Terms of "Indearment": Lyric and General Economy in Shakespeare and Donne

Barbara Correll
ELH, Volume 75, Number 2, Summer 2008, pp. 241-262 (Article)
Published by The Johns Hopkins University Press DOI: 10.1353/elh.0.0006

For additional information about this article

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/elh/summary/v075/75.2.correll.html

Access Provided by Reed College at 11/14/11 10:42PM GMT

Terms of IndearmenT: LyrIc and GeneraL economy In sHakesPeare and donne

by barbara correLL

The term poetry, applied to the least degraded and least intellectualized forms of the expression of a state of loss, can be considered synonymous with expenditure; it in fact signifies, in the most precise way, creation by means of loss. George bataille, The notion of expenditure1

I.

renaissance poetry has long been linked to historical and politicalcultural issues: social ambition, eroticized power politics, and poetic self-promotion.2 more recent criticism ties economic metaphors in lyric to historical and contextual issues such as usury, coining, and counterfeiting, yet in addressing those practices and policies such criticism tacitly defines the economic as a closed system or mode of management and controlled exchange; it conflates economy and restrictive economy.3 but only to read the discourse of economy with such conceptual limits is to be blind to George batailles work on general or unrestricted economy, work from which I take my epigraph, and to foreclose interpretive and conceptual possibilities for the ongoing study of lyric and early modern culture. General economy, which shadows or (for bataille) historically antecedes the hegemony of restrictive economy, refers to unproductive or sacrificial expenditure, to absolute loss, incalculable and unquantifiable; for bataille, an affirmation of the true gift, of squandering without reciprocity.4 Jacques derrida found in batailles theory affinities with deconstruction and poststructuralist economies of knowledge and signification, in their radical questioning of thought limits, or, as bataille puts it, the dpense that undoes la pens. more recently, in ambitious new work, scott shershow has seen in general economy and its connection to the gift (as theorized by marcel mauss) a model for radical reconfiguration of community and the political.5 Though these works certainly do not address, and
ELH 75 (2008) 241262 2008 by The Johns Hopkins University Press

241

indeed seem resolutely distant from a discussion of renaissance poetry, this essay takes steps toward bridging the gap between contemporary theoretical texts of general economy and what might seem an unlikely place to look for it: early modern amatory lyric. even bataille, who saw a historical break between feudalism and the bourgeois period as marking the decline of an archaic gift economy, of great and free forces of social expenditure (while projecting its inevitable and revolutionary return), who saw poetry as the signifier of general economy and poetic language its vehicle, had modernist literature and anti-bourgeois writers as his examples: arthur rimbaud but not Torquato Tasso, Grard de nerval but not christopher marlowe, and certainly not William shakespeare or John donne.6 However, poets supported by patronage and coterie circulation during the very period of rupture that bataille identifies do not conform to his conception of the poet as radically disinterested and totally (not altruistically) self-sacrificing.7 Insofar as early modern poetry, or indeed any poetic text at all, is open to a deconstructive reading, and since deconstruction is inextricably linked to an epistemological general economy of diffrance, the distance between bataille and shakespeare or donne may not be great at all. but it is the opening up of the question of general economy in the language of financial economy in select poems that interests me here, and I have chosen my examples accordingly. for in deploying economic figures and metaphors, most especially when they cross the economic and erotic in discursive chiasmus, as they do so strikingly in my textual examples, donne and shakespeare both address the question or the risk of general economy, of expenditure and exorbitant loss, in amatory utterances and social-erotic explorations, with results that sometimes seem to peer beyond limits of thinking about love and economy as in the case of shakespeares sonnet 31.8 for this essay I have chosen to compare two poetic texts that begin by crossing the language of economy and love and proceed to reflect on that crossing. shakespeares sonnet 31 (Thy bosom is indeared with all hearts) is strategically structured by the weighty significations of the early modern noun bosomchest cavity, heart, site of affects and subjectivity, and purseand the verb indear: to enrich both affectively and economically.9 In elegy 10 (Image of her whom I love more then she) donne also creates complex and critical effects through a similar crossing in which the speaker is imprinted like a coin or medal.10 both poems address the perils and possibilities of great loss but, as I will argue, in shakespeares posing an ardent all the all 242 Terms of Indearment

against donnes love proportionall, sonnet 31 has a quite special status, even in comparison with other sonnets in the sequence. In an influential reading of King Lear, richard Halpern describes the text as a play that quite explicitly engages the transition to capitalism as the feudal order-word is superseded by the consumption-sign, thus dramatizing a contradiction between absolutist rhetoric and economic reality, represented in numerous scenes of divestiture, from cordelias refusal of ornamental copia in act one, to edgars shedding of noble identity in becoming a bedlam beggar in act two, to Lears mental and verbal disrobing in act 4 to become the unaccommodated man he sees in edgar in act 3.11 What is important about the tragedys collapse back into feudalism is its strategic embrace of radical decline: [I]t throws this [feudal-aristocratic] orderor its declining valuesover the edge, consumes it in a massive act of dpense in which feudalism is reconstituted in a tragic form.12 What Id like to suggest is that extravagant throwing over is not the only way in which early modern literature addressed the historical transition from a period hearkening back to an archaic economy of uncalculating generosity to a more anxiety ridden economy of scarcity, dearth, and profit-taking, and my goal is to explore in this discussion the very different responses of donne and shakespeare to loss as a confrontation between general and restrictive economy at a particular historical moment. Here lyric reflection appears to have a generic advantage over drama or tragedy, not least because it is not the dramatis personae but singular and more sustained poetic voices that play the major roles. In the poems I have chosen donne and shakespeare transform the metaphoric currency of Petrarchan conventionwhat, following Pierre bourdieu and John Guillory, we would now call symbolic or cultural capitalto produce critical poetic reflections on love and currency itself, on erotic relationships and coining, on exchange, debt, and value.13 Theirs are not simply the accidental poetic incursions that Jean-Joseph Goux so easily dismisses in speaking of money and language.14 When, as in my examples, donne and shakespeare put money in their lyric, they use monetary metaphors with deliberation, and they make the coin poetic image, concrete object-commodity, the material signifier of economic exchange and, too, the social-erotic relations embedded in the object itself.15 To judge from much of their poetry, certainly also from a good deal of shakespeares drama, donne and shakespeare were keen observers of the intervening role of the market economy in early modern cultural life with some knowledge of contemporary debates on monetary practices such as usury, debased Barbara Correll 243

coinage, or trade debates. furthermore, they could see something of the increasing importance of money and exchange beyond, for example, the familiar topos of bemoaning devalued knowledge in the face of valorized material wealth.16 as men of ambition both donne and shakespeare observed and lived through the conflicts between an official feudal power structure and the emerging, competing economic power of a market economy. Whether, like Jean-christophe agnews early modern english subjects of the market and the theater, they saw themselves in the likeness of commodities or felt that their experiences were of a self no longer, or at least not fully authorized within the traditional religious, familial, or class frame, their poetic texts evidence an awareness of economic mediation in amatory relations and in the role of the poetic speaker no matter how they might have actually experienced the increasingly fugitive and abstract social relations of a burgeoning market society.17 beyond their biographical particulars, we can also read signs of critical discomfort with newer economic forces in the ultimately deprivileging play of discourses found, as Theodor adorno argues in Lyric Poetry and society, in the poetic texts themselves rather than by reference to their social contexts.18 That play of discourses may generate what adorno referred to as thoughts that cannot be stopped at the behest of the poem, thoughts that may place what happens in the poems at odds with the restrictive economy of meter, the sonnet form and sonnet conventions and, as well, with the early modern profit economy and the profoundly economic and juridical realms of heterosexuality and reproductive sex.19 When donne and shakespeare write the language of an early modern money economy into amatory lyric they exploit the materialtopoi, tropes, lexiconof change and exchange, and they create appropriately complex poetic-critical reflections on a context of upheaval and change, or what shakespeares sonnet 32 called this growing age (S, 10). The early modern world chatters in their poems about coins and affects, love and loss, enrichment and lack, and does so most particularly and pointedly in my examples, but shakespeares and donnes poetic speakers are not simply ventriloquized by that chatter; despite their differences they actively address questions of affective and economic gain and loss, of restrictive and unrestrictive or general economy in social-erotic relationships.
II.

George Puttenhams The Arte of English Poesie (1589) comments on crossed discourses when he illustrates catachresisthe figure of 244 Terms of Indearment

abusewith the example of an economic figure in a line of hexameter verse: I lent my love to losse, and gaged my life in vaine.20 Puttenham first seems to take a negative view of catachresis, which he describes as what occurs when for lacke of naturall and proper terme or worde we take another, neither naturall nor proper and do untruly applie it to the thing which we would seeme to expresse.21 but having said that, in a statement by turns both ameliorating and jarring, he finds both impropriety and justice in his example of catachretic wrenching or misapplication:
Whereas this worde lent is properly of mony or some such other thing, as men do commonly borrow, for use to be repayed again, and being applied to love is utterly abused, and yet very commendably spoken by vertue of this figure. for he that loveth and is not beloved again, hath no lesse wrong, than he that lendeth and is never repayde.22

Puttenhams and yet confuses what might more properly be discursive distinctions. While it moves toward naturalizing and normalizing the catachresisthe outrageous non-equivalenceof bad debt or bootless expenditure and lost love, and would include the cross-ties between economy and affect as part and parcel of early modern rhetoric (by vertue of this figure), it acknowledges a collision, and perhaps a collusion as well, of symbolic registers in early modern poetry. It leaves catachresis as a troubling question, and does so through an example that speaks of lacking, lending, wagering, losing. This catachresis works not only by wrenching meaning from a normative position but by emptying, diminishing it. The traditional renaissance adage, In love is no lack, is made to stand on its head.23 In a way Puttenham anticipates the cultural estrangement effects that donne and shakespeare produce when they write of love and loss in the exchange terms of the worldthat is, when they cross affects and economics.
III.

of those critics who approach the issue of general economy in the sonnets, Joel fineman and Thomas Greene stand out. fineman has little regard for the notion of general economy, though he is admittedly insightful in locating it in more than one of the young man sonnets. He sees the poets eternizing lines in the elegiac sonnets (for example, 31, 55, 100) presenting a kind of mimic, generally visual, correspondence between the poets elegiac praise and that which it commemorates, a specular resemblance that is oddly morbid in its Barbara Correll 245

iconicity.24 He locates a sort of specular morbidity in sonnet 31 when the young man is figured as the grave where buried love doth live (D, 9), the crucial line which makes this poem, for fineman, evidence of a general economy of self-cancelling visuality that runs through the sonnets as a whole. . . . Visual circles become vicious circles, and visual reflections become exhaustingly reflexive, producing an emptying and impoverished lyric paralysis.25 In finemans brief reading of sonnet 31, the economy of self-expense in the procreation sonnets takes a turn for the worse, and where the sonnets to the young man promise or intimate a subject that cannot exist except as a lie and are frozen in mirrored and mirroring morbidity, in the dark lady sequence, when the foul lady supplants the fair youth and when the sonnets own up metapoetically to the lie of epideixis and openly exploit the paradox of praise, modern subjectivity effects emerge.26 I am obviously not the first both to admire finemans work and to take issue with his thesis on shakespeare as the inventor of a modern subjectivity (or subjectivity effects) located in heterosexual difference. Jonathan Goldberg, for example, criticizes finemans structuring terms of invidious distinction between a narcissistic homosexuality and a misogynistic heterosexuality.27 margreta deGrazia faults him for an anachronistic insistence on gender difference that effaces the importance of social distinctions and, in effect, for uncannily recalling the stigmatizing reception of the sonnets first seen in edmond malone in the eighteenth century.28 even provoked to take issue with what amounts to a rather masculinizing and homophobic project, however, we learn a lot from fineman about the sonnets and theoretically informed close reading.29 but the issues of general economy and early modern poetic production, and of the early modern subject as well, look quite different from fineman if we attend to the crossing of economic and affective discourses and reconsider the matter of general economy in the sonnets and read them with or against donnes elegy. In another of the more insightful and critically activating readings of the sonnets, contemporary with fineman, Greene speaks of the anxiety of cosmic and existential economics which haunts them, of a terrible fear of cosmic destitution [that] overshadows the husbandry of the procreation sonnets.30 Greene notes a central conflict or flaw in the sonnets, which are distinguished by . . . insidious metaphoric multiplications that suggest a compensatory aspect, as if in their superfetation . . . the poetry could be working to refute its own selfaccusations of dearth and repetition.31 not only do the metaphoric crossingsmetaphors are mixed, replaced by others, recalled, jostled, 246 Terms of Indearment

interfused, inverted, disguised, dangled, erodedproduce slippage in Greenes reading, they paradoxically offer language that loses its wealth and its potency while asserting them.32 Plenty (of metaphorizing) makes the poetry poor, and figurative intensity goes hand in hand with poetic evacuation: To compose poetry is expensive, just as loving is expensive, and the unformulated implication of the work as a whole seems to be that expense is never truly recuperated.33 yet in Greenes critical bottom linewhat becomes a sort of cost-benefit analysis of poetic compositionartistic achievement outweighs, ultimately contains the anxiety it provokes, finally producing a chiastic balance, not the surrender or self-destruction of which bataille writes.34 Where fineman makes sexual difference the answer to a threateningly subjectless and moribund general economy, Greene takes quite seriously the general-economic of poetic language that works its way through the poetry. yet he ultimately pulls back from the brink of semiotic exorbitance and expenditure to seek a familiar humanist hermeneutic safety. In the end the sonnets, despite their use of language so wealthy, so charged with difference, as to be erosive . . . are not consumed by the extravagant husbandry that produced them. Their effort to resist, to compensate, to register in spite of slippage, balances their loss with store. They leave us with the awesome cost, and reward, of their conative contention.35 What Greene finally claims for the sonnets, however, might apply more properly to donne than to shakespeare. donne, like Greene, is ultimately eager to reconcile or relativize conflict, manage uncertainty and domesticate the stress in introducing economic metaphors with the achievement of poetic production. donne characteristically employs a method of containing and managing loss even as he poetically figures it. That poetic economy of restricted metrical form and the general economy of uncontainable meaning, the loss (of life, semen, mastery) that keeps reappearing in poems dedicated to its containment, is perhaps most succinctly delineated by donne himself in The Triple fool: Griefe brought to numbers cannot [should not, dare not] be so fierce, / for, he tames it, that fetters it in verse (D, 1011).36 When donne crosses the amatory and the economic in lyric he is typically concerned with a quite restrictive heteroerotic economy concerned with recapturing what love for a woman threatens to take from a man. In The bracelet, for example, the lovers gold coins, which must be melted down to replace the womans lost jewelry, function as metonymies of a beleaguered masculinity: much of my able youth, and lustihead / Will vanish, if thou love let them alone (D, 5253).37 Barbara Correll 247

In the valedictory of Weeping, the tears coined, stamped, minted by gazing at the woman threaten to drown or obliterate the speaker: draw not up seas to drown me in thy sphere, / Weep me not dead in thine arms (D, 2021).38 donnes poetry is thus deeply invested in restrictive economy, is preoccupied with weighing costs and benefits, pains and gains, even as it stages crises of affective and financial value. elegy 10, The dream, shows donnes interest in coining, or numismatic imprinting, as that which generates both subjective loss and poetic production. In elegy 10 donnes speaker constructs a shifting scene of presence and absence, loss and gain, precipitated by reference to coining or stamping value on a medal, an act that indears, enriches, and threatens as well in an amatory relationship strongly mediated by the language of economy:
Image of her whom I love, more then she, Whose faire impression in my faithfull heart, makes mee her Medall, and makes her love mee, as kings do coynes, to which their stamps impart The value . . . (D, 15)

The syntactical complications or conceits of the first lines are ingenious as well as telling in terms of crossed discourses. on the one hand, the poem first suggests a symmetry and reciprocity between the speaker and the woman: each loves the others image. but the poet figures the female beloved as the proactive imprinter who performs an act of transforming exchange. His love for her image empowers the woman to stamp the speaker. for Helen Gardner the poem illustrates the neo-Platonic amatory principle in which the lover may fashion in imagination an image of the beloved more beautiful than the image his senses perceive in her presence.39 The convention is defamiliarized, however, when donne links that impression to coins or medals, understood in the poem as the signifiers of exchange and measurable value. These tokens disrupt the idealizing neo-Platonic itinerary, for in this amatory precession of simulacra it is coining that lends value.40 The faire impression of the woman is less beautiful than valuable and powerful, but coining also threatens loss and removes power. Wrenched as well from the poetic convention in which cupids arrow pierces the lovers heart through an ocular-visual conduit, the speakers declaration of love tacitly proceeds to dismantle that convention: to love, in lyric, is to love a coined image at a remove from a concrete love object. It is to be coined by convention, to maintain and reproduce its currency. 248 Terms of Indearment

Like the coining monarchical authority to whom shes similaically compared (as kings do coins), the beloved loves the lover-simulacrum shes coined, to whom her imprinting gives both feudal and currencyobject status. as the kings coin, the lover straddles two realms. The medal is feudal, the coin a historical hybrid of the feudal privilege that stamps it and that sends it into circulation as the instrument of commerce in the emerging economic arena.41 but coinings act of bestowing value is the poems crisis. being coined, bearing the weight of the world of coins and medals, is at odds with another more autonomous subject status. for donne it is the poet who would control the representational economy; being imprinted is not the place of the poet, even though, since the crisis is the scheme, it is where hes put himself in the poem. The stamping of his heart is rich but reifying, heavy; he prefers the managed reality of Queen fantasie and the dream. even as he releases the coined heart to circulationgoe, and take my heart from hence, / Which now is growne too great and good for me (D, 67)he rejects the disempowering burden of her imprinting as much as the sensual reality (reason) of the woman, the sight of whom sets the image in place: Honours oppresse weake spirits, and our sense, / strong objects dull, the more, the lesse wee see (D, 78). at least as the poetic speaker constructs it, hers is a feudal investment: the lyric I would circulate as her weighty coin, the signifier of her power. Like feudal honors, putatively beyond or anterior to the competition of a market arena, [s]trong objects are larger objects. In commanding her departure with his heart and affects, the speaker answers to another power, an alternative representational economy:
When you are gone, and Reason gone with you, Then Fantasie is Queene and soule, and all; she can present joyes meaner then you do; convenient, and more proportionall. (D, 912)

fantasy coins things differently and circulation looks different in this meaner, lesser realm, where the speakers all competes with reasonreality. In the womans absence the speaker cant cognitively see her, she cant further imprint him, and he takes shelter in a restrictive economy of manageable affects, an all that is [c]onvenient, and more proportionall. These lesser, more orderly joys, self-generated in an interior sphere at a safe remove from the coining, enable an authoritative and self-authorizing repossession of the absent woman: so, if I dreame I have you, I have you (D, 13).42 Barbara Correll 249

In donnes dream machine, she may be fort but the speaker brings her da; if shes no longer up close and personal, shes certainly up close. He arrests the metaphoric circulation that overloads his heartI scape the paine; for paine is true; / and sleep which locks up sense, doth lock out all (D, 1415)and he is empowered to do some symbolic imprinting or (given donnes aversion to print publication) inscribing of his own:
after a such fruition I shall wake, and, but the waking, nothing shall repent; and shall to love more thankfull sonnets make, Then if more honour, teares, and paines were spent. (D, 1720)

coined, then retreating to auto-poetic fantasy and its fruition (possession of the woman in his dream), the speaker vows to pen amatory sonnets of his own coining. but he cannot escape his derivative or coined status; even taking into account the poems witticisms and ironies, what transpires in the fantasy world anxiously reflects and emulates the coining world from which it comes. In the fantasy economy, the dream of full possession, the poetic speaker usurps and subsumes but mimics, emulates the imprinting power of the female beloved and the model of monarchical coining and transforms it in a secondary realm. To make good on loss the poet replicates the very terms of the world he would escape, the terms of indearment, even while withdrawing from it. for Philip sidney, as astro-Phils iterative love declarations to and of stella are paranomastic signatures or, we could say, stele-ings: Stella; now she is namd, need more be said? and naming stella names the poet, so donnes poem also inscribes the lovers in a circular or rebounding discourse that points ultimately not to the ennabling pronomic object of amatory address but rather back to the poet himself, foregrounding poetic production.43 donnes political-elegiac economy is laid out again in the concluding section of the poem as the speaker gestures to reconcile and transcend the conflict between the coined affect-image that overloads and overpowers the heart and the fantasy-controlled, managed reality that would lighten or liberate it. after calling back what hes dismissedbut dearest heart [mine, indeared by your imprinting], and dearer image [what I love more than the concrete woman, dearer than what I can make in the second world, in managed reality] stay (D, 21; my emphases)a two-line memento mori intervenes as the really oppressive reason that cant be dreamt away: Though you stay 250 Terms of Indearment

here you passe too fast away: / for even at first lifes Taper is a snuffe (D, 2324). The speaker summons the Grim reaper momentarily but necessarily as a transcendentalizing digression from the crisis: coined or not, stay or go, youll go anyway. everyone will. mortal joys are simply dreamt as life is inevitably shortened; poems are fashioned to compensate for the loss; loss is their prerequisite. In the last couplet the speaker rhetorically resigns himself to the heavy imprinting of the first lines over no imprinting, and when he ultimately speaks for being grown / mad with much heart, then ideott with none (D, 2526) he registers an investment in the circular crisis of loss and poetic gain. Worldly imprinting, coining, exchange and circulation are painful and true; fantasy is the realm in which to escape is to replicate that world but, as well, to put another poem into it. To be made mad is, in effect, to be made poetically productive in elegiac complaints, in lyrically staging the agon of the early modern subject in a perpetual motion machine that ritually denies, even as it is subtended by loss. better to be an oppressed spirit who can produce poems than a spiritless unknown; better, that is, to remain in the world of coins and medals, of masculinizing crisis, of restrictive economy.
IV.

even more frequently than donne, shakespeares sonnets mix love and money in crossed discourses and thematize love and loss, often to conclude with containing gestures that seem to recapture order. but where donnes elegy 10 voices anxieties about coining as a powerful enrichment that threatens the subject while becoming the condition of poetic signification and seeks to contain a crisis of general economy of expenditure and loss in a relationship with a woman, shakespeares sonnet 31 seems willing to risk more. In a sonnet sequence long noted for experimentation and innovation, for its interest in debating sonnet convention, sonnet 31the first lines of which cross the economic and the amatorystands out as a poem seriously invested in loss. In its challenging paradoxes and, for some, its troubled resolution, it treats bodily and affective remains in a way that speaks to a cultural and historical problematic differently from the group of three (sonnets 29, 30, 31) in which it is traditionally placed. It opens up the space of general economy that is tenuously gestured toward in other sonnets and, in effect, refuses to close it:
Thy bosom is indeared with all hearts, Which I by lacking have supposed dead,

Barbara Correll

251

and there raignes Love and all Loves loving parts, and all those friends which I thought buried. How many a holy and obsequious teare Hath deare religious love stolne from mine eye, as interest of the dead, which now appear, but things removd that hidden there lie Thou art the grave where buried love doth live, Hung with the tropheis of my lovers gone, Who all their parts of me to thee did give; That due of many now is thine alone. Their images I lovd, I view in thee, and thou (all they) hast all the all of me.

In sonnet 29 (When in disgrace with fortune and mens eyes) the poets envious bootless cries against his misfortune, his outcast state (S, 2, 3) and his lack of position threaten to become a downward spiral, only reversed with ameliorating thoughts of the young man whose sweet love remembred such welth brings, / That then I skorne to change my state with kings (S, 1314). In sonnet 30 (When to the sessions of sweet silent thought) the poet speaks of the melancholic retention of old woes and waste, iteratively tell[s] oer / The sad account of fore-bemoaned moan, and places his repetitive grieving at grievances foregone in a seemingly limitless and endless cycle of debt, Which I new pay as if not paid before (S, 1011, 9, 12). The alliteration and assonance, the summoning and re-summoning dramatize a cycle of undischargeable obligation but, as in sonnet 29, recollected thoughts of the young man intervene like a deus ex machina to counteract the otherwise ceaseless expenditure of grief and mourning, refill my dear times waste, (S, 4) become the speakers affective debt relief: but if the while I think on these, dear friend, / all losses are restored, and sorrows end (S, 1314). In some ways these sonnets recall the gain-centered economy of the procreation sonnets and their preoccupation, as the young man is urged to follow the speakers advice and reproduce, with a calculableor perhaps incalculable legacy, the replication or copy of beauty (sonnet 4s acceptable audit [S, 12]) which acts to arrest, hold back or disavow death and loss even as it foregrounds them as an untranscendable mortal horizon. every compensatory claim, that is, recalls and underscores loss. In sonnet 55, verse gives life back to the young man in the form of a legible posterity (The living record of your memory [S, 8]), albeit one that, for fineman, gloomily memorializes a kind of living death.44 such restorative and reconstituting actions, persistent if not (pace fineman) morbid about a subtending mortality, may seem to echo donnes typical 252 Terms of Indearment

recuperative gestures, although, unlike donne, the young man sonnets do not rely on the sacrificial symbolic, heterosexual conflict and its threats to cultural masculinity, or an adjudicating mortality. In sonnet 31 shakespeare significantly departs from 29 and 30 in that he explores and ardently commits his speaker to loss. While contained by the still restrictive metrical and linear economy of the sonnet form, the poet faces up to the losses of 29 and 30, now with a crucial difference. The young man of sonnet 31 is first paradoxically figured as Loves mausoleum and credit union, accumulating deposits of the speakers tributes, initially, at least, returning to him, in what fineman dismissed as a thither-hither movement, sonnet 30s precious friends hid in deaths dateless night (S, 6).45 The poem, which quite hauntingly links the indeared young man to the speakers old loves lost to death, begins with and continues to work from that strategic ambivalence. as the precious repository of lost loves, the young man is a treasure-chest of hearts and parts: affects, qualities, and anatomy. To the last line, when that treasure is typographically deposited and entombed in the haunting parenthetical (all they), the young man is the deeply invested, eroticized site and grave site of life and death matters: and there raignes Love and all Loves loving parts, / and all those friends which I thought buried.46 dead and lost lovers fill the young mans bosoma body, a purse, a part like other loving partswith signifying weight that may briefly recall the oppressive coining of the speakers heart in donnes elegy 10. Here, however, the multiple hearts of the lost lovers, the multivalence of the young mans bosom, the unsettling yoking of life and death in the line Thou are the grave where buried love doth live, move the sonnet in another direction, toward the all so prominent in the poem: all hearts, all Loves loving parts, all those friends, all their parts, (all they), all the all. The economic language of the indeared bosom, the stolen tear, the interest of the dead, the due of many, is always imbricated with the poems affective and erotic investments. Helen Vendler, whose readings of the sonnets are resolutely, even polemically formalist, is sensitive to the persistent somber quality of sonnet 31 that refuses a resurrective resolution: even in the couplet, the mournful phrase Their images I loved weighs down, in its elegiac gravity, the phrase I view in thee, its resurrective counterpart.47 The sonnet contains what she classifies as a defecTIVe key Word: aLL (missing in Q2, which concerns absence and removal, rather than presence).48 sonnet 31s deliberate insistence on construing all Barbara Correll 253

through absence distinguishes the poem in bringing together the young man, the poet, and the dead and absent lovers. as the figure of the young mans bosom oscillates or crosses between loss and gain, a live bosom filled with dead remains, the speaker figures him returning less by way of compensation than always recalling the lost loves. The young man, the bosom friend, is indeared, that is, with the treasure of general economy, the record of loss. The other loves filling the young mans bosom are by turns at once present, thought lost, dead but not gone, in him; they appear but things removed. Love raignes in the bosom; the lost lovers are dead, gone, memory-images, neither revivified nor revivifying, that reappear only to underscore death, deaths, or losses. That the young man is paradoxically figured as the grave where buried love doth live recalls finemans negatively construed general economy of self-cancelling visuality. The poem situates the young man in a three-way circuit of interest-bearing (interest of thee) exchange: the remembering poet, standing between the dead-gone and their trophies (memorials, of him), bestows to the live-present young man the tribute owed to the dead-gone, the due of many. The ardor of the couplet suggests that the intense exchange is also strongly erotic: Their images I lovd, I view in thee, / and thou (all they) has all the all of me. What was concealed and re-found, lost and restored in 29 and 30 becomes an impassioned refusal of restoration, a long look at love and loss. The young mans bosom holds what the speaker has thought lacking, but what he gives back always places death and loss at the center. In the powerful conflating action of the poem, unsustained by others in the sequence, the grave of living love, the confusion of gain and loss, treasure and lack, are held in an uncompromising tension in which loss and absence remain powerfully present in the poem, with the ability to thwart any compensatory reading. The sonnet voices no stoic or tragic resignation to loss but rather an embrace of it. The adage, In love is no lack, becomes, in sonnet 31, In love is all loss. The young man is the container, the record, reminder and remainder of loss; he replays rather than repays it. contrary to the present-absent, hither-thither relationship to the young man that fineman finds an immobilizing and self-centered chiasmicized withinness, in sonnet 31 it seems more appropriate to speak of a thither-hither-thither movement toward loss.49 The poem pushes past the melancholy, first undischargeable but finally recuperable loss in sonnets 29 and 30, and, in an extravagantly discharged divestment, gives loss center stage.50 254 Terms of Indearment

shershows work on batailles general economy and marxist theory proposes a reading of general economy not only as a model for a social community of generosity and sharingin shershows very witty paranomasia, sinking as pitching inbut as an epistemological challenge to restrictive knowledge systems (theoretical economies) that claim to contain and control wasteful indeterminacies, in effect disclosing the primacy of waste and expenditureand, finally, communitythat they must repeatedly encompass and suppress.51 In his reading of bataille and Jean-Luc nancy, shershow argues for general economys radical epistemological and political capacitiesgeneral economic dpense as the other of restricted economys la pens.52 not surprisingly, he says nothing about literature or poetry, and attempting an argument here for lyric poetrys direct political effects would be strained indeed. but as invested practices or cultural labors that address expenditure and loss, that imagine (in the case of sonnet 31) relations of extravagant generosity and what bataille called interest in considerable losses, perhaps poetic forms like the sonnet are of interest.53 and if radically other epistemologies are linked to social structures, if thinking differently means an ability to imagine other social arrangements, beginning with the most intimate or social-erotic ones, then poetry is, as donne writes in the famous valedictory poem of the tears shed and coined by lovers at parting, always an emblem of more; or, as my epigraph from bataille states, much, much less. In their poetic strategies of mixed discourses and the estranging meanings that ensue from them, donne and shakespeare signal an awareness of the alienating and plurally signifying potential of early modern market and material culture, and insofar as that awareness can be read into the poems they perform or enable the work of social critique. Like donnes elegy 10, images in shakespeares sonnet 31 indear the object and inscribe the author. The value-bearing image, like the character on a coin, is a letter of exchange that sets signs in unarrestable motion. The coined speaker in donne, the indeared bosom in shakespeare are constitutive poetic metaphors moving between financial and affective signification. Their mixing and exchanging is not naturalized but rather foregrounded as the lyric situation in which the two poets not only work with but places them in shifting and oscillating relations. In part by means of the restricted economy of form, in part by masterful figurative techniques, donne states a struggle to impose order on the general economy of plural signification in which expenditure, nonproductive excess, and loss are as unavoidable as they are linked Barbara Correll 255

to cultural masculinity. If the goal for donne is a restricted economy of mastery, the poems repeatedly set signification in unarrestable movement and leave the speaker to confrontor incorporateand preserve the loss that is essential for poetic production. He must make good (poetry) on loss, and to compose the good poems he must have the loss. sonnet 31s concern for love, lyric, and economics offers another critical reflection on amatory and economic crossing, one with an interest in facing or even celebrating considerable loss. The lyric poetry of shakespeare and donne that deals with money and the economic in social and affective arenas crosses or imbricates amatory and economic discourses to construct early modern reflections on the power of money and exchange, reflections that address the links between monetary practices on the one hand and subject construction, social and sexual relationships on the other. It is perhaps the point of crossing that lends such work its special social-erotic charge; my suggestion here, however, is that the category of the economic, and not merely the restrictive economic, is also key to reading that charged textual atmosphere. Cornell University
noTes earlier versions of this work were presented at shakespeare association of america seminars organized by karen newman and Linda Woodbridge, respectively, and at an International association of Philosophy and Literature session on chiasmus organized by scott newstok. I thank them, richard rambuss, Graham Hamill, scott shershow, Henry Turner, and other seminar members for their comments and suggestions. I also want to acknowledge Lytle shaw, who first got me thinking about elegiac economies. 1 George bataille, The notion of expenditure, in his Visions of Excess: Selected Writings, 19271939, trans. allan stoekl and others (minneapolis: Univ. of minnesota Press, 1985), 120. 2 The seminal texts here are stephen Greenblatt, Renaissance Self-Fashioning from More to Shakespeare (chicago: Univ. of chicago Press, 1980); arthur marotti, Love is not love: elizabethan sonnet sequences and the social order, ELH 49 (1982): 396428; and richard Helgerson, Self-Crowned Laureates: Spenser, Jonson, Milton and the Literary System (berkeley: Univ. of california Press, 1983). 3 see neal dolan, shylock in Love: economic metaphors in shakespeares sonnets, Raritan: A Quarterly Review 22.2 (2002): 2651; and Peter c. Herman, Whats the Use? or, The Problematic of economy in shakespeares Procreation sonnets, in Shakespeares Sonnets: New Essays, ed. James schiffer (new york: Garland, 1999), 26383. The new economic criticism, at least as described in The New Economic Criticism: Studies at the Intersection of Literature and Economics (ed. martha Woodmansee and mark osteen [London: routledge, 1999]), adheres to economic systematicity and, in its polemical Introduction, excludes poststructuralist work as mere formalism (Woodmansee and osteen, 6). even the attention of Jody Greene (you must eat men:

256

Terms of Indearment

The sodomitic economy of renaissance Patronage, GLQ 1 [1994]: 16397) and Will fischer (Queer money, ELH 66 [1999]: 123) to the very important relationships between sodomy and the economic focuses on the role of transgression and illicit practices or social disorder that subtend order and the normative and doesnt manage to undermine the dialectic of order and transgression or see a clear link between the sodomitic and general economy. Though fischer tentatively cites Jacques derridas treatment of bataille in from restricted to General economy, such work retains the discursive boundaries of the (restrictive) economic even as they point toward the indeterminate signification introduced by the sodomitic or even more by the category of queerness. The notable exception to the trend of restrictive economic interpretation is richard Halpern (The Poetics of Primitive Accumulation: English Renaissance Culture and the Genealogy of Capital [Ithaca: cornell Univ. Press, 1991]), who calls for a rethinking of the economic and whose reading of King Lear locates the working of general economic dpense in the tragedy. Though Halperns book is quoted and cited frequently, that essential theoretical part of his pathbreaking work seems routinely passed over. 4 bataille, The Accursed Share: An Essay on General Economy, trans. robert Hurley, 2 vol. (new york: Zone books, 1991), 1:38. 5 see Jacques derrida, from restricted to General economy: a Hegelianism without reserve, in his Writing and Difference, trans. alan bass (chicago: Univ. of chicago Press, 1978), 25177; and scott shershow, The Work and the Gift (chicago: Univ. of chicago Press, 2005), esp. 8595 and 10714. although I know that he would be amused by the formulation, I am incalculably indebted to shershows discussion of bataille and general economy. The apparently automatic dismissal of a true gift radically opposed to exchange is a routine and unexamined claim, even a sort of mantra, in much anthropological work and in early modern cultural studies. mary douglass introduction to the 1990 edition of mauss denies the possibility or historical existence of a pure gift; see douglas, introduction to The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies, by mauss, trans. W. d. Hals (new york: norton, 1990), viiviii. for Jody Greene, the gift in a patronage system is an empty cultural fiction (162), but compare maurice Godelier, The Enigma of the Gift, trans. nora scott (chicago: Univ. of chicago Press, 1999); and alan d. schrift, Introduction: Why Gift? in The Logic of the Gift: Toward an Ethic of Generosity, ed. schrift (new york: routledge, 1997), 120. 6 bataille, notion of expenditure, 118. see also shershows summary of batailles theory (The Work and the Gift, 1001). 7 according to bataille, It is true that the word poetry can only be appropriately applied to an extremely rare residue of what it commonly signifies and that, without a preliminary reduction, the worst confusions could result. . . . It is easier to indicate that, for the rare human beings who have this element at their disposal, poetic expenditure ceases to be symbolic in its consequences; thus, to a certain extent, the function of representation engages the very life of the one who assumes it. It condemns him to the most disappointing forms of activity, to misery, to despair, to the pursuit of inconsistent shadows that provide nothing but vertigo or rage, the poet frequently can use words only for his own loss; he is often forced to choose between the destiny of a reprobate, who is as profoundly separated from society as dejecta are from apparent life, and a renunciation whose price is a

Barbara Correll

257

mediocre activity, subordinated to vulgar and superficial needs. (notion of expenditure, 120) needless to say, donnes well-documented personal vicissitudes would not qualify him as sacrificial poet for bataille. 8 a recent attempt to reconsider love in the sonnets appears in david schalkwyk, Love and service in Twelfth Night and the sonnets, SQ 56 (2005): 76108. schalkwyk takes issue with what he sees as an obsession with power in shakespeare criticism, and he rightly calls for a more nuanced analysis of affective and power relations to include evidence of intimacy and reciprocity, but his own mitigating argument for taking account of love and the erotic in early modern service relations, while quite admirable, seems actually to re-instantiate foucaults work on subjects and power flows in which coercion and consent can work quite fluidly. 9 William shakespeare, sonnet 31, in Shakespeares Sonnets, ed. stephen booth (new Haven: yale Univ. Press, 1977), 1. Hereafter abbreviated S and cited parenthetically by line number, except when quoted in full. see booths glosses to this sonnet: In company with endeard two other meanings [of bosom] also pertain: bosom was used as we use pocket, to indicate the place where money is carried (183). The oed definitions of indear (indeere, endear, endeere, endeare) include: To render costly or most costly; to enhance the price of; To enhance the value of; to render precious or attractive (oed, s.v. indear, def. 1, 2, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50074900 [accessed 18 January 2007]). I have, for reasons that I discuss below, used the Quartos spelling and punctuation, provided in booth, in place of booths selective modernizations. 10 all references to donnes poems will be to John donne, The Elegies and The Songs and Sonnets, ed. Helen Gardner (oxford: clarendon Press, 1965). spelling and punctuation are from the 1633 edition. Hereafter abbreviated D and cited parenthetically by line number. 11 Halpern, 242, 254; William shakespeare, King Lear, in The Norton Shakespeare, ed. stephen Greenblatt and others (new york: W. W. norton, 1997), act 3, scene 4, lines 9596. 12 Halpern, 242, 269. 13 Pierre bourdieu defines symbolic capital in The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature, ed. randall Johnson (new york: columbia Univ. Press, 1993), 75. see also John Guillory, Cultural Capital: The Problem of Literary Canon Formation (chicago: Univ. of chicago Press, 1993). 14 Jean-Joseph Goux, monetary economy and Idealist Philosophy, in his Symbolic Economies: After Freud and Marx, trans. Jennifer Gage (Ithaca: cornell Univ. Press, 1990): The monetary metaphor that haunts discussions of languagenot in accidental poetic incursions but quite coherently, in the site of substitutionsseems to betray an awareness, as yet veiled and embryonic, of the correspondence between the mode of economic exchange and the mode of signifying exchange (96; my emphasis). for Goux the correspondence is homologous, isomorphic; but I would like to entertain the question of how the lyric poets, donne and shakespeare, make correspondence more difficult, how it is represented and articulated in the lyric text. 15 see karl marx, Contribution to a Critique of Political Economy, in his Selected Works (moscow: Progress Publishers, 1966): Political economy begins with commodities, begins from the moment when products are exchanged for one anotherwhether by individuals or by primitive communities. The product that appears in exchange is a commodity. It is, however, a commodity solely because a relation between

258

Terms of Indearment

two persons or communities attaches to the thing, the product, the relation between producer and consumer who are here no longer united in the same person. . . . [e]conomics deals not with things but with relations between persons, and, in the last resort, between classes; these relations are, however, always attached to things and appear as things. (514) It is possible to read marxs analysis as a capsule comparison between the empiricism and investment in objects in material culture studies and a more critical cultural materialism. 16 In addition to moral allegories such as William Langlands Lady mede, edmund spensers mammon, malbecco, and belphoebe, see also richard barnfields ironic Encomion to Lady Pecunia: or The Praise of Money, in The Complete Poems, ed. George klawitter (London, Toronto: susquehanna Univ. Press, 1990), 149243. ben Jonson includes a Lady Pecunia in Bartholomew Fair. John carey (donne and coins, in his English Renaissance Studies Presented to Dame Helen Gardener in honour of her Seventieth Birthday [oxford: clarendon Press, 1980], 15163) accumulates references to coins in donnes poetry and prose and concludes that they provide a key to the poets intellectual interests and concerns. coburn freer (John donne and elizabethan economic Theory, Criticism: A Quarterly for Literature and the Arts 38 [1996]: 497520) describes donnes employment by sir Thomas edgerton, elizabeth Is Lord Treasurer and states that donne had sophisticated knowledge of contemporary economic practices and ideas. 17 Jean-christophe agnew, Worlds Apart: The Theater and the Market in AngloAmerican Thought, 15501750 (cambridge: cambridge Univ. Press, 1986), 10, 11, 12. compare barbara bowens call to [take] seriously the proposition that the literature produced at the period of transition to capitalism would bear, in addition to the deep scars of consciousness that capitalism still delivers, some openings for resistance to its already visible oppressions, some imagining of collective agency (The rape of Jesus: aemilia Lanyers Lucrece, in schiffer, ed., Shakespeares Sonnets, 105). 18 see Theodor adorno, Lyric Poetry and society, trans. bruce mayo, Telos 20 (1974): social ideas should not be brought to works from without but should, instead, be created out of the complete organized view of things present in the works themselves. . . . [n]othing but what is in the works, and belongs to their own particular forms, provides a legitimate ground for ascertaining what the content of the worksthe things which have been raised into poetryrepresents in a social way (57). 19 adorno, 57. see Herman for the contrasting view that economic metaphors in the sonnets correspond to restrictive sonnet form. 20 George Puttenham, The Arte of English Poesie, ed. Gladys doidge Willcock and alice Walker (cambridge: cambridge Univ. Press, 1936), 150. The poem appears in richard Tottels Songes and sonettes written by the right honorable Lorde Henry Haward Earle of Surrey and other (London, 1557). 21 Puttenham, 190. 22 Puttenham, 191; my emphases. 23 desiderius erasmus, Adagia in Latine and English (n.p.: 1621), 29. booth sees the proverb as the foundation of sonnets 30 and 31, which are, in his interpretation, elaborately metaphysical exempla for the homely proverb (181). 24 Joel fineman, Shakespeares Perjured Eye: The Invention of Poetic Subjectivity in the Sonnets (berkeley: Univ. of california Press, 1986), 157. 25 fineman, 158. 26 fineman, 248.

Barbara Correll

259

27 Jonathan Goldberg, Sodometries: Renaissance Texts/Modern Sexualities (stanford: stanford Univ. Press, 1992), 157n. In Idols of the Marketplace: Idolatry and Commodity Fetishism in English Literature, 15801680 (new york: Palgrave, 2001), david Hawkes reads the sonnets in the context of aristotelian and early modern views of usury and sodomy as sins against nature. The poet of the Sonnets, he states, commits the sins of both antonio and shylock and suffers their penalty (114). claiming that in representing natural heterosexual reproduction as usurious, the poet perverts the logic of the syllogistic link between usury and sodomy; that is, in de-privileging heterosexual reproduction (as usurious) the poet de-stigmatizes the sodomitic in the sonnets. Thus the sonnets produce a witty vindication of homoerotic desire (Hawkes, 105). The problem with this argument is not only that Hawkes seems to have too local a notion of usury and shakespeares puns on it (since these include use as sexual pleasure or access to something for profit or pleasure), it is that the poet of the sonnetslike antonio in Merchant of Venicelacks a stigmatizing attitude toward same-sex love and never apologizes for his ardor as sodomitic. While the poet makes masturbation an issue (for example, sonnets 1, 4, 6, 9), vindication for a sin against nature is not his agenda. 28 see margreta deGrazia, The scandal of shakespeares sonnets, Shakespeare Survey 46 (1993): 3549. The real scandal for deGrazia is racial: the threat of miscegenation. 29 In any case, finemans project is far ahead of Harold blooms Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human (new york: riverhead books, 1998). 30 Thomas m. Greene, Pitiful thrivers: failed Husbandry in the sonnets, in Shakespeare and the Question of Theory, ed. Patricia Parker and Geoffrey Hartman (London: methuen, 1985), 231, 232. 31 Thomas Greene, 234, 235. 32 Thomas Greene, 234. 33 Thomas Greene, 241. 34 see batailles refusal of the compensatory in poetry for the author put to death by his work: The profound importance of poetry is of the sacrifice of words, of images, and by virtue of the misery of this sacrifice . . . , it causes a slipping from impotent sacrifice of objects to that of the subject (Inner Experience, trans. Leslie anne bolat [albany: sUny Press, 1988], 208). 35 Thomas Greene, 24344. 36 If there is one donne poem that travels most boldly and deliberately toward the precipice of a general economy, however, it is the female voiced sapho to Philaenis, but even in that controversial elegy the poet must finally re-summon sexual difference in his ventriloquized speaker. see my symbolic economies and Zero-sum erotics: donnes sapho to Philaenis, ELH 62 (1995): 487507. 37 see my chiasmus and commodificatio: crossing Tropes and conditions in donnes elegy 11, The bracelet, Exemplaria 11 (1999): 14365. 38 In contrast, in donnes To mr Tilman after he had taken orders, the ordained man is figured as newly coining Gods substance (The Elegies, 16) and is seen empowered and enriched by his changed status. Where a relationship with a woman threatens to diminish a man, a relationship with God enhances the male subject with christs new stamp (The Elegies, 18). 39 Gardner sees Leone ebreos 15011502 dialogue, Diologhi damore (n.p.: 1535), as donnes source for the poem; see Gardner, 181.

260

Terms of Indearment

40 Gardner is unimpressed by the structuring figures of the medal and the coin, even in her gloss; see Gardner, 182. on the renaissance medal as commemorative token or as a coin no longer circulating, see George Hill and Graham Pollard, Medals of the Renaissance, rev. ed. (London: british museum Publications, 1978); and stephen k. scher, curator and ed., The Currency of Fame: Portrait Medals of the Renaissance (new york: H. n. abrams in association with frick collection, 1994). 41 In elegy 11, The bracelet, the gold coins or angels are repeatedly given religioustalismanic and more literal, though loaded, monetary valences. 42 compare another characteristically donnean chiasmus in The sun rising: sheis all states, and all Princes I, / nothing else is (The Elegies and The Songs and Sonnets, 2122). 43 Philip sidney, Astrophil and Stella, in Sir Philip Sidney: The Major Works, ed. katherine duncan-Jones (oxford: oxford Univ. Press, 2002), sonnet 16, line 12. 44 fineman, 157. 45 fineman, 248. 46 booth alludes to several phrases, words, and statements that have unexploited potential for sexual meaning . . . and that, being in one anothers company, give the poem a persistent though muted and casual undercurrent of sexual innuendo (18384). for those who find the poem highly erotically charged, and poignantly so, it is all but impossible to read it un-anachronistically in the time of aIds, and this reading that resonates with contemporary issues will be particularly aware of a certain exorbitant and elegiac element, arguably part of the social-erotics of general economy. 47 Helen Vendler, The Art of Shakespeares Sonnets (cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1997), 170. Vendler sees christian resurrection as providing the foundation for the sonnet: The reassembling of parts into wholes (bones into bodies) at the general resurrection is the conceit (parts / all the all) on which the poem is founded, as the resurrection of christ is the doctrine on which in christian literature, resurrection n any other form is based (170), and she is adamantly against reading any of the sonnets in the realm of the social (or, for that matter the social-erotic), aside from acknowledging that lyric language in any given epoch draws on all available sociolects (2). 48 Vendler, 171. 49 fineman, 248. 50 one way to read the poems difficulties is by looking to a dramatic analogue: antonios response to bassanios loan request in The Merchant of Venice (in shakespeare, The Norton Shakespeare), a play which crosses amatory-erotic and economic discourses and in which nearly every affective relationship or declaration is mediated by economics. clearly knowing the likelihood of being repaid, antonio, later called bassanios bosom lover by Portia (act 3, scene 2, line 17), offers my purse, my person, my extremest means (1.1.138) to a bassanio he knows will not return it thus showing love to be an unproductive expenditure, a self-destructive extravagance or dpense that defies la pense of calculated gain seen in Portias full sum of me speech (3.2.14974). antonios debt-ridden bosom is bared to shylock, also dedicated, at least at this significant moment, to sacrifice; that is, he knows, or he must know that he can claim but not collect the forfeit, and, for affective rather than (restricted) economic reasons, he refuses the inflated, more than generous compensation offered for the unpaid debt. as in sonnet 31, for both characters erotically inflected affect, death, and great loss are intertwined. compare the now classical study of economic and affective language in the play, marc shell, The Wether and the ewe: Verbal Usury in The Merchant of Venice, in his Money, Language and Thought: Literary and Philosophical Economies

Barbara Correll

261

from the Medieval to the Modern Era (berkeley: Univ. of california Press, 1982), 4783. shells structural analysis takes no account of general economy, but one could argue that the early modern juridical term purse and person is given new meaning in the play (oed, s.v. purse, phrase 3, http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50193046 [accessed 4 march 2008]). 51 shershow, of sinking: marxism and the General economy, Critical Inquiry 27 (2001): 492. 52 shershow, The Work and the Gift, 108. 53 bataille, notion of expenditure, 117.

262

Terms of Indearment