Obviously, the doctor had revealed Bruce’s putative female identity to the county governor, and there was a special reason why he knew about Bruce’s anatomical constitution. In autumn 1837, Bruce got pregnant and in July his
27 Littberger Caisou- Rousseau 2013, p. 175. In his study The Power of Character: Middle- Class Masculinities, 1800– 1900 (Stockholm 2003), Swedish historian David Tjeder demonstrates that there was a discrepancy between especially many young men’s apprehension that drinking and gambling were masculine activities and moralists maintaining that drinkers and gamblers were fallen, middle- class men and that gam-bling and drinking were pernicious passions. By emphasising that he is no drunkard but not a total abstainer either Bruce wants to prove that he is a proper man, not gov-erned by his passions in an unmanly way, nor a fearful (and in that respect unmanly) total abstainer.
daughter was born. As he has promised himself to be truthful, Bruce has to coerce himself to mention this unexpected and uncommon event even if it is very painful for him to do so. How did it come about? An inspector named Lars Nyström stubbornly declared his love for Bruce and said that he knew for sure that Andreas was a disguised young lady. Bruce emphasises that he felt very embarrassed at Nyström’s flirtation. Yet at an early stage there is a moment when he wonders whether it is not God’s will that he shall live as a woman in a relationship with Nyström. This thought soon passes off, though, and Bruce declares that he could not be persuaded to change clothes.
Bruce comments on the circumstances when the foetus was conceived in the following way: ‘One night when we had been on the spree together the inspector asked to stay as it was late and he had a long way home. I gave him permission and totally forgot to be careful.’28 There is no evidence in the text that Nyström forced himself on Bruce, even if it is not out of question that this was the case. The wording that Bruce forgot to be careful could be a hint that it was not the first time he went to bed with Nyström; whether or not that was the case is impossible to know. However, any indication that Bruce would play along and recognise a double gender identity is not congruent with the rest of the text. The fact that he was drunk could to some extent explain his action, yet Bruce does not highlight this, presumably because the very revelling is to him morally objectionable.
Bruce portrays the discovery of his pregnancy in terms of a catastrophe.
The anxiety and distress are overwhelming, and Bruce finds it impossible to describe all the torments he undergoes at the same time as he has to be on duty.
More than once the thought of committing suicide haunts him, but as he has his hope in God he wants to wait after all. When Nyström is informed about the pregnancy he abandons Bruce whose despair at this response is total as he sees himself as hopelessly lost. Even if he trusts in God he cannot bear it any longer when he feels the foetus move. At that moment he takes his gun, loads it and cocks the trigger to fulfil his suicide. Just then he hears an inner voice calling out a doctor’s name whereupon Bruce makes up his mind to see this doctor and explain his situation to him.
That a pregnancy constituted a severe threat to Bruce’s construction of a male identity is obvious. The conception of the child did indeed prove that Doctor Hagströmer was wrong: at least Bruce’s female genitals must have been intact.
But it was not that kind of ‘completeness’ he wanted to have confirmed. In this
28 Littberger Caisou- Rousseau 2013, p. 228.
precarious situation the only thing left to do was to wait for the delivery and demonstrate his masculine bravery when the labour pains finally attacked him.
Bruce relates that he had suffered for nine hours without anybody looking after him, apart from the doctor briefly exhorting him to cry out so that the pains would be reduced, but Bruce stubbornly remained silent, not letting out a single sound. Not to cry when one is giving birth is for Bruce the most extreme proof of masculinity. In truth a paradoxical situation! Presumably this is the very first depiction of a man giving birth in Sweden, maybe the first ever written.
Immediately after the birth, the girl Carolina is brought to a foster family.
Yet Bruce is firmly determined to bring her back as soon as possible to take care of her himself. That is also accomplished when Bruce resigns his appointment at Dubbe’s estate and moves to Öja, another locality on the island of Gotland.
Carolina is brought up in a household consisting of Bruce and his partner Maria Lindblad and her illegitimate daughter.29 From Bruce’s preserved letters to Carolina, published in my book, it is evident that he acted as her affectionate father.
The doctor’s revenge did not stop with the participation in the act to prevent Bruce from bearing arms, thereby depriving him of a vital part of his male ap-pearance. When Bruce wants to marry Maria Lindblad the doctor throws a new spanner into the works by telling the clergyman that Bruce is the mother of his child. By extension this results in the vicar’s refusal both to absolve Bruce and according to an old ritual receive Bruce as a member of the clerical and social communion after his giving birth to the child. That implies that Bruce is also forbidden to partake of the Holy Communion for almost a decade; as he was an ardent believer that was a severe punishment. Moreover he had to endure the social disgrace that the prohibition implied.
Even if a personal act of revenge was the primary driving force it is not only the doctor who acted as a brake; a few others of society’s mainstay, namely the county governor and the vicar also actively counteracted Bruce’s ambition to live his life as a complete man.
Andreas and Maria did never marry. Besides being a man with an ambiguous gender identity he was a mother/ father to an illegitimate child, and his stigma-tisation was therefore double. It is nevertheless remarkable that what for a reader of today looks like a textbook case of masculine authorities’ discrimination of
29 Sexuality outside of marriage was a penalised act in Sweden until 1864 when it was permitted for unmarried persons. At this time, it was not socially acceptable to live as cohabitants.
a human being who violated sexual and gender norms already by lacking a clearly defined sex, is instead interpreted by the ageing Bruce in a Christian light which makes him blame himself as a wicked man who lived a sinful life with the woman he loved and who cursed, revelled, and sang obscene songs.30
∞∞∞
Swedish historian David Tjeder, who has investigated the fragile masculinity of nineteenth- century middle- class society, maintains that a key concept in this context was character. The male task was to realise his character from poten-tiality to actuality. What it was all about was not finding oneself but creating oneself. A man should be transparent with no flaw or discrepancy between his inner and outer self and his acts.31 More than most other men Bruce created and invented himself as a male individual. All his adult life he fought to prove to himself and others that he was a proper man in thoughts, words, and deeds.
It is therefore ironic and regrettable that his tombstone was engraved with his female initials C.T. (Christina Therese), rather than his male initials F.A.E.
(Ferdinand Andreas Edvard), in an act that was certainly not in compliance with Bruce’s desires.
∞∞∞
A Swedish version of this chapter has been published in Tidskrift för litteraturvetenskap 2013:3– 4.
Sources
Barbin, Abel, Herculine Barbin: Being the recently discovered memoirs of a nineteenth- century French hermaphrodite (introduction by Michel Foucault;
translated by Richard McDougall), New York 1980.
Bondestam, Maja, Tvåkönad: studier i den svenska hermafroditens historia, Nora 2010.
Bourdieu, Pierre, Masculine Domination, Cambridge 2001.
Lasse- Maja, Den beryktade Lasse- Majas äfwentyr: efter nyare upptäckter och anteckningar om denne stortjufs märkwärdiga stölder, äfwensom hans
30 What is at stake here is no longer a happy medium between a drunkard and a total abstainer, rather it is an excess in masculine, and paradoxically enough therefore unmanly, behaviour that is portrayed.
31 David Tjeder, ‘Borgerlighetens sköra manlighet’, in Jørgen Lorentzen & Claes Ekenstam (eds), Män i Norden: Manlighet och modernitet 1840– 1940, Möklinta 2006, pp. 48−76.
många äfwentyr, såwäl i karlkläder, som förklädd till qwinna, under hwilken förklädnad han utförde många djerfwa puts med både Herrar och Damer, Stockholm 1887.
Liliequist, Jonas, ‘Kvinnor i manskläder och åtrå mellan kvinnor: Kulturella förväntningar och kvinnliga strategier i det tidigmoderna Sverige och Finland’, in Eva Borgström (ed.), Makalösa kvinnor: Könsöverskridare i myt och verklighet, Stockholm 2002, pp. 63– 123.
Lindeberg, Maria, Bref från Paris af ett resande svenskt fruntimmer, Stockholm 1827.
Littberger Caisou- Rousseau, Inger, Therese Andreas Bruce: En sällsam historia från 1800- talet, Göteborg/ Stockholm 2013.
Ljunggren Jens, Kroppens bildning: Linggymnastikens manlighetsprojekt 1790–
1914, Stockholm/ Stehag 1999.
Tjeder David, ‘Borgerlighetens sköra manlighet’, in Jørgen Lorentzen & Claes Ekenstam (eds), Män i Norden: Manlighet och modernitet 1840– 1940, Möklinta 2006, pp. 48– 76.
Tjeder, David, The Power of Character: Middle- Class Masculinities, 1800– 1900, Stockholm 2003.