Scott Sprenger
132
ence of mystical love at the heart of Catholicism in Papal Rome, Balzac figures more clearly the problem of “les deux Frances” in the
nineteenth century, allowing readers to imagine a religious content in
Sarrasine’s love for la Zambinella. The voyage in geographical space
is then simultaneously a voyage in time, towards a Catholic homeland
that remains intact. The “voix céleste” of la Zambinella attacks Sarrasine’s soul (p. 244), penetrates his pores (p. 242) and is received as
“[une] révélation”. The erotic symbolism of this penetration is inspired by the Christian/mystical tradition according to which spiritual
operations (in this case, the spiritual union between the souls of la
Zambinella and Sarrasine) are figured by erotic metaphors such as
sexual union, orgasmic ecstasy, etc. On the one hand, we find a chain
of religious themes and metaphors characterizing Sarrasine’s experience (la Zambinella sings for the Catholic church, his friends are
Christians, he possesses “[une] grâce inimitable”, and “[une] grâce infinie” (p. 243). On the other, we find a mystical eroticism: the penetration of la Zambinella’s voice in the soul of Sarrasine produces an
orgasmic ecstasy that provokes “des cris de plaisir” (p. 243) and leads
him to imagine “des principes nouveaux de l’existence” (p. 244).
This scene, which is the key to all of Rochefide’s questions
(and thus to understanding the fragmented consciousness of the narrator) remains a total mystery if we miss the connection between the
marriage between the old man / Marianina and that of Sarrasine /
Zambinella. To underscore its importance, the narrator returns to Madame de Rochefide’s question about the old man / Marianina’s marriage right after he describes the experience of mystical union between
Sarrasine and la Zambinella at the opera: “Mais, me dit madame de
Rochefide en m’interrompant, je ne vois ni Marianina ni son petit
vieillard”. The narrator replies: “Vous ne voyez que lui! m’écriai-je,
impatienté comme un auteur auquel on fait manquer l’effet de coup de
théâtre” (p. 245, our emphasis).
This is the same theatrical mechanism featured earlier in the
reference to the thought of a united couple resurrected in the narrator’s
consciousness. The memory of this mystical union in Rome surges
into the narrator’s consciousness in Paris, though he does not tell us
this directly, making his reader discover the connection via indirect
clues. Rochefide’s confusion and frustration constitutes Balzac’s admission that his readers are undoubtedly experiencing similar confusion as we move through the narration in search of meaning. The
132
ence of mystical love at the heart of Catholicism in Papal Rome, Balzac figures more clearly the problem of “les deux Frances” in the
nineteenth century, allowing readers to imagine a religious content in
Sarrasine’s love for la Zambinella. The voyage in geographical space
is then simultaneously a voyage in time, towards a Catholic homeland
that remains intact. The “voix céleste” of la Zambinella attacks Sarrasine’s soul (p. 244), penetrates his pores (p. 242) and is received as
“[une] révélation”. The erotic symbolism of this penetration is inspired by the Christian/mystical tradition according to which spiritual
operations (in this case, the spiritual union between the souls of la
Zambinella and Sarrasine) are figured by erotic metaphors such as
sexual union, orgasmic ecstasy, etc. On the one hand, we find a chain
of religious themes and metaphors characterizing Sarrasine’s experience (la Zambinella sings for the Catholic church, his friends are
Christians, he possesses “[une] grâce inimitable”, and “[une] grâce infinie” (p. 243). On the other, we find a mystical eroticism: the penetration of la Zambinella’s voice in the soul of Sarrasine produces an
orgasmic ecstasy that provokes “des cris de plaisir” (p. 243) and leads
him to imagine “des principes nouveaux de l’existence” (p. 244).
This scene, which is the key to all of Rochefide’s questions
(and thus to understanding the fragmented consciousness of the narrator) remains a total mystery if we miss the connection between the
marriage between the old man / Marianina and that of Sarrasine /
Zambinella. To underscore its importance, the narrator returns to Madame de Rochefide’s question about the old man / Marianina’s marriage right after he describes the experience of mystical union between
Sarrasine and la Zambinella at the opera: “Mais, me dit madame de
Rochefide en m’interrompant, je ne vois ni Marianina ni son petit
vieillard”. The narrator replies: “Vous ne voyez que lui! m’écriai-je,
impatienté comme un auteur auquel on fait manquer l’effet de coup de
théâtre” (p. 245, our emphasis).
This is the same theatrical mechanism featured earlier in the
reference to the thought of a united couple resurrected in the narrator’s
consciousness. The memory of this mystical union in Rome surges
into the narrator’s consciousness in Paris, though he does not tell us
this directly, making his reader discover the connection via indirect
clues. Rochefide’s confusion and frustration constitutes Balzac’s admission that his readers are undoubtedly experiencing similar confusion as we move through the narration in search of meaning. The