Obscenity and Orientalism: How Burton’s Arabian Nights Challenged the Victorian Stance on Sexuality
Sir Richard Burton, arguably the most controversial translator of The Arabian Nights, was very much, in his own way, an advocate for women’s sexuality — within the cultural constraints of his place and time. While Burton’s particular translation is questionable from a modern perspective, Burton can still be considered especially progressive for his time. According to Colette Colligan's 2002 essay “'Esoteric Pornography,' Sir Richard Burton's Arabian Nights and the Origins of Pornography,” Burton’s translation was “shockingly different” from anything the English people had seen before, creating a rift in the standards of social propriety of Victorian England. Colligan explains, “When Burton first published his translation of the Arabian Nights in 1885, it outraged the English literary community” (p. 31). She writes of its shocking lewdness:
Although the Arabian Nights already possessed exotic and sexual appeal in England before Burton’s translation, his translation emphasized its Arab origin and sexual content. With its focus on the sordid sexuality of the Arabs, Burton’s translation was estranging to the English reader who was used to chastened tales of tender English Orientalism… His translation violently disrupted the English cultural presentation of the Arabian Nights — to such an extent that it was branded ‘pornographic’ (p. 33).
Within the texts Colligan references to assert these claims, there is the story of “The Porter and the Three Ladies of Baghdad." She writes: “Long familiar tales from the nursery and schoolroom, like that of the Baghdad Porter, now included awful scenes of sexual violence” (p. 32). In one excerpt, the Porter and the women engage in sadistic foreplay, further exemplifying the divergence from its previously child-friendly content. After drinking plenty of wine, things escalate.
[T]he portress stood up and doffed her clothes till she was mother naked… Then she came up out of the cistern and throwing herself on the Porter's lap said, ‘O my lord, O my love, what callest thou this article?’ pointing to her slit, her solution of continuity. ‘I call that thy cleft,’ quoth the Porter, and she rejoined, ‘Wah! wah, art thou not ashamed to use such a word?’ and she caught him by the collar and soundly cuffed him. Said he again, ‘Thy womb, thy vulva;’ and she struck him a second slap crying, ‘O fie, O fie, this is another ugly word; is here no shame in thee?’ Quoth he, ‘Thy coynte;’ and she cried, ‘O thou! art wholly destitute of modesty?’ and thumped and bashed him.
In this particular passage, the women are both sexually assertive with (and authoritatively reproachful of) their male guest. They employ bawdy and disparaging language, as well as physical punishment, in a very striking reversal of gender power dynamics. The remainder of the story contains similarly aggressive and overtly sexual anecdotes. Upon reading Burton’s translation of this particular story, it is difficult for one to imagine an earlier version that was tame enough to be well-received by prudish Victorian Englishmen, let alone be read to their young children.
Upon reading Burton’s translation of this particular story, it is difficult for one to imagine an earlier version that was tame enough to be well-received by prudish Victorian Englishmen, let alone be read to their young children.
As Colligan notes, the very first public literary debate in England regarding pornography stemmed from the publication of Burton’s translation of Arabian Nights. Critics accused Burton of trying to impose an immoral ideology onto society, although that was not his intention. His primary purpose in publishing the work was to “hold a mirror” to the sexual prudery and hypocrisy that defined the Victorian era. Despite all his scholarly research and many attempts to provide rationale which supported his work, critics tore at it mercilessly. Editor John Morley of the Pall Mall Gazette condemned Burton’s work because it supposedly “imported” Arab sexual perversion to the West (Colligan, p. 39). Another particularly critical review of Burton’s translation, penned by Stanley Lane-Poole for The Edinburgh Review, slammed Burton’s work as “unreadable” while denouncing its “varied collection of abominations” as being an “ocean of filth,” (Colligan, p. 43).
Burton’s many attempts to justify his work were unsuccessful. He included extensive footnotes that sought to bring the reader a deeper understanding of esoteric Arab customs and sexual behaviors. Such notes served as an attempt to make the texts appear more culturally informative and comparative. Jorge Luis Borges notes in his essay, “The Translators of The Thousand and One Nights,” “Burton abounded in explanatory notes on "the manners and customs of Muslim men,’” (p. 100). However, Edward Lane, an Orientalist and an earlier, more “family-friendly” translator of Arabian Nights, had already included footnotes clarifying facets of Arab culture extensively. These footnotes covered everything from “[E]veryday customs, religious practices, architecture, references to history or to the Koran, games, arts, mythology.” This left Burton with the task of covering all things erotic, which, to paraphrase Borges, he was more than “rampantly capable” of doing. Burton had previously published a translation of The Kama Sutra, as well as a detailed personal account of Bengal brothels.
Burton also included a foreword which summarized his intent to use the example of the “Other” to force English society to reflect on itself. Colligan notes: “Burton begins his Foreword by defending the sexual content of his work on the grounds of cultural difference, suggesting that Arabs are more straightforward than the English and juxtaposing Arab sexual honesty with European sexual hypocrisy,” (p. 36). He explains:
My motive was to supply travellers with an organ which would rescue their observations from the outer darkness of manuscript, and print their curious information on social and sexual matters out of place in the popular book intended for the Nipptisch and indeed better kept from public view. But, hardly had we begun when ‘Respectability,’ that whited sepulchre full of all uncleanness, rose up against us. ‘Propriety’ cried us down with her brazen blatant voice, and the weak kneed brethren fell away. Yet the organ was much wanted and is wanted still. (The Translator’s Foreword, Burton).
One could surmise that Burton’s intention in eroticizing the original narrative was, in a sense, a sort of primitive feminist endeavor — albeit one undoubtedly formulated within a patriarchal mindset. From a modern perspective, one can easily find error in his approach, but for his time, Burton was extremely progressive. Burton believed that the Victorian way of repressing and denying people’s, particularly women’s, natural sexual impulses was, in fact, an underlying disease of sorts to English society. He believed Arabic culture was more in tune with the bodily pleasures of women, and as such, had a more content and harmonious society overall. Kennedy Dane writes in his essay, “‘Captain Burton's Oriental Muck Heap’: The Book of the Thousand Nights and the Uses of Orientalism”: “[Burton’s] translation of the Nights was intended to provide male readers with the insights of the Orient into the physical woman, to inform them of the erotic responsibilities they were obliged to shoulder in their relations with the opposite sex..." (p. 332).
One could surmise that Burton’s intention in eroticizing the original narrative was, in a sense, a sort of primitive feminist endeavor — albeit one undoubtedly formulated within a patriarchal mindset.
Despite his purposeful translation, which sought to encourage men to focus on their female partners’ sexual desires and needs, such does not absolve him of being deemed sexist or racist, evidenced by his patriarchal and stereotypical depictions of “Oriental” characters. But, I must reiterate, he was still quite radical for his time.
Even Colette Colligan, who is critical of Burton’s instigation of the society-wide debate on pornography by means of “[A]ppropriation of Arab texts and through racist assumptions of Arab sexuality…” (p. 53). Despite Colligan’s distaste for Burton’s manipulation of the Orientalist fantasy of the exotic “Other,” she also cedes that it serves, at least, to address the important issue of sexuality. Colligan urges that Burton’s work not be dismissed altogether, as it was demonstrative of “[H]ow English sexuality found expression through a combination of racist, imperialist, and reverent attitudes toward Arab literature and culture,” (p. 53-54). She further asserts: “Burton’s translation is a creative production that discloses more about English sexual preoccupations than it does about Arab sexuality” (p. 34).
It is also essential to make a note of the fact that there existed other, less obvious underlying reasons for Burton’s radically different translation of Arabian Nights. Burton sought to further his reputation as an esteemed “Arabist” and Orientalist, but he wanted to do it in a way that made him stand out from his predecessors. Ultimately, Burton sought to achieve undeniably unique and prestigious notoriety within the literary world.
Edward Lane, Burton’s predecessor in translating the Arabian Nights tales, and his version of the texts were very popular and well-received. Lane omitted the majority of the blatantly violent or sexual excerpts, opting instead to write in supplemental material. Borges notes:
[Lane] prefers an alarmed chorus of notes in a cramped supplementary volume, which murmur things like: I shall overlook an episode of the most reprehensible sort; I suppress a repugnant explanation; Here, a line far too coarse for translation; I must of necessity suppress the other anecdote; Hereafter, a series of omissions; Here, the story of the slave Bujait, wholly inappropriate for translation. Mutilation does not exclude death: some tales are rejected in their entirety ‘because they cannot be purified without destruction.’ This responsible and total repudiation does not strike me as illogical: what I condemn is the Puritan subterfuge (p. 94).
Lane was well-versed and thoroughly educated in Arab culture, having lived for five years in Cairo. During this period, he lived "[A]lmost exclusively among Muslims, speaking and listening to their language, conforming to their customs with the greatest care, and received by all of them as an equal,” (Borges, p. 94). Borges makes a point to note that despite Lane’s deep immersion in Arab culture, he never lost touch with his European roots. His translation was accurately written but heavily censored so that it would be befitting to the purist Victorian standards of his homeland. Lane’s “purifying” of the less chaste content was appreciated by prudish English readers, who found his syntax “[D]elightful, as befits the refined parlor table,” (Borges, p. 95).
Burton, too, was deeply educated in Arab culture. However, he did not care to conform his writing to please the largely purist English base of readers, as Lane had done. Burton sought to publish an astonishingly different take on the beloved tales. In the conclusion of his foreword, Burton seeks to assert his knowledge, while simultaneously disparaging Lane — and, by extension, Lane’s self-appointment as a censor to his readers’ so-called moral sense and sensibilities. He writes:
I here end these desultory but necessary details to address the reader in a few final words. He will not think lightly of my work when I repeat to him that with the aid of my annotations supplementing Lane's, the student will readily and pleasantly learn more of the Moslem's manners and customs, laws and religion than is known to the average Orientalist; and, if my labours induce him to attack the text of The Nights he will become master of much more Arabic than the ordinary Arab owns (The Translator’s Forward, Burton).
Burton was “[E]ager to shock the public and boast of his work’s difference from previous translations” (Colligan, p. 35). In this endeavor, he was undoubtedly successful. Jorge Luis Borges enthusiastically praises Burton’s skill as a writer and triumph in stirring up significant societal debates, describing him as “legendary.” Borges says of Burton’s work, “[I]t has a preordained prestige with which no other Arabist has ever been able to compete. The attractions of the forbidden are rightfully his” (p. 98).
Altogether, Burton was competent in achieving the goals he sought out to accomplish with his radically fresh take on Arabian Nights. His style of translation remains unmatched in its provocation. He gained notoriety and scholarly acclaim, despite evoking much criticism, to such an extent that he was awarded knighthood in 1886. Most importantly, though, was how he deliberately defied the strict purist standards and attitudes of Victorian England, and thereby, crucially, provided an early platform for an open discussion on sexual attitudes and sexuality as a whole.
His style of translation remains unmatched in its provocation.
In a manner with which I wholeheartedly agree, Kennedy Dane eloquently concludes the value of Sir Richard Burton’s work, as well as his ultimate contribution to society:
The triumph of Burton's Nights can be viewed from several vantage points. It can be seen as evidence of the crumbling of a high-Victorian moral consensus. Its inquiry into the varieties of sexual desire is the most visible sign of this development. Burton gave early expression to the view that Victorianism carried a heavy psychological cost for its practitioners. His position was in many respects a precursor of the modernist challenges that arose at the fin de siècle… His orientalism was intended above all to offer a mirror to his own society, exposing its various imperfections to itself. It was indeed because of his orientalist preoccupation with difference that Burton was able to address the issue of sexual difference as frankly and fully as he did (p. 338-339).
By Devon Gibbons
llustrations done in collaboration with the New Media Artspace at Baruch College. The New Media Artspace is a teaching exhibition space in the Department of Fine and Performing Arts at Baruch College, CUNY. Housed in the Newman Library, the New Media Artspace showcases curated experimental media and interdisciplinary artworks by international artists, students, alumni, and faculty. Special thanks to docent Kezia Velista for creating artwork for this piece.
Check the New Media Artspace out at http://www.newmediartspace.info/