“Yesterday morning I was in despair… I couldn’t screw a word from me; and at last dropped my head in my hands: dipped my pen in the ink, and wrote these words, as if automatically, on a clean sheet: Orlando: a Biography… [I]t sprung upon me how I could revolutionise biography in a night…” — Virginia Woolf to Vita Sackville-West, 9 October 1927
It was playful and bold to write a novel as though it were a biography, and to call a fiction a life, and to invent that life around a woman the author was in love with, and to stretch her over 350 years, like a body freed from the problems of gravity. In Orlando (1928), Virginia Woolf did away with the usual co-ordinates of biography and set off through time as though it were an element, not a dimension.
The story is simple: Orlando is a young nobleman, aged 16, in the reign of Elizabeth I. After a series of adventures and disappointments in love and life and poetry, he takes an appointment as the British ambassador in Constantinople. Aged 30, he wakes up one morning from a week-long dead sleep to find that he is now a woman. Orlando returns to England and discovers that it changes as centuries pass but he, or rather she, continues as before. Woolf wrote the book at top speed, scarcely pausing, as Orlando scarcely pauses as he races through 350 years.
On 11 October 1928 — the last day in the novel — Orlando has reached the age of 36: “The true length of a person’s life, whatever the Dictionary of National Biography may say, is always a matter of dispute.” This is a poke at Woolf’s father, Sir Leslie Stephen, the great and erudite editor of the DNB. The Victorians loved dates and facts, especially dates and facts in order — theirs was the age of classification, of taxonomy, of the museum, the geographical society, the butterfly net. The pinned wings or the shot and stuffed head are symbols of Victorian England. The Dictionary of National Biography, where the great and the good could be safely pinned and stuffed, was, to Woolf, part of the monstrous edifice of the 19th century that 20th-century creativity needed to overthrow.
As Orlando enters the 19th century she notices, to her dismay, “widow’s weeds and bridal veils… crystal palaces, bassinettes, military helmets, memorial wreaths, trousers, whiskers, wedding cakes, cannon, Christmas trees, telescopes, extinct monsters, globes, maps, elephants, and mathematical instruments”. In one of the funniest passages in the novel, Orlando suffers a kind of self-generated electric shock treatment as her left hand takes to convulsing spontaneously. She realises that it is because she is not wearing a wedding ring. She rushes out and finds a husband, and the symptom subsides — the censorious somatic symptom of an age where every woman must be classified as virgin, wife or widow.
And everyone as male or female. Woolf was born in 1882. She grew up as a Victorian. Gender roles were strictly observed in society and at her London home in Hyde Park Gate. Her brother Thoby went to Cambridge; Virginia and her sister Vanessa were educated at home. The social doctrine they were raised on was that of “separate spheres” — woman in the home, man in the world — and it was still going strong when Woolf published Orlando, in the year that all female British citizens over 21 finally got the vote.
But Woolf believed that the creative mind is androgynous. She was an expert in Elizabethan literature. She loved both the scope and the certainty of the Renaissance mind. Shakespeare, writing his sonnets to boys and women with equal passion, understanding the manliness of a soldier, the intensity of a nun, seemed to her to be a sign of what we all might be — bigger, wider, freed from convention and hypocrisy. Woolf met Vita Sackville-West in 1922. Sackville-West was an English aristocrat brought up at Knole House in Kent. As a woman, she could not inherit the ancestral home. Woolf, who had fallen in love with Sackville-West’s past as much as her person, found that the family portraits, ancient relics and priceless objects that filled Knole filled her imagination.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeNo one is trans, of course.
Orlando is a bisexual fantasy romp, nothing more. No one has or ever will literally change sex. Like all apologists for postmodern chaos, Winterson confuses the map with the territory. Destiny is of course a false concept, like the “authentic self” of the transgenderist game players. The self cannot be separate from the body, except in fantasy. This is conclusively demonstrated by death.
Let’s pretend! . More, let’s pretend is what makes life exciting. No boundaries! Nothing fixed -except mortality! Woolf in the end drowned herself. Alas, a serious end to all that pretence!.
Mr Jackson wins the Internet.
Anyone who thinks they’re not pretending is either not thinking hard enough or pretending.
What is Alan Jackson? He might be the summation of a set of life experiences (quite a few judging by the picture) but the man who Alan Jackson believes himself to be has influenced his own interpretation of those life experiences.
Alan Jackson is incapable of being an objective observer of his own existence. He might have been born in a particular space, amongst a particular community, he might consider that his home. But in forming that judgment Alan Jackson will have selected and weighted certain experiences and aspects which he then internalised whilst ignoring others.
Was Alan Jackson using objective criteria when selecting and ignoring these experiences and aspects? Is he viewing them objectively when remembering now? Has Alan Jackson allowed future experiences to influence his interpretation of his part experiences?
Alan Jackson, like all of us, is an abstraction. Alan Jackson is and only ever can be what Alan Jackson pretends to be.
As Freud might have predicted, the anti-trans lot grasp their genitals as the sole objective fact in their existence. The only element of their being that has been inextricably true since birth.
Alan Jackson is confused – maybe he has been pretending? Who is the authentic Alan Jackson? He can hardly remember old friends, parents are only memories, the place of his birth is changing but he can say one thing for certain. Alan Jackson has his genitals and all else flows from there. Alan Jackson is a p*n*s.
All of that may be true, but at least he hasn’t drowned himself yet.
I don’t know anything about myself but I know that I am in the wrong body and must undergo genital mutilation otherwise I will kill myself, a victim of the cis white patriarchy.
Good God, what a load of post-modern drivel. The article wasn’t any better. For too many ‘intellectuals’ no idea can be stupid as long as you dress it up in the requisite amount of solipsistic dross. For the rest of us, bullshit’s bullshit.
Androgyny and trans are not the same. Trans women/men are women/men apparantly…
Androgyny is not a mental disorder
And ‘non-binary’ doesn’t exist.
What do you mean by “trans?”
It currently means several entirely-different things including: Transexual, Transvestite, ‘Suffering from gender dysphoria,’ or ‘Trying to get a reduced sentence in a women’s prison.’
I enjoyed this article at least for the quotes from Orlando. The term “genius” is bandied about too freely, but I believe Woolf was a genius. Her prose is all rhythm and cadence, breathlessly taking us from one time or place to another with no clear memory of how the transition was made. I would hate to “critique” a Woolf novel; I’d hate to rationalize the magic.
She wrote a very short story (what would now be called flash fiction) called “A Haunted House” which is one of the most original contributions to the horror genre I’ve read, and yet it is a century old and probably isn’t really a horror story. It’s easily googled if you’re interested.
please don’t call one of my favorite books a ‘trans-novel’. Why does this new ideology have to invade my imagination and history as well as everything else? Can’t we just accept that some sensitive writers women and men have always imagined life as the other without attaching ideological labels that impose imaginative limits?
Bla bla bla. Enough already. There is no such thing as ‘trans’. A genuine mental illness (dysphoria) and a much larger process of social contagion egged on by activist teachers. VW has nothing to offer our world. She never did. JW neither – part of the problem
I’d suggest they do have something to offer – an insight into a particular mindset – (of which i’m making no particular judgement with this comment) that is, however, something very human; and i’m very much interested in that, as we all should be. It needs to be more fully understood rather than dismissed.
Who gives a flying? This fad will fade away, like they all do. The huge and tragic difference is that it will have created countless permanently disfigured patients for the medical monsters to milk, and plenty if lucrative law suits for lawyers.
The brain is not androgenous… it is genderless.
So NO, Orlando was NOT the first trans novel.
If gender is so mutable and challenging it so transgressive then why go to all the trouble of full body plastic surgery to achieve a supposedly literal and fixed sex identity?
Unherd has now reached peak Guardian. I’m off to Substack…
You can’t be serious? It’s full of brain dead American poseurs.
Instead of throwing fellow anti woke writer/journalists such as Matt Taibii, Michael Schellenberger and Bari Weiss under the bus, why not accept them as allies? Those of us who despise the far left need to hang together, otherwise we shall hang separately.
The title of the article sounds like a question addressed in a woke PhD thesis. Jeanette Winterson lectures in the Oxford English department which produced Cathy Newman who exposed the progressive Oxford mentality in the Jordan Peterson interview. I really enjoyed both of Jeanette Winterson’s autobiographies, I thought they were brilliant, but not her other writing: I got the sense she was trying too hard to be a great writer. It put me in mind of an interview with Salman Rushdie I once read. He said when he first tried to write, his writing was not well received and he was advised to write what he knew. He sat down and wrote Midnight’s Children – pure brilliance.
Amazing. “don’t like title. saw something on youtube loosely related to writer which I didn’t like… must be bad”
Are you projecting? I have read a great deal about the writer and many of her novels. I have never seen anything about her on YouTube. I was going to criticise the article in detail but I couldn’t be bothered repeating myself again.
Agreed.
Answer: no, she did not.
Remember being absolutely bewildered and so sad finding out Winterson had fallen for the gender propaganda. One of my favourite authors of all times. Gut Symmetries is a masterpiece.
My first thought upon seeing who the author of this article was, was “oh no not Jeanette Winterston too”
I don’t understand how intelligent people are rewriting every unconventional women in history as trans.
And this book which was obviously a feminist book and not a trans one.
I admire the beauty and originality of Jeanette Winterson’s prose, and the empathy and insight with which she writes about Virginia Woolf. But no, Orlando was not the first trans novel, because Orlando literally changes sex – which transgender people don’t do because it’s biologically impossible.