Desire in Many Tongues: Regiment of Women vs Mädchen in Uniform

Sappho and Erinna in a Garden at Mytilene, Simeon Solomon, 1864

Image released under Creative Commons CC-BY-NC-ND (3.0 Unported)

I recently learned that social media has repurposed the term ‘Mommy’ to mean sexy. This came as somewhat upsetting news to somebody who actually calls their mother ‘Mummy’ but I can imagine that Clemence Dane or Christa Winsloe , who wrote the play on which the 1958 film Mädchen in Uniform was based, would have adopted such a term with alacrity (had Americanised Instagram comment sections been around in the early twentieth century). In both Regiment of Women and Mädchen in Uniform the central female relationship teeters precariously on the precipice between the maternal and the romantic. Hero worship seems to require a gratification which cannot be satisfied by mere platonic affection, and as such, both works have historically found themselves ensnared in somewhat of a quagmire for their veiled yet undeniable depiction of lesbian desire. These works seem, at points, to almost bleed into each other, and yet perusing them is an entirely different experience- one which has taught me a lot about both German and English.

When I was beginning to write this article, I must confess that I had to consult dict.cc (I have never graduated to a more sophisticated German dictionary despite the protestations of many of teacher over the years) to clarify how I might translate the noun ‘desire’ to best encompass the relevant themes when referencing Mädchen in Uniform. Interestingly, the noun that first sprung to mind was ‘Die Lust’ which translates more literally as passion or, indeed, lust. This noun can be seen to reference, perhaps, the physicality of desire more than the vicissitudes of yearning, which would translate more as ‘Die Sehnsucht’ or ‘Das Verlangen’. When I was thinking about both works in English, it seemed only natural to adopt the noun ‘desire’- I did so without thinking or really considering the nuances of such a term, because in my mind, it fit the complicated inter-personal dynamic between the protagonists in both narratives. I did not even contemplate the noun ‘lust’ because its raw physicality felt at odds with the rigidity of the school environment portrayed in both works.However, when I thought about translating my ideas, it was the first German noun that occurred to me. Does this mean that in some hidden echelon of my mind I view the physical desire between Clare and Alwynne, and Manuela and Frau von Bernburg as more significant than the emotional yearning which unites them? I am not entirely sure. Though this anecdote might appear tangential or superfluous, it is just one of the many examples of how German has encouraged me to consider linguistical nuances that can be overlooked when dealing with your native language.

An intense desire for the approval of the central, authoritative figure (Fräulein von Bernburg in the former and Clare Hartill in the latter) lies at the centre of both narratives. Indeed, were the works contemporary, one might quip that both protagonists, being orphans, are afflicted with ‘Mommy issues.’ However, though Alwynne and Manuela are both orphans, we must also understand that there is a key difference in the power dynamic between the two works. In Regiment of Women, Clare and Alwynne - though not quite equals- are both adults; Alwynne, though only nineteen, is a schoolmistress, whereas in Mädchen in Uniform Manuela is a mere schoolgirl. Both women, however, are infantilised as they become subsumed by the potency of their desire for an elusive other.

This desire, however, is not limited to its influence on the protagonists: rather, it seems to engulf the entire school body, as it descends perpetually into frenzied, ritualistic hero worship of these central figures. When Manuela arrives at her boarding school, she receives the piece of advice ‘sich nicht in Fräulein von Bernburg zu verlieben’ or ‘to avoid falling in love with’ Fräulein von Bernburg- lest a classmate claw her eyes out in jealousy. Similarly, when she receives her uniform, she is told that its previous owner stitched ‘E V B’, referencing her teacher Elizabeth von Bernburg, into the lining because, ‘sie schwärmte sich auch für Fräulein von Berburg’ or ‘she was also quite enamoured with Fräulein von Berburg.’ Clare Hartill is similarly introduced as a figure over whom schoolgirls profess their unadulterated adoration; Dane describes her as ‘…the Miss Hartill of a hundred legends’ and ‘..the Olympian to whom three-fourths of the school (say) its prayers’. Both these descriptions are rich with hyperbole and coloured by the throes of collective passion. It is interesting to note that the German verb ‘sich verlieben’ or ‘to fall in love with’ is used here, rather than ‘lieben’ which is ‘to love’. Thus, an overt proclamation of intense collective desire (explicitly connotating the romantic in the case of ‘sich verlieben’) can be seen at the very beginning of both works. In both cases, the intensity of collective schoolgirl infatuation renders it a caricature: harmless and hyperbolic.

This intense adoration, rather than meriting condemnation from the school body, is readily adopted as the status quo, and it is only the later personal proclamation of feminine desire which proves more scandalous. For example, in Regiment of Women, Alwynne, considers the prospect of the marriage contrived by her aunt as a way of saving her from the intensely dysfunctional dynamic she shares with Clare and concludes ‘Clare before the world!’. She is also depicted holidaying with Clare, and spending days on end with her- much to her aunt’s vexation. In Mädchen in Uniform, when Manuela proclaims her love for Fräulein von Bernburg, she does not use the same verb ‘sich verlieben’ jokingly adopted by her teacher’s colleagues at the beginning of the novel, but she asserts ‘Ich liebe sie!’, suggesting a more intimate and considered affection which is outside the parameters of girlhood crushes. Thus, the more domesticated and sincere affection depicted in the works represents much more of a challenge to the binaries of heteronormativity than the hyperbolised infatuation of the masses.

I could say a lot more about both works, and how the depiction of desire varies in line with the cultural parameters of the age, but I fear I must conclude with a disclaimer about the depiction of lesbian desire in both works. Although both works have been analysed under a homosexual lens, they can also both be read in such a way as to minimise the presence of any affection or desire which situates itself outside of the binaries of heteronormativity. Thus, whilst it is indisputable that both women imbue their works with a certain je ne seis quoi, the somewhat overused and irritating quip ‘history will say they were friends’ also seems applicable.