our lady of the whores

I have a confession to make, and I hope it does not make you immediately stop reading this blog--I love Lady Gaga. I like the way that she is always a performer wherever she goes, whether it is through her eccentric fashion, extremist views, or song. I do not intend for this blog to convince any anti-Gagas to suddenly transform into little monsters, but I would like to discuss one of Lady Gaga's newest personas (or "personae" to use the Latin correctly): Mary Magdalene.

On April 15, I opened my Gmail to discover an email from ladygaga.com titled, in all caps, “JUDAS OUT NOW.” I thought, “Wow, Gaga sure does know how to stir up drama” by releasing a single called Judas nine days before Easter. Somehow I forgot to join the millions of little monsters anxiously counting down the seconds to the release of the single. “Maybe I’m losing my interest in Gaga,” I considered. I opened YouTube to listen to the song, and I realized that “Judas” was very catchy. I listened to it a few more times, when I actually started to listen to the lyrics. These lyrics repeatedly say, “I’m in love with Judas,” which, on first impression, seems like an outright mockery of anything Christian—until I remembered that Christ loved Judas, even through his crucifixion. I’m not comparing Lady Gaga to Christ, but, in my opinion, the song is about loving someone (maybe foolishly) even with the foreknowledge that the person you love is likely going to stab you in the back (or plant the kiss on your cheek that seals your crucifixion). This song which at first appeared to be the antithesis of anything religious surprisingly revealed a note of spirituality that Gaga’s previous songs lacked.

When the “Judas” music video was revealed, so was Mary Magdalene. In a modern day Jerusalem, Mary Magdalene rides on the back of Jesus’s motorcycle, dances in the middle of the street with the disciples, and even bathes between Jesus and Judas (possibly alluding to Mary’s washing of Christ’s feet and being reprimanded by Judas in John 12?).

Six weeks later, Lady Gaga released the entire Born This Way album, featuring many songs concerning struggles related to social acceptance and forgiveness, whether spiritual or otherwise. On the album, these themes are tied very tightly with references to Christ and the Christian tradition, influenced by Gaga’s Catholic school days and her current spirituality. Again, Mary Magdalene shows up.

Although the title of the song “Bloody Mary” suggests a reference to the crazy Catholic daughter of Henry VIII and the popular ghost story of the twentieth century, the Mary to whom Gaga alludes is actually Mary Magdalene. In a recent interview with Popjustice, Lady Gaga describes why she continually models herself after this woman:

[W]hen I was young and I went to Catholic school - an all girls school - we were told to pray to God and pray to Jesus, but I always prayed to women. I guess I always worshipped a more feminine force in my life and I didn’t view God as having a particular gender. I always either prayed to Mother Mary or Mary Magdalene, or to my father’s sister Joanne who had died when he was a kid because I viewed her as an angel in the sky in the house of the Kingdom working alongside God. You know, watching over me. It must be so big up there. A lot of people. So I always prayed to women and that’s the thing that I look to now to make me strong in this very unique situation that is being a pop singer. I always pray to Mary and to Joanne. It’s very sad that in those [Biblical] times women were stoned for adultery or for doing inappropriate things. Women were always the target, so I guess I looked to my past and my faith to find bravery in myself. So on this record I thought a lot about my faith and tried to channel a lot of that into myself, and so make myself brave.

So the lyrics are Mary sort of talking... If you listen to the lyrics and the way the cadence goes, the way I’m actually singing, I start quite sweetly then I go into these quite demonic tones, then I come back to sweetness, and then the chorus is me ultimately, publicly singing, ‘I won’t cry for you, I won’t crucify the things you do, I won’t cry for you when you’re gone I’ll still be Bloody Mary’. I’ll still bleed, is what I’m trying to say. I guess I’m fascinated by her - like I said, I worshipped women in my religion as a young girl - and in my belief Mary was in it all along. I think she knew what was going to happen. But I also believe that she loved him, and I believe there was a moment when she cried. So she says ‘I won’t cry for you’ but in the rest of the song, in the way that it feels, it’s sad and quite... Dirgic? Is that the right word? Like a death dirge... There’s that kind of quality to it. It’s about me having to be a superstar. (http://www.popjustice.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5456&Itemid=266#ixzz1RGwExnqd)

So who is this Biblical woman for whom a modern pop star would find such an affinity? Strictly speaking, the Bible only refers to a woman named Mary Magdalene (meaning “from Magdala”) in reference to three episodes. She was a woman out of whom Jesus drove seven demons (Luke 8:1-3); she was present at the crucifixion of Christ (Mark 15:40-41; Matt. 27:55-56; John 19:25; hinted at in Luke 23:49); and she was one of the women who went to Christ’s tomb to put spices on his corpse and to whom the resurrected Jesus reveals himself (Mark 16:1-11; Matthew 28; Luke 24; John 20:14-18). Through the repetition of these episodes in the four Gospels, she is mentioned a total of eight times, and is suggested at one other time. But the picture that these three episodes paint is lacking compared to the woman that tradition (and the Middle Ages) has brought to us. The “complete” woman of Mary Magdalene is much more fascinating—she is (possibly) a combination of four or more separate women.

First, there’s Mary of Bethany, the sister of Martha and Lazarus—she sat at Christ’s feet and listened to him speak, leaving her sister to do all of the work in preparation for Christ’s visit. Upset that her sister does not help her, Martha complains to Christ, who responds that Mary has done what is right (Luke 10:38-42). In another account, while Jesus is at the house of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, Mary pours expensive perfume on Christ’s feet and dries them with her hair while Martha prepares the meal (John 12:1-3). This Mary often symbolizes a life of divine contemplation.

Next, there’s the harlot—the “sinner” with the alabaster jar who anointed Christ’s feet. After learning that he was at Simon the Pharisee’s house, this anonymous woman came and began bathing Christ’s feet with ointment and her own tears, and dried his feet with her hair. Simon the Pharisee was shocked and disgusted that Christ would allow a “sinner” to touch him, and to this, Jesus responds, “I say to thee: Many sins are forgiven her, because she hath loved much. But to whom less is forgiven, he loveth less.” (Luke 7:36-50; Mark 14:3-9; Matthew 26:6-13). (According to Ruth Mazo Karras, in her article “Holy Harlots”, this nameless sin was automatically linked to sexuality in the eyes of medieval people: “Sexuality, for the Middle Ages, constituted a woman’s life; if she sinned it would be by abusing her most salient quality. The prostitute could stand for Everywoman. Sexuality defined the woman and it defined her sin.”). This nameless woman and the Magdalene are then compared to the woman in John 8 whom the Pharisees and scribes bring before Jesus to be stoned as a woman who committed adultery. In reference to her, Christ says, “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her” (John 8:7).

Finally, there’s the bride. Now this one might seem bizarre and a bit much to wrap our modern heads around, but medieval minds worked in much different ways than our own. Mary Magdalene is often linked with the Bride in the Song of Songs, with Christ as her lover/Bridegroom. Now don’t go jumping to any Dan Brown conclusions—the people of the Middle Ages who made this connection did not believe that Christ was literally married to Mary Magdalene (in fact, many of the same theologians claimed that the Bride could also be Christ’s mother). Instead, medieval theologians saw many similarities between the language employed in the Song of Songs and the occurrences of the so-called Mary Magdalene’s life. Mary Magdalene, as a sinful woman whom Christ forgave, and to whom the resurrected Christ appeared, becomes a symbol for the Church, Christ’s true bride (Ephesians 5:21-33). Again, this sounds like a stretch, because it is a stretch, but it was completely acceptable in the Middle Ages to make these connections as long as one had some sense of validation. In the fourth chapter of the Song of Songs, the Bride is described as a “garden enclosed” (4:12) and is compared to “Spikenard” (4:13, 14): the ointment that Mary of Bethany used to anoint Christ’s feet was made of spikenard (John 12:3), and Mary Magdalene searched for Christ in a garden (John 20). In the third chapter, the Bride describes her desperation as she seeks her lost lover; after finding him, she desires to touch him (3:1-4). This passage parallels Mary Magdalene’s desperation at the site of the tomb following Christ’s resurrection, and her response when she discovers him alive (John 20).

These multiple women in both the Old and New Testament of the Bible were very likely separate women; however, in the sixth century Pope Gregory the Great united them all under the name Mary Magdalene, creating one of the most intriguing personalities of the Bible. To combine all of the stories, Mary Magdalene was a demon-possessed harlot whom Christ saved from being stoned. While Christ was visiting a Pharisee, this forgiven harlot came to the house and gave her most costly ointment to Christ, anointing his feet with the ointment along with her tears, and drying his feet with her hair. Later, Christ visits her and her siblings, and while her sister Martha prepares for their meal together, the enraptured Mary cannot leave Christ’s presence. She, along with Christ’s mother and his beloved disciple (John), watches as he is crucified, and three days later visits his tomb to place spices on his body. When she arrives to the tomb, Mary Magdalene cannot find Jesus, and begins to cry, but Christ reveals himself to her, his spiritual bride, and instructs her to go and tell his disciples. She thus presents the perfect story of redemption, transforming from a harlot to the beloved of Christ, often referred to as the “apostle to the apostles.”

By the later Middle Ages, Mary Magdalene had become one of the most popular saints, second only to the Virgin Mary. These Biblical stories, along with other quite fantastic stories developed through later literature (depicting her as the jilted fiancée of John, or a later mystic who fasted for an extensive time, among other things) presented a woman who allowed a space in Christianity for mystical contemplation, women’s preaching rights, and, most complexly, sex.

Although this sexual space within Christianity is not a positive space (instead, it is something we are expected to turn from), it is still a significant characteristic of one of the most important of Christ’s followers, according to Christian tradition. Ruth Mazo Karras describes this negative emphasis on (female) sexuality:

The legends of the prostitute saints provided a place in Christianity for the erotic, but not a positive one. Christianity attempted to eliminate sexual pleasure from daily life and all sexuality from religion. Mary Magdalen fulfilled some of the functions that in other religions were embodied by a goddess of love or the wife of a male divinity. But the church only accepted her sanctity after the denial of the erotic side of her being.

But I feel that although this tradition describes the sexual space as bad, and although society has always divided women into two separate extremes (the Virgin and the Whore), the humanity presented in the figure of Mary Magdalene is both beautiful and accessible to average (non-perfect) people. I believe that the best description of Mary Magdalene’s appeal, both in the Middle Ages and in modern times, is said by Marina Warner in Alone of All Her Sex:

And in her myth, Mary Magdalene sins because she is not chaste, and not for any other reason that might be considered more grave…. This facet of human personality could not be represented by the Virgin Mary, however beautifully and youthfully and enticingly she is portrayed. Her unspotted goodness prevents the sinner from identifying with her, and keeps her in the position of the Platonic ideal; but Mary Magdalene holds up a comforting mirror to those who sin again and again, and promises joy to human frailty. Although the Virgin is both the bride of Christ and of mankind, Mary Magdalene when she mourns and lays out Christ’s body usurps that role, leaving the Virgin of Sorrows a more restricted maternal character.

Through the Mary Magdalene persona, Lady Gaga reminds her listeners of a harlot who had experienced the acceptance of a deity, of a woman whom the rest of society had dismissed as being “demon-possessed”. Her song “Bloody Mary” presents one who prepares herself for her own persecution that will most likely follow the crucifixion of Christ. Will the followers of Christ forgive her and accept her humanity the way that Christ did, or will they resume where they left off, one stone at a time?

Sources:

Ruth Mazo Karras. "Holy Harlots: Prostitute Saints in Medieval Legend." Journal of the History of Sexuality, Vol. 1, No. 1 (Jul., 1990), pp. 3-32.

Marina Warner. Alone of All Her Sex. New York: Vintage Books, 1983.

Popjustice interview with Lady Gaga: http://www.popjustice.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5456&Itemid=266#ixzz1RGwExnqd

"Bloody Mary" lyrics: http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/l/lady_gaga/bloody_mary.html

"Judas" Music Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wagn8Wrmzuc

are you good or are you gay?

The English language has a flexibility that is unheard of in many other languages, mostly because of its generation as the bastard step-child of the Germanic Anglo-Saxon language (Old English) and Norman French. Shakespeare took advantage of this flexibility as he created many new words for the young language that we refer to as modern English.

One word which has developed a lot of negative meanings from this flexibility is the word "gay." This word, which originally was positive, meant "having or showing a merry, lively mood" and which was later adopted to mean "homosexual," suddenly developed into an umbrella-like term that covers anything negative.

The word "gay" can be heard frequently in almost every Middle and High School as a term of derogation in reference to all things that are sub-par. Students (and, sadly, adults) use phrases like "That test was so gay," "Those rules are gay," "My pencil's being gay," so frequently that they do not recognize how ridiculous it sounds. These people who are throwing this adjective around generally are not intending to comment on the sexuality of inanimate objects; instead, they are following a tradition that links less-acceptable minority groups with wickedness or deficiency. The ease through which we are able to label something as "gay" without referencing its sexuality reveals how greatly our society links "normal" with "good" and "other" with "flawed."

This very same phenomenon occurred roughly one thousand years ago, leading to the development of one of the most common words in the English language--"bad."

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, "bad" is defined as both "Not good" and "Of poor quality or little worth." Notably, if you look up the etymology of this common word, the OED (that's the Oxford English Dictionary, not the Old English Dictionary, for all of you like me who might actually confuse the two) says, "Perhaps related to Old English bæddel hermaphrodite, effeminate, or homosexual man."

Basically, "bad" is the Anglo-Saxon "gay."

Dr. Allen Frantzen at Loyola University in Chicago discusses the label in Anglo-Saxon society of bæddel (hermaphrodite) and bædling (a term that refers to men who prefer to have sexual intercourse with other men, Frantzen argues) in his Before the Closet: Same-Sex Love from Beowulf to Angels in America. Dr. Frantzen notices a significant choice of words in an Anglo-Saxon translation of a seventh-century Latin penitential. The Latin states: "Qui sepe cum masculo aut cum pecude fornicat, X. annos ut peniteret judicavit" ("Whoever frequently fornicates with a man or with an animal must do penance for 10 years so that he should repent"). This is translated into Old English as follows: "Se ðe mid bædlinge hæme. oððe mid oðrum wæpnedmen. oððe mid nytene. fæste X. winter" (Whoever has intercourse with a bædling or with another man or with an animal should fast for ten winters).

The Anglo-Saxon translator felt the need to insert another category to the list of sexual sins--he added the category of bædling. By having both bædling and wæpnedmen listed in juxtaposition, the translator reveals that the Anglo-Saxons had an established label for categorizing a man that does not fall under the typical "manly man," as Dr. Frantzen loosely translates wæpnedmen. Frantzen uses this evidence to define the bædling as "a man who was known to have sex with other men." He continues as follows:

[The bædling] was not the only kind of man who had homosexual intercourse; other men, “wæpnedmen”…could also be sexual partners of “whomever” this canon was directed at. The “bædling” evidently could have sex with two kinds of men: ordinary men, who usually preferred women partners, or “bædlings,” men like himself who usually had sex with other men or with each other.

This specific linguistic categorization of bædling, compared to wæpnedmen, suggests that the Anglo-Saxons recognized differences between sexualities similar to the differences that we recognize today. If there were no strictly homosexual men in Anglo-Saxon England, the Anglo-Saxons would not have required such a specific category for them.

Although this evidence is remarkable for the history of sexualities, it is heartbreaking when we return to my earlier discussion. In Anglo-Saxon society, the wæpnedmen were considered normal. They were the "real men" who followed social norms. They were nothing like the soft-spoken, passive bædlings, , the "others,"the despised men who, like hermaphrodites, possessed the traits of both men and women.

"Normal" equals "good" and "other" equals "flawed."

Are you normal or are you other? Are you a good guy or are you a bædling? Are you good or are you bad? Are you good or are you gay?

If we do nothing to stop the negative use of the word "gay," we continue to allow the oppressive powers of our society to shape the majority's opinion over what is acceptable and what is not. The term "gay" will continue to be linked with the term "bad," forever shading today's wæpnedmen's view of sexual minorities.

Sources:
Allen J. Frantzen. Before the Closet: Same-Sex Love from Beowulf to Angels in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998.