecognizingtheirneedto

returntotheworkplace,andJudithFairchildwouldhavebeenabettermother

hadshenotadheredtoprescriptivematernalpracticesthatforcedhertostayat

home.

Finally,Iwanttoarguethatthereisanimportantandunfinished

discussionconcerningthestatusofmaternalintersubjectivityandwhataffect

thishasonamother’sdecisionmakingprocessconcerningtheworkplace.

However,thechallengewiththismayliewithwomenthemselveswhocouldbe

reluctanttoconfessanyintrinsicbondwiththeirinfantforfear,onceagain,of

beingrelegatedtotheroleofprimecarer.AsIhavealreadystated,emphasis

needstobereinforcedthatexperiencingmaternalintersubjectivitydoesnot

necessarilymakeyouabetterparent,asbothMossandCuskillustrate.335Rather,

itmaymakeseparationmoreconflictingforthemotherbutnotsomethingthat

cannotbeovercome.Insteadofperceivingmotherhoodasaninconvenient

interruption,apunctuationmark,whichissituatedoutsidetheboundariesof

femaleprogress,Iarguethatitneedstobeconsideredinamoreinclusive,

organicandpositivemanner.AsYounghighlights,pregnancyitselfandthis

awarenessofweightandmaterialityoftenproducesasenseofpower,solidity,

andvalidity.Indeed,shesharesanextractfromthe1950textAnInteresting

Condition,inwhichtheauthordescribeshersenseofpregnancyas‘thisbulk

slowsmywalkingandmakesmygesturesandmymindmorestately.Isuppose

ifIschooledmyselftowalkmassivelytherestofmylife,Imightalwayshave

335

It is worth noting that Cusk makes a point in her memoir of highlighting that her husband is the main carer of their children whilst she is writing her book on motherhood!

129

massivethoughts’.336Moreover,Kristevaclaimsthatmaternityisindispensible

toawoman’sdiscoveryoffemaleexperiencebutalsothatitis‘oneofthemost

ferventdivinizationsofmaternalpower’.337Indeed,sheacknowledgesthefact

that‘nomatterhowfarsciencemayprogress,womenwillcontinuetobethe

mothersofhumanity’.338Itisthisessenceofmasteryofwoman’spositionas

creatorsofhumanitythatneedsre-considering,butthiswillnotbepossible

withouttheassistanceandhonestyofwomenthemselves.Ambivalenceisrarely

revealedinthepublicsphereforfearofretributionofbeingconsideredan

unnaturalorbadmother,justasCuskherselfwas.Bychartingthecourseof

historyofmaternalinstinctthroughbothfictionalandtheoreticalliterature,re-

definingitaccordingtothevoiceofthemother,thefinalobjectiveofthisstudyis

toactasapointofdepartureforfurtherinvestigationintowhatitmeanstobea

motherbothinthehomeandworkplacein21stCenturywesterncivilization.

336

Ann Lewis, An Interesting Condition (New York: Doubleday, 1950) p. 83, cited by Iris Marion Young in ‘Pregnant Embodiment’ p. 53. 337

Kristeva, ‘Women’s Time’, The Kristeva Reader, p. 205. 338

Julia Kristeva, ‘Hannah Arendt, Vol 1, ‘Female Genius: Life, madness, words’ (2001) in Maternal Encounters by Lisa Baraitser (Routledge, London, 2009) p. 27.

130

Afterword

Whilewritingthisthesis,therewasenoughevidencetoargueforanempirical

re-definingratherthanacompletere-namingofmaternalinstinct.However,the

useofthistermisanemotiveoneparticularlywithinfemininediscourseand

althoughthisresearchhasmadeattemptstore-definetheterm,itwasnotthe

intentionforittodistractfromtheexperienceofmaternalintersubjectivityitself,

referredtoas‘theblurringeffect’.Therefore,thereasonforthisAfterwordisto

stresstheimportancethatadetachmentismaintainedbetweenthehistorically

negativeconnotationsthatsurroundthelabel‘maternalinstinct’fromthe

experientialprocessoftheblurringeffectwhichisdiscussedinthisstudy.339

Furthermore,asrecentscientificresearchhasdisclosed,whichisincluded

inthisthesis,scientificprogressarguesthatitisnotpossibletoidentifyor

separatewhatisnatureandwhatisnurture.340AsMandyBloomfieldandClare

Hansonargue,genesare‘understoodaslocatedwithinacomplexanddynamic

regulatorysystem(thegenome)whichallowsorganismstoadapttochanging

environments’.341Indeed,EvelynFoxKellerclarifies,‘nolongerisitnature

versusnurture,butnaturevianurture[…]naturedependsonnurturetobe

realized.’342So,althoughattemptshavebeenmadetodissectthesuminparts

thatmakeupmotherhood,theintentionofthisstudywasneithertodwellon

whatisbiologicalandwhatissocialandculturalbutinsteadtolayemphasison

maternalinstinctandambivalenceintermsofacoherentexperientialwholeof

whatitistobeamother.

339

See Chapter One, Section One, p.21, of thesis for further clarification. 340

See Introduction p.4 and Chapter 3 Section Two p.101 of this thesis for further clarification. 341

Mandy Bloomfield andClare Hanson, ‘Beyond the gene: epigenetic science in twenty-first century culture’, Textual Practive, 2015, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp.405-413. 342

Evelyn Fox Keller, The Mirage of A Space Between Nature and Nurture (USA: Duke University Press, 2010) pp. 2-3.

131

Bibliography

Abel,DonaldC,Freud:OnInstinctandMorality(NewYork:StateUniversityof

NewYork,1989)

Badinter,Elisabeth,DeadEndFeminism(Cambridge:PolityPress,2007)

Badinter,Elisabeth,TheConflict:HowOverzealousMotherhoodUnderminesthe

StatusofWomen(NewYork:Picador,2010)

Badinter,Elisabeth,TheMythofMotherhood:AnHistoricalViewoftheMaternal

Instinct(London:SouvenirPress,1981)

Baraitser,Lisa,MaternalEncounters:TheEthicsofInterruption(EastSussex:

Routledge,2009)

Barber,Lynn,‘TheInterview:RachelCusk’,TheObserver,30August2009,

http://lexisnexis.comchain.kent.ac.uk/uk/nexis/[accessed7April2014]

Bassin,Donna,Honey,Margaret,Kaplan,MeryleMahrer,Representationsof

Motherhood(NewYork:Vail-BallouPress,1994)

Berzoff,Joan,Flanagan,LauraMelano,Hertz,Patricia,eds.,InsideOutandOutside

In(Maryland:Rowman&Littlefield,2016)

Beauvoirde,Simone,TheSecondSex(Middlesex:Penguin,1982)

BlafferHrdy,Sarah,MotherNature:NaturalSelection&theFemaleoftheSpecies

(London:Chatto&Windus,1999)

Bloomfield,Mandy&Hanson,Clare,‘Beyondthegene:epigeneticsciencein

twenty-firstcenturyculture’,TextualPractice,29:3,405-413,2015

132

Bourne-Taylor,Carole,Mildenberg,Ariane,eds.,Phenomenology,Modernismand

Beyond(Bern:PeterLangAG,2010)

Brontë,Anne,TheTenantofWildfellHall(Oxford:OUP,2008)

Brontë,Charlotte,JaneEyre(London:Penguin,1994)

Bowlby,Rachel,AChildofOne’sOwn:ParentalStories(Oxford,OUP,2013)

Burkhardt,RichardW.,PatternsofBehaviour:KonradLorenz,NikoTinbergen,

andtheFoundingofEthology(ChicagoandLondon:TheUniversityof

ChicagoPress,2005)

Cain,Madelyn,TheChildlessRevolution(NewYork:PerseusPublishing,2001)

CanfieldFisher,Dorothy,TheHome-Maker(London:PersephoneBooks,2004)

Chodorow,NancyJ.,TheReproductionofMothering:Psychoanalysisandthe

SociologyofGender(London:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,Ltd,1999)

Chopin,Kate,TheAwakeningandOtherStories(London:Penguin,2003)

Cixous,Héléne,Clément,Catherine,eds.,TheNewlyBornWoman(London:JB

Tauris&Co,1996)

Conroy,PeterV.,Jean-JacquesRousseauNewYork:TwaynePublishers,1998)

Cunningham,Michael,TheHours(London:HarperPerennial,2006)

Cusk,Rachel,Aftermath:OnMarriageandSeparation(London:Faber&Faber,

2012)

Cusk,Rachel,ArlingtonPark(London:Faber&Faber,2007)

133

Cusk,Rachel,ALife’sWorkonBecomingaMother(London:FourthEstate,2008)

Cusk,Rachel,‘Iwasonlybeinghonest’,TheGuardian,21March2008,

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2008/mar/21/biography.women

[accessed23May2015]

Derrida,Jacques,OnTheName(Stanford:StanfordUniversityPress,1995)

Doane,Janice,andHodges,Devon,FromKleintoKristeva:Psychoanalytic

FeminismandtheSearchforthe“GoodEnough”Mother(Michigan:

UniversityofMichiganPress,1993)

Dunworth,Felicity,MothersandMeaningontheEarlyModernEnglishStage

(Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress,2010)

Enright,Anne,MakingBabies:StumblingintoMotherhood(London:Vintage,

2005)

Evans,Lloyd,‘AWriter’sLife:RachelCusk,TheDailyTelegraph,13April2003

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/3592667/A-writers-life-

Rachel-Cusk.html[accessed23May2015]

FoxKeller,Evelyn,TheMirageofaSpaceBetweenNatureandNurture(Durham&

London:DukeUniversityPress,2010)

Friedman,May,MommyblogsandtheChangingFaceofMotherhood(London:

UniversityofTorontoPress,2013)

Gionfriddo,Gina,Rapture,Blister,Burn(London;Bloomsbury,2014)

Girard,Grégoire,TheMother-tongue:Or,methodicalInstructionintheMother-

tongueinSchoolsandFamilies,1January1747,

134

http://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=5QQTAAAAIAAJ&rdid=book

[accessed7November2014]

Gordon,Bryony,‘Milestonemadnessthatsaysyouhavefailedasawoman’,Daily

Telegraph,2June2015,p.22

Griffiths,Sian,Harley,Nicky,‘Whatguilt?Mothershappytogotowork’,The

SundayTimes,13April2014,p.13

Guenther,Lisa,‘Merleau-PontyandtheSenseofSexualDifference’,Angelaki:

JournaloftheTheoreticalHumanities,16:2,pp.19-33

http://dx.doi.org/1080/0969725X.2011.591583[accessed9June2014]

Gunn,Molly,‘Takesissuewiththemoderncultofchildworship’,StellaMagazine,

26November2013,pp.33-37

Harris,Alexandra,VirginiaWoolf(London:Thames&HudsonLtd,2011)

Heinämaa,Sara,TowardaPhenomenologyofSexualDifference:Husserl,Merleau-

Ponty,Beauvoir(Maryland:Rowman&Littlefield,2003)

Held,Virginia,FeministMorality:TransformingCulture,SocietyandPolitics

(Chicago:TheUniversityofChicagoPress,1993)

Heller,Agnes,OnInstincts(Assen:VanGorcum,1979)

Hess,EckhardH,Imprinting:EarlyExperienceandtheDevelopmental

PsychobiologyofAttachment(NewYork:VanNostrandReinhold

Company,1973

Hewlett,SylviaAnn,Babyhunger:TheNewBattleforMotherhood(London:

AtlanticBooks,2001)

135

Hewlett,SylviaAnn,‘Fast-TrackWomenandtheQuestforchildren’,Sexuality,

Reproduction&Menopause,Vol.2,No.1,March2004

Holmes,Jeremy,JohnBowlby&AttachmentTheory(London:Routledge,1993)

Hudson,HeatherBrown,‘Makeroomformother:Astudyofmotherhoodandthe

maternalinstinctin20thcenturywomenwriters’,2010,CityUniversityof

NewYork,

http://search.proquest.com.chain.kent.ac.uk/results/C755A46FD4FB4A1

APQ/1?accountid=7408[accessed2June2014)

Irigaray,Luce,SpeculumoftheOtherWoman(NewYork:CornellUniversity

Press,1985)

James,P.D.,TheChildrenofMen(London:Faber&Faber,2005)

Kellaway,Kate,‘Mother’sRuin’,TheGuardian,9September2001

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2001/sep/09/biography.features

[accessed23May2015]

Kilpatrick,Kate,‘APhenomenologyofthePregnantBody’,papergivenat

PhenomenologyofHealth:AnInterdisciplinarySymposium,Universityof

Oxford,27-28March2015

Kilpatrick,Kate,‘PastherPrime?SimonedeBeauvoironMotherhoodandOld

Age’,SpringerScience+BusinessMediaDordrecht,29March2014

Lazarre,Jane,TheMotherKnot(DurhamandLondon:DukeUniversityPress,

1997)

LaChanceAdams,Sarah,MadMothers,BadMothers&WhatA“Good”Mother

WouldDo:TheEthicsofAmbivalence(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversity

Press,2014)

136

Liddle,Rod,‘AfewkindwordsofadviceforRachelCusk’,TheSpectator,25

February2012,http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/rod-

liddle/668053/a-fe-kind-words-of-advice-for-rachel-cusk[accessed23

May2015]

Long,Camilla,‘OnAftermathbyRachelCusk,TheSundayTimes,4March2012,

http://www.theomnivore.com/camilla-long-on-aftermath-by-rachel-cusk

[accessed25April2015]

Lymer,Jane,‘ThePhenomenologyoftheMaternal-FoetalBond’,2010,University

ofWollongong,

http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4624&context=theses

[accessed1December2014]

Mantel,Hilary,GivingUptheGhost(London:FourthEstate,2013)

Marneffede,Daphne,‘WhatExactlyistheTransformationofMotherhood?

CommentaryonLisaBaraitser’sPaper’,StudiesinGenderandSexuality,

7:3,pp239-248,http://dx.doi.org/10.2513/s15240657sgs07032

[accessed18February2015]

Merleau-Ponty,Maurice,‘Cézanne’sDoubt’,SenseandNon-Sense(Evanston:

NorthwesternPress,1964)pp.9-25

Merleau-Ponty,Maurice,PhenomenologyofPerception(Oxon:Routledge,2014)

Merleau-Ponty,Maurice,Signs(Evanston:NorthwesternUniversityPress,1964)

Merleau-Ponty,Maurice,TheVisibleandtheInvisible(Evanston:Northwestern

UniversityPress,1987)

Merleau-Ponty,Maurice,TheWorldofPerception(Oxon:Routledge,2004)

137

Moi,Toril,ed.,TheKristevaReader(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1986)

Moss,Sarah,NightWaking(London:GrantaPublications,2012)

Morgan,Lady,TheBookofBoudoir,inTwoVolumes,Vol1,1829,

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=AfM5AQAAMAAj&printsec=frontcove

r&output=reader&hl=en&pg=GBS.PP11[accessed7November2014]

‘MultipleNewsItems’,TheSheffieldIndependentandYorkshireandDerbyshire

Advertiser(Sheffield,England),November211829,Issue:519

http://www.kent.ac.uk/library/resources/ebooks/index.html[accessed7

November2014]

NelsonGarner,Shirley,Kahane,Claire,Sprengnether,Madelon,eds.,The

(M)otherTongue:EssaysinPsychoanalyticInterpretation(London:Cornell

UniversityPress,1985)

Odone,Cristina,‘Iwantmydaughtertoknowthatshecannever‘haveitall’’,

DailyTelegraph,1June2015,p.17

O’Hagan,Timothy,Rousseau(London:Routledge,2003)

Parker,Rozsika,TorninTwo:TheExperienceofMaternalAmbivalence(London:

ViragoPressLtd,1995)

Pearson,Allison,IDon’tKnowHowSheDoesIt(London:Vintage,2011)

Phillips,Adam,Winnicott(London:Fontana,1988)

PinkolaEstés,Clarissa,WomenWhoRunWithWolves:ContactingthePowerof

theWildWoman(Croydon:Rider,2008)

138

Plato,Symposium(Middlesex:Penguin,1983)

Plato,TheRepublic(London:Penguin,2007)

Price,Danielle,‘MotherLuck:AReviewofALife’sWork:OnBecomingaMother

andTheLuckyOnes’,Literarymama,

http://literarymama.com/reviews/archives/2005/02/mother-luck.html

[accessed23May2015]

Purves, Miranda, Rachel Cusk on her new Novel, The Bradshaw Variations’, Elle Magazine, 14 April 2010,

http://www.elle.com/culture/books/interviews/a11067/book-release-a life-s-work-on-becoming-a-mother-by-

rachel-cusk/ [accessed 23 May 2015]

‘Rachel Cusk on the hostile reaction to A Life’s Work’, 84 posts, Mumsnet,

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/501274-rachel-cusk-on-the-hostile-reaction-to-a-life-s

[accessed 23 May 2015]

Rankin, Jennifer, ‘Fewer women leading FTSE firms than men called John, The Guardian, 6 March 2015,

http://www.theguradian.com/business/2015/mar/06/johns-davids-and-ians-outnumber-female-chief-

executives-in-ftse-100 [accessed 6 October 2015]

Reidhead,Julia,ed.,TheNortonAnthologyofEnglishLiterature:theVictorianAge

(NewYork:WWNorton&Company,2000)

Reynolds,Jack,Merleau-PontyandDerrida:intertwiningembodimentandalterity

(Ohio:OhioUniversityPress,2004)

Rich,Adrienne,OfWomanBorn:MotherhoodasExperienceandInstitution(New

York:WWNorton&Company,1995

Rodgers,Catherine,‘ElisabethBadinterand“TheSecondSex”:AnInterview,

Signs,Vol.21,No.1(Autumn,1995)pp.147-162,TheUniversityof

ChicagoPress,http://wwwljstor.org/stable/3175125[accessed12

February2014)

Roiphe,Anne,AMother’sEye:MotherhoodandFeminism(London:Virago,1997)

139

Romdenh-Romluc,Komarine.RoutledgePhilosophyGuidebooktoMerleau-Ponty

andPhenomenologyofPerception(Oxon:Routledge,2011)

Rose,Jacqueline,‘Mothers’(http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n12/jacqueline-

rose/mothers,Vol.36,No.12,19June2014[accessed10July2014]

Rossi,Alice,‘ABiosocialPerspectiveonParenting’,Daedalus,Vol.106,No2,The

Family,Spring,1977,pp.1-31http://www.jstor.org.stable/20024474

[accessed7May2014]

Rousseau,Jean-Jacques,Émile(London:Everyman’sLibrary,1992)

Ruddick,Sara,‘ThinkingMothers/ConceivingBirth’,Representationsof

Motherhood,eds.Bassin,HoneyandMahrerKaplan(NewYork:Vail-

BallouPress,1994)

Sandberg,Sheryl,LeanIn:Women,Work,andtheWilltoLead(London:Ebury

Publishing,2013)

Shott,RobinMay,ed.,Birth,Death,andFemininity(Bloomingdale:Indiana

UniversityPress,2010)

Shriver,Lionel,WeNeedToTalkAboutKevin(London:Serpent’sTail,2011)

Singer,Petered.,Ethics(Oxford:OUP,1994)

Smith,Sidonie&Watson,Julia,eds.,Women,Autobiography,Theory(Madison:

theUniversityofWisconsinPress,1998)

Shulkind,Jeanne,ed.,VirginiaWoolf:MomentsofBeing,Autobiographical

Writings(London:Pimlico,2002)

140

Stamp,Anna,‘(An)othergender:Across-culturalanalysisofwar-tornFranceand

GreatBritaininwhichSimonedeBeauvoirandVirginiaWoolfredefine

“woman”’,2011,UniversityofLouisville,

http://search.proquest.com.chain.kent.ac.uk/pqdtglobal/results/E373D2

84FCC247D1PQ/1?accountid=7408[accessed2June2014]

VicedoCastello,Maria-Margarita,‘TheMaternalInstinct:Motherloveandthe

searchforhumannature’,2005,HarvardUniversity,

http://search.proquest.com.chain.kent.ac.uk/pqdtglobal/results/E373D2

84FCC247D1PQ/1?accountid=7408[accessed15May2014]

Walder,Dennis,ed.,LiteratureintheModernWorld:CriticalEssaysand

Documents(Oxford,OUP,2007)

Waller,RobertJames,TheBridgesofMadisonCounty(London:ArrowBooks,

1997)

Walton,Gregory,‘Womenwhowantchildren“shouldstarttryingbefore30”’,

DailyTelegraph,1June2015,p.4.

Watson,Shane,‘Toughatthetop:Newvoicesinthework/lifedebateareraising

thetemperature’,StyleMagazine,24March2013,pp.35-37

Waugh,Daisy,‘Wanted!ForCrimesAgainstMotherhood’,TheSundayTimes

Magazine,23June2013,pp.23-29

Wokler,RobertRousseau(Oxford:OUP,1996)

Woolf,Virginia,ARoomofOne’sOwn(London:Penguin,2004)

Woolf,Virginia,MrsDalloway(London:Triad,1976)

141

Woolf,Virginia,TotheLighthouse(London:Vintage,2011)

WrightBeth,‘HistoriesofPregnancy’,Women:ACulturalReview,Vol.17,Issue.3,

2006,pp.381-384

http://www.tandfonline.com.chain.kent.ac.uk/doi/full/10/1080[accessed6

December2016]

Wu,Duncan,ed.,Romanticism:AnAnthology(Malden:BlackwellPublishing,

2006)

Yates,Richard,RevolutionaryRoad(London:Vintage,2007)

Young,IrisMarion,OnFemaleBodyExperience:“ThrowingLikeAGirl”andOther

Essays(Oxford:OUP,2005)