|
Abstract:
|
Through scientific discourse and reproductive technologies, the reproductive body and the maternal body continue to be constructed as ‘natural’. At the same time,
these technologies have begun to blur the boundaries between what is considered
an acceptable reproductive body, and consequently an acceptable maternal body,
and an unnatural or a socially undesireable one. As science purports to offer
women greater control over how and when they choose to procreate, through methods which range between delaying or eliminating the possibility of contraception to those which extend the possibility of conception to postmenopausal or infertile women, these same procedures raise questions about the
nature and ‘naturalness’ of reproduction. Added to these concerns are the
suitablility of the reproductive body as a maternal body. Consequently, and more
and more frequently, bodies which defy ideals about maternity and motherhood
emerge, and questions about what it means to mother are raised. Bodies which
contest the construction of motherhood as natural are frequently represented as
monstrous or freakish, and the debate between science and nature is heightened.
Hiromi Goto’s short story ‘Hopeful Monsters’ resists the construction of the
‘natural’ maternal body by highlighting the way in which women’s bodies are
shaped by scientific discourse. In turn, images of ‘monstrous’ mothers emerge and
are challenged, suggesting the need to reimagine what it means to mother and what
it means to be a mother. Through reading a selection of the stories this paper will
interrogate possible alternatives to constructions of the ‘natural’ maternal body and motherhood, suggesting that the Goto’s ‘monsters’ are perhaps only monstrous as a result of scientific discourse which constructs them as such. |
