Poor Yorick-sentimentality and gender in Sterne's work

While preparing my presentation on Sterne's Sentimental Journey, some themes kept reappearing throughout the book that had a fascinating effects on the narrative. Granted, we've kicked around the idea of gender and gendered reading quite a bit in this class, but
it has such an effect on the works we've read and our reaction to them that I feel it's valid to continue exploring as a theme. While reading other's interpretations of Sterne's work, I came across a journal article by Rebenna Gould entitled "Sterne's Yorick as a Male Hysteric." Gould made some interesting connections between the feminine attributes of hysteria (in the 17th century sense of the world, not the modern sense of the word) and Yorick's character, which I will cover in more detail in my presentation. However, Gould makes some very interesting points about the masculinity, or lack thereof, of Yorick. I do not think it is entirely accurate to claim that he is presented as an androgynous or asexual creation, as Gould does, since Yorick seems to be rather lucky with the ladies. Still, Gould makes a valid point in observing that Yorick is certainly not presented as overtly masculine, in contrast with the vigorous Le Fleur. Sterne uses feminine words (for example, Yorick's use of "prostitute" to describe himself) in connection with Yorick, and furthermore Yorick does not seem to be perceived as very masculine (and therefore dangerous) by any other characters in the story. Is Sterne feminising Yorick? Knowing that Sterne invested Yorick with several biographical details as they related to him personally, that is a hard question to answer. Certainly Yorick's "sentimentality" as the "man of feeling" rather than a man of action could be interpreted as feminine with regards to our traditional assignation of certain qualitites with the label of feminine or masculine. I rather feel as though this feminised quality of Yorick's makes him ultimately more accessible to those he comes into contact with. He makes emotional connections with both men and women, as as he is not perceived by women as a threat, he is given a certain amount of license in regards to being in private with them (which, I would point out, he certainly takes advantage of). We have seen a similar play with the concept of masculinity and femininity in Richardson and Fielding's work, and I feel as though the authors are attempting ot make certain points or assertions about the qualities invested in those gendered concepts. Richardson, for example, gives Pamela quite a bit of power but only within an extremely feminised sense. I don't want to ramble on in this post, but I really find this idea quite fascinating, and hopefully we will have a chance to discuss this further tonight.