George Sand’s idealist novel Isidora (1845) can be read, I argue, as a feminist re-writing of the Biblical Fall and the Garden of Eden.1¹ In Pouvoirs de l’horreur (1980), Julia Kristeva notes that ‘le récit de la chute met en scène une altérité diabolique par rapport au divin’.2² It is specifically a covetous desire for woman which Kristeva states as rupturing the divine in paradise, as Adam is torn apart by temptation: ‘Adam n’a plus la calme nature de l’homme paradisiaque, il est déchiré par la convoitise: désir de la femme.’3³ Thus, whilst sin can be interpreted as being brought into the world by both Adam and Eve, ‘sa racine et sa représentation fondamentale n’est autre que la tentation féminine’.4⁴ Although Kristeva does not mention the textual re-appropriation of this strand of theological thinking within literary contexts, the textual equation of woman, sin and desire is commonly seen at work within the nineteenth-century realist novel, in which the narrative of the Fall is re-appropriated according to a gendered framework. Often, the ‘altérité diabolique’ to which Kristeva refers is feminized in the male realist and naturalist novel of the nineteenth century through the textual and aesthetic re-appropriation of Eve as a figure of feminine evil, whose seductress ways are quintessentially represented in the figure of the courtesan, as well as that of the adulteress. The divine is then represented in the figure of the ideal woman, a symbol of feminine passivity, docility and self-sacrifice, attributes often associated with what Bram Dijkstra calls ‘the virtuous household nun’.5⁵ Yet, in a century beset with dualities and dichotomies, Sand’s Isidora defies the gendered binaries of the nineteenth-century novel by rejecting the clear-cut distinction of the angel/whore dichotomy, entangling certain characteristics of the ‘diabolical’ courtesan and the ‘divine’ woman in the identity of the protagonist, Isidora. In this article, we will see how Sand rejects the textual re-appropriation of Eden as a gendered space of control in which to police the feminine. Moreover, it will be argued that Sand rejects the phallocentric terms of theological literary narratives by re-writing Eden as a space of feminine liberation.

中文翻译：

---

撤消现实主义：在乔治·桑的《伊西多拉》（1845）中夺回伊甸园

我认为，乔治·桑( George Sand) 的理想主义小说《伊西多拉( Isidora)》 ( Isidora) (1845) 可以作为对《圣经的堕落和伊甸园》 ( Garden of Eden.1 ^{1 1}在Pouvoirs de l'horreur (1980) 中，朱莉娅·克里斯蒂娃 (Julia Kristeva) 指出“le récit de la chute met en scène une altérité diabolique par rapport au divin'.2 ^{2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2}克里斯蒂娃说这是一种对女人的贪婪欲望，它破坏了天堂中的神圣，因为亚当被诱惑撕裂了：“亚当n'a plus la calme nature de l'homme paradisiaque, il est déchiré par la convoitise: désir de la femme.'3 ³因此，虽然罪可以被解释为由亚当和夏娃带到世界上，但 'sa racine et sa représentation fondamentale n 'est autre que latentation féminine'.4⁴尽管 Kristeva 没有提到在文学语境中对这股神学思想的文本重新挪用，但在 19 世纪的现实主义小说中，女人、罪恶和欲望的文本等式很常见，其中堕落的叙述是根据性别框架重新分配。在 19 世纪的男性现实主义和自然主义小说中，Kristeva 所指的“altérité diabolique”经常被女性化，因为夏娃在文本和美学上被重新挪用为女性邪恶的形象，她的诱惑方式在人物中得到了典型的表现妓女的，也有淫妇的。然后以理想女性的形象代表神圣，这是女性被动、温顺和自我牺牲的象征，⁵然而，在一个充满二元性和二分法的世纪里，桑的伊西多拉通过拒绝天使/妓女二分法的明确区分，将“恶魔般的”妓女和“以主人公伊西多拉的身份出现的神圣'女人。在本文中，我们将看到 Sand 如何拒绝将伊甸园的文本重新挪用作为监管女性的性别控制空间。此外，有人认为桑通过将伊甸园改写为女性解放的空间来拒绝神学文学叙事中的男性中心术语。