Kindle and All You (might not have) Wanted to Know About Necrophilia in 1400-1600
Why would I want a Kindle?
No PDF, no Microsoft Reader, no MobiPocket Reader, no non-Amazon (article) provider, ten cents to upload any of those on the device and everything full of DRM.
If I had a similar device, I would want to be able to use those programs, use the network provider I want (I really don’t want to pay a 10-cent fee every time I want something on my device), be able to buy from any provider I want, be able to upload more than 200 titles on my device (I read a lot, I have a lot of textbooks, and articles, and pdf files, and jstor, and project muse and so on and so forth) and most of all no DRM. Not to mention that 400$ is quite a sum and that the prices of the ebooks are practically the same as the paperback version.
[Some of the ebooks on MobiPocket.com are 20$ when I can get the printed version for 7$, where is the incentive for me to purchase the ebook?]
I saw that you could take notes, which is an interesting feature. I’m currently wondering how many kb it is per “note” and if it’s easy (and fast) to type. I usually take too many notes.
While reading an article I ran over some interesting facts and some ended up grossing me out
Article: Coddon, Karin S. ‘"For Show or Useless Property": Necrophilia and the Revenger's Tragedy.’ ELH, Vol. 61, No. 1. (Spring, 1994): 71-88
“In fact, in the fifteenth century occurred the most notorious documented case of necrophilia in early modem Europe, that of Gilles de Rais, a French nobleman who had fought alongside Jeanne d’Arc, and who was to become the inspiration for the fictive Bluebeard. After Jeanne's capture and execution, Gilles evidently retired to his castle, where he proceeded to seduce, murder and mutilate scores of young boys, not only copulating with the corpses but preserving various body parts for posterity, Upon his arrest, Gilles confessed to his crimes, his pre-execution repentance likely of greater edification to the Church than to the soul of the necrophile himself, for "[Gilles's] confession, repentance, and resignation were acclaimed as an elaborate example of Christian penance.” (emphasis mine)
*snort* Necrophilia + preservation of the body parts for posterity + the inspiration for Bluebeard = an example of 15th century Christian penance. I mean really.
Finding out who the inspiration for Bluebeard is is an unexpected surprise and a great insight into one of my childhood stories that perplexed me the most. Finding out that he fought at Jeanne d’Arc is also an interesting tibit and makes me wonder about his character and all sorts of hypothetical situations are running through my brain.
My reading this (in the same article):
“One is tempted, perhaps, to concur with Giovanna Ferrari's claim that the practice of anatomy descends from traditional, popular pharmaceuticals of the dead body. Yet the relation between popular practice and science in the early modern period is less one of integration than of cooptation. By 1604 in England, it was a felony "to take up a dead body in whole or part for magical purpose." Anatomy and dissection were the territory of the specialist; for the non-specialist, traffic with the dead body constituted necromancy, witchcraft. Although in France, desecration of the corpse could serve as an act, however unsanctioned, of religious sedition, for the most part in early modem Europe, licit contact with the dead body was expressly limited to men of science.”
Made me come up with this:
A black-robed figure can be seen chanting over a dead body.
‘Hey, you there! What you are doing with the dead body?’
‘I iz a scientist.’
‘You iz ?’
‘Yes.’ - nodding in affirmation.
‘Well, then. Carry on.’
‘’m also a necromancer.’ - mutters.
‘What was that?’
‘I said, so good of you, sir.’
‘Well, then.’ - walks off.
‘You have my… blessings.’
“The Reformation's simultaneous privilege of inwardness and denial of individual agency vis-a-vis salvation may well have provoked greater anxiety about death; the prominence of the "food for worms" topos, emphasizing the decomposition and putrefaction of the corpse, is scarcely less morbid than the medieval Dance of Death. As for the living, sexual body, Lawrence Stone suggests that for most early modern English women and men, intercourse likely exposed them to flesh that must have appeared well on the way to putrefaction:
Both sexes suffered long periods of crippling illness which incapacitated them for months or years. Even when relatively well, they often suffered from disorders which made sex painful to them or unpleasant to their partners. Women suffered from a whole series of gynaecological disorders, particularly leucherrhoea, but also vaginal ulcers, tumours, inflammations and haemorrhages which often made sexual intercourse disagreeable, painful, or impossible. Both sexes must very often have had bad breath from the rotting teeth and constant stomach disorders which can be documented from many sources, while superating ulcers, excema, scabs, running sores and other nauseating skin disorders were extremely common, and often lasted for years.
Stone's catalogue of "nauseating" physical ailments comes dangerously close to absolutizing cultural norms, but it is equally misguided to assume that because of the commonness of such complaints, the average Elizabethan or Jacobean paid them no heed. Most important to attend to, I believe, is that for many sixteenth- and seventeenth-century women and men, sexual intercourse was accompanied by pointedly un-romanticized assumptions about the body of desire that would likely strike the twentieth century Western sensibility as revolting.”
Argh, now that’s just gross. Some sort of twisted living breathing form of necrophilia between living breathing decomposing bodies. I did not need to know that. “Strike the twentieth century Western sensibility as revolting”, indeed.