Introduction to the Special Issue “The Body and Sexuality”：Examining the Existing and Exploring the Possible Alternatives in Comparative Study
Within the field of literary studies，vibrantconversations continue to arise around various cultural，social，and political discourses that are forever competing with one another to define sexuality，body，and sex，and to prescribe norms as well as define taboos. However，the body and sex as biological and physical entities are by nature reticent and perennially resist discourses. As a result，the cultural phenomena of the body and sexuality，as expressed and revealed in literary and cultural texts，display rich complexities as well as intense contestations.
This special issue on the body and sexuality includes six articles that approach the body and sexuality in different languages and unfold the multiplicity of meaning embodied in literary texts and cultural materials. Leihua Weng's “Xiushen as Self-Cultivation in The Extended Meaning of the Great Learning” takes the Greek concept of the care of the self as a comparandum and discusses the self-other relationship within the Neo-Confucian philosophical and political notion of self-cultivation as expressed in a work of commentary from the Song Dynasty of thirteenth-century China. While Weng's article focuses on how the notion of the body is co-opted in and reinforced through state ideology，Eileen Vickery's “Entrepreneurial Masculinity and the New Misogyny” looks at contemporary Chinese novels and argues that patriarchal concepts of the body and sexuality continue their restricting and suppressive forces over present-day women in the new economic and social environments of twenty-first century China.
However，do discourses of the body and sexuality，once normalized and even institutionalized，remain dominant and rule out other voices？To this question，articles in this special issue provide diverse responses. Tyler Travillian's “Credere quis possit？Falcem subripuere：An Alternative Reading of the Carmina Priapea” addresses how a Latin text，as in the Carmina Priapea，functions in two ways in respect to the dominant power：on the surface level it supports the prevailing ideology，while at the same time undermining that ideology and reacting upon it by playing on deviant social codes. Travillian's literary analysis shows that Roman sexuality，with all of its deviances，cannot be reduced to one single system. In his article “Incestuous Desires：Man's Feminine Soul in Kabuki and Tanizaki，” Seigo Nakao explores Kabuki plays in the nineteenth century and works by Tanizaki Junichiro in the twentieth century，and postulates that，in a society of extreme patriarchy，the suppressed longing for matriarchy in men sometimes takes the form of “incest.” Taking another direction，Bennett Fu in his “A Nosegay of Chinese Lilies：Ethno-Sexual Bending/Bonding in Sui Sin Far's Short Stories” discusses how Chinese North American writer Edith Maude Easton（1865-1914）challenges the gender imperatives of her time by deploying transgressive ethno sexual politics and poetics in her story writing. Both Nakao and Fu approach the transgressive nature of sexuality in the cultural context of Japan and North America of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries，paying particular attention to the tension and incongruity between femininity and dominant socio-cultural discourses and how the former challenges，revises，and deconstructs the latter. Frédéric-Charles Baitinger takes the discussion of the feminine onto a more theoretical level. In his “‘To Believe Weeping：’ Hélène Cixous：Writing the Feminine with Lacan，Bataille，and Derrida，” Baitinger discusses how the postmodern feminist theorist Cixous resourcefully and productively makes use of the theories of Bataille and Derrida on the definition of the feminine，and departs from Lacan's definition that is based on a more negative relationship to the Phallus.
In all these articles，postmodern theories，especially theories of Michel Foucault，weigh heavily. For instance，the discussion on sex and social power structure in Travillian's article on Roman sexuality is conducted from a Foucauldian perspective，though not explicitly stated in his article. And Nakao，Fu，and Vickery also use Foucault's theories or concepts in their textual analysis of Japanese，American Chinese，and Chinese literatures. Weng's examination of the Neo-Confucian self-cultivation is carried out in a comparison with Foucault's research on the Greek care of the self.
In addition to a unique perspective and a set of vocabulary，in what other ways can we draw upon Foucault's research？If sexuality is largely constructed of social and cultural discourses，those we discuss and examine in our respective literary research，then through our work do we each simply add another layer of discourse to the existing ones？Could there be any other purposes in our examination of socio-cultural discourses of sexuality？I hope this special issue and its articles covering diverse discussion topics as a project of comparative study will transmit the message that，by delineating and examining these discourses we can also explore possibilities that were not developed in reality but that could still reveal themselves to us through our examinations of the existing discourses.
According to Foucauldian theories，discourse goes with power. When we describe a cultural and social phenomenon，it is likely that we attribute to it certain forms and reaffirm its existence，and thus，it is feasible that by doing so we may rule out other possible alternatives. But what if we start our research with adequate sensibility to those alternatives，and conduct historiographical study within a comparative frame，i.e.，with comparand in our research scope that may not necessarily surface in the foreground？
Foucault in his later years turned to Greco-Roman antiquity in his historiographical study of sexuality for alternative ethics built upon the subject's own volition rather than its obedience to pre-existing social norms and order as in modern ethics. In other words，the later Foucault engaged himself in exploring through the Other，which is either temporally or geographically distinct from what exists here and now，in exploring possible alternatives to the existing modern ethics of the present age. Would we be able to apply his approach of exploring alternatives in other cultures to our own cultural and literary projects of comparative study？If so，we would not only be simply reaffirming through our respective researches what discourses of sexuality are，but also and more importantly，we would be self-reflectively searching for other possible alternatives by taking a comparative look into discourses in other languages and cultures.
I hope this special issue，with articles exploring discourses of sexuality in ancient Rome，thirteenth-century China and contemporary China，modern Japan，Europe，and North America，in someway delivers this message of comparative study：to examine the existing and to explore what is possible.
Leihua Weng
Guest Editor of “The Body and Sexuality”
Sarah Lawrence College
November 6，2016
