In his paper, Jonathan Hsy notes that “in chapter 74, Margery expresses an inordinate desire for contact with lepers.” While he focuses heavily on the question of same-sex desire in this chapter (as well as the connection between leprosy and lechery), I would offer another reading. The chapter in question makes explicit in the beginning Margery’s will do die (or impatience for death) “turning over in her mind the time of her death, grievously sighing and sorrowing because it was so long delayed,” and shortly after having the wish to kiss lepers “very full of the disease.” (Penguin pages 216 + 217).
It seems to me that this is connected, that on top of any sexual connotations the kissing of the lepers might have, that this kissing is primarily an attempt at accelerating towards the death which she impatiently awaits.
While I do not think that it’s any of my business to be commenting on the sexuality of another person, let alone a woman who lived nearly a thousand years ago, I will concede that there is perhaps something going on in chapter 74. After speaking of kissing female lepers on the mouth, the text makes note of a virgin woman with ‘many temptations,’ and states that Margery ‘went to her many times’. She is the only leper in this chapter who is singled out and so it seems plausible that Margery fancied this woman, or at least got some sort of pleasure by visiting her. Again, it seems foolish to try and make such an assumption, but when reading I couldn’t help but think it (especially since the woman is identified as having trouble with sexual desire).
It seems to me, though, that Margery did not care who she kissed (as long as it was a leper with a mouth) and that the chief purpose was to degrade or possibly infect herself.
Stefan
I think this is a really interesting, and perhaps critically ignored reading of this text. In contemporary literature theory Lisa Ruddick wrote an analysis of broader theory trends called, "When Nothing is Cool." The basic principle is that literary critics are turning to criticism that is "cool," edgy, and potentially contentious rather than textually accurate in an effort to "fill a gap" in critical work. I think for this particular essay, there is textual evidence for the claim, but maybe the claim had more to do with a really good, pointed argument than greater trends in the work. I really like your reading and its broader approach to the text, rather than a singular chapter. I think that, potentially, your reading highlights a hyper focus in this article that is applicable to the singular chapter but does not tell us something about the work itself.
I think that this article does stretch the point in which we can impose our own thoughts upon other generations. I would say that the point of kissing is a mirroring to Jesus being willing to commune with those of a lower class of society. The leper was thought to have had something sinfully wrong with them in order to be cursed with such a disease, thus should not be touched because the were unclean. This uncleaness was not only on the outside, for lepers, but on the inside as well. Kempe's willingness to have any kind of intimacy (nonsexual) would be to go against the mores of the day and align herself with figures such as the Christ more than being a play at sexual indiscretions.