Monday, April 19, 2010

Orientalism and Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace

In Edward Said's groundbreaking 1978 book, Orientalism, he argues that the West has constructed, "a colonial discourse that produced the ideas about the Orient—the East—that the discourse purports to describe…constructing the East as sensual, lazy, exotic, irrational, cruel, promiscuous, seductive, inscrutable, dishonest, mystical, superstitious, primitive, ruled by emotion…[and] descriptions of the East in these terms generated a discourse that produced and then continued to produce the East in such terms" (Parker, 248). By characterizing the East as an inferior and alien "other", then the discourse necessarily constructs its polar opposite as a West that is rational, honest, civilized, and superior. Through this discourse, the West occupies a privileged position, where its ideas and values are treated as "universal truths" (Parker 249).

In the 1999 film, Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace, George Lucas constructed good and evil characters that seem to reflect the ideas of good and evil produced in Orientalist discourse—that is, the good characters are white, beautiful, human, rational, and straightforward, while the evil characters are dark, ugly, alien, emotional, and devious. After the movie's premiere, Lucas's critics were quick to accuse him of racism and claimed that he modeled his alien characters after various foreign and minority groups. Lucas, of course, was quick to defend himself in an interview with the BBC and denied that his characters draw on racist caricatures and stated that his accusers were, "basing a whole issue of racism on an accent that they don't understand" (BBC News, 1999). Perhaps, then, it is just a coincidence that the evil, desert-dwelling creature, Watto, was given an Arabic name and spoke with a perfect Arabic accent—and yes, I am familiar with Middle Eastern languages and accents. His characterization of Watto recalls Said's statement that the West has a limited awareness of the reality of the Arab world and what it has created," instead is a series of crude, essentialized caricatures of the Islamic world." (Islam Through Western Eyes, 110).



Although it appears that it may not have been Lucas's intent to perpetuate racist stereotypes through his characters, it is difficult to dismiss the presence of racial overtones, especially in light of how he has constructed his characters in the past Star Wars films. The heroes have always been handsome humans, who wear white and speak with perfect British or American accents; while the evil characters tend to be dark, deformed, and/or masked, and speak in foreign accents and/or in guttural tones. Even the character Darth Vader, which means dark father, undergoes a transformation from blonde- haired blue-eyed Anakin Skywalker in his innocent youth to a broken man who is encased in black and speaks with the voice of James Earl Jones once he becomes evil. When Darth Vader is redeemed, at the end of the movie, his black mask is removed and he becomes white again in voice and body.



In the movies, the prevailing pattern seems to be that darkness is a signifier of death, destruction, and evil, while white is its morally superior opposite. Again, perpetuating racist stereotypes was probably not George Lucas's intent in Phantom Menace, but given the prevailing pattern of evil=dark, alien, and other while good is equated with whiteness, humanity, and beauty in the preceeding movies, it is difficult not to find patterns and draw conclusions about ethnic stereotyping in the Phantom Menace.

Works Cited


Parker, Robert. How to Interpret Literature: Critical Theory for Literary and Cultural Studies, New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.

Said, Edward W., "Islam Through Western Eyes," The Nation, April 26, 1980, January 1, 1998

Said, Edward W., Orientalism, New York: Vintage Books, 1978.

"Star Wars: Lucas Strikes Back," BBC News, 14 July 1999. 5 May 2010. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/394542.stm

Sunday, April 11, 2010

Group Presentation: The Jungle by Upton Sinclair

Our group, which included Mandy, Jada, me, Jason, and Jeff, led a class discussion about Upton Sinclair's The Jungle, approaching the text from a Marxist theoretical perspective. Our goal was to determine whether the workers in The Jungle were treated unjustly by the ruling class. We divided the class into two main groups, the Proletariat and the Bourgeoisie. Each group was then divided into three smaller groups represented in Sinclair's novel-- child laborers, prostitutes, factory workers, politicians, factory owners, and the clergy. Each group was given time to meet and discuss the novel and to find information and evidence from The Jungle to defend their position. After the class debated the issues, our group determined whether or not the workers were treated unjustly by the Bourgeoisie based on the strength of the arguments made.

For this group discussion, I created the outline below, which served as a guide for the presentation, and I summarized each of the chapters in The Jungle, including information that would be relevant to the class discussion.

Outline


I. Introduction: Marxist Theory and a summary of The Jungle. A trial/debate will be conducted to determine whether the workers in The Jungle are treated unjustly under the capitalist system (approx. 5 minutes).
II. Trial
A. The class will be broken up into two main groups: Proletariat Vs. Bourgeoisie or Ruling Class
B. The proletariat will be divided into three groups: prostitutes, factory workers, and child laborers (i.e. newspaper sellers, machine workers, etc.). The ruling class will be divided into three groups: Church, Politicians (Scully, union leaders, etc.), and factory owners (Jones, Durham, etc.)
C. Each of the smaller groups will consist of approximately 3 people and will have 10 minutes to meet and discuss who they are and the institutions they represent by finding information about their groups in the text. They will formulate reasons/evidence to defend their position.
D. We will reconvene as a large group where each of the smaller groups will have 2-3 minutes to present their information, explaining who they are in the story and why their actions are justified.
E. Each group will also be given an opportunity to question and debate with other groups, using information—and hopefully direct quotes—from the text to attack the position of an opposing group. This should take 10-20 minutes.
F. The discussion leaders will be the jury, moderating the discussion and timing each section.
III. Conclusion: Judgment will be rendered at the end of the trial by the Honorable Judge Wexler.

The Jungle Chapter Notes


Ch. 1: The wedding of Jurgis and Ona. Many of the younger guests leave the wedding without paying any money for the veselija, leaving Jurgis and his family with a large debt for the wedding. The chapter ends when Jurgis says, "I will work harder." Jurgis still believes that all of his financial problems can be solved simply by working hard.

Ch. 2: The narrator recounts how Jurgis and his family saved money to come to America. During their journey to America, they lost their money to immigration workers who took advantage of immigrants. When Jurgis and his family lose most of the money they saved to settle in America, he replies, "I will work harder." Jurgis believes that because he is healthy, young, and hard-working, this will be enough to make him successful in America. He believes that those who have failed to succeed in this land of opportunity have only themselves to blame because they are either too weak or too lazy to earn their success [MYTH #1: The poor only have themselves to blame. Anyone can pull himself up by his bootstraps, if he only tries. If he remains poor, he has only himself to blame. This ignores the fact that a capitalist system is a pyramid that depends on a large base of poor laborers to support the ever narrowing structure of people who have resources above them. In Slaughterhouse Five, Kurt Vonegut quotes Howard W. Campbell, Jr., who states, "Americans believe things that are obviously untrue, especially that it is easy to make money. The poor blame themselves when they find this is not true, and this provides an easy way out of guilt for the rich. Americans have the novelty of an undignified poor who do not love each other because they do not love themselves."]

Ch. 3: We get a tour of packingtown—or at least what the public is allowed to see. It is a well ordered and very efficient killing machine, slaughtering hundreds of helpless animals for consumption every day. What we will learn in later chapters is that the men who toil over the various beasts and packing house machines to bring America meat are likewise put through the meat grinder, as they are used for their labor until their bodies wear out and are tossed aside without compensation. Laborers are consumed (sometimes literally) along with the meat they kill, process, and pack for consumption. We also see that the state inspectors, who are obviously in the pay of the bourgeoisie owners and corrupt politicians, allow diseased meat to pass inspection.

Ch. 4: In this chapter we also see how false advertising, lures Jurgis and his family in to look at a dilapidated house placed on the market by property owners and realtors (Scully and his agents). At first the rent seems affordable and the house seems solid; however, as the story progresses, we see that the house is poorly built, using substandard materials, and the real estate contract is riddled with ambiguous language that results in higher payments that eventually become impossible for the family to pay, which results in repossession of the house and a loss of all funds invested in the real property.

Ch. 5: Jurgis has his first encounter with the union and refuses to join because they request dues. He thinks that if people do not succeed then it is their own fault and that he has no need for protection from a union because he will work hard to become successful. His father, Dede Antanas, has trouble getting a job because of his age. Once a person becomes old or physically unable to carry on the demanding duties of factory work, he is thrown out without any compensation and prevented from gaining employment—a more overt form of ageism that plagues our markets today. He finally gains employment when he agrees to pay a man 1/3 of his wages as a "finder's fee" for the job. The family learns that this form of graft is quite common where the old and weak seeking employment are concerned. Dede Antanas's job involves packing old and rotten meat from the drains for consumption. Marija and Jurgis gain positions at Brown's canning factory and Durham's meat packing factory after their injured predecessors are forced out of their jobs. Both do well in the beginning because they are strong, willing, and able to work long hours for their pay. Jurgis and Marija are lucky compared to the hundreds of laborers who show up at the factories before dawn every morning hoping to be picked by the factory supervisors for work. People are often unemployed for months on end. With no welfare system in place, many, unable to find employment, die of starvation.

Ch. 6: Jurgis and Ona are still in love at this point. However, as the story progresses this changes. The family meets Grandmother Majauszkiene, a next door neighbor who tells them that the house they purchased is shoddily built and the purchase agreement they signed includes many hidden fees that they will most likely fail to pay and get evicted, as all of the other families who previously occupied the property have. Upon learning of the additional fees, Ona is forced to find a job and must pay a bribe to gain her position at a meat packing factory. We also learn how the packing houses imported labor from Germany, Ireland, and Lithuania to replace worn-out workers and to water down the labor pool and keep wages low. Stanislovas must also get a job. He is two years below the legal age to work, so the Church forges a birth certificate, lying about his age, so that he will be hired to work in front of a lard machine in a packing house. The Church and workers lie about children's ages and the factories pretend to believe the lies. The whole system facilitates child labor to further flood the labor market and drive down wages (children were paid 1/3 what an average adult worker made). Children were also used to work the machines—many of which replace human laborers. The work is dull, repetitive, and keeps the worker focused on only one small, isolated part of the productive process (alienation).

Ch. 7: We see our first winter in packingtown. The extreme cold sweeps through and takes away all of the people who are too weak, sick, or old to survive the winter--survival of the fittest. We also learn how everyone lies, cheats, and steals in this town in order to survive. Medicine is adulterated, water is polluted with formaldehyde, cotton is mixed with inferior fibers, peas are colored with poisons--such as copper salts, and there is no adequate sewage system. Jurgis and his family become sick because of the cesspool that exists under their home. In short, there is no government oversight to regulate unscrupulous criminals who lie, cheat, and steal in the name of free capitalism. Dede Antonas dies during the first winter from Tuberculosis.

Ch. 8: Factory workers are strongly encouraged to eat at the local saloon during lunch, where they are forced buy large quantities of alcohol with their meals, turning a large number of laborers into alcoholics. Jurgis resists this temptation because Ona packs his lunch and he does not want to jeopardize his ability to earn a proper living for his family. Jurgis joins a union after he sees how corrupt the system is and understands that unions are necessary for the protection of workers who labor in a system that sets the average worker up for failure. We also see how the workers' hours are reduced after Christmas. Although workers are expected to come to work for full days, they only get paid for the hours that the factory bosses put them to work, which may only be a few hours.

Ch. 9: Jurgis attends union meetings and learns English. He also learns that spoiled, diseased, and defective meat is routinely sold to the public for consumption. He is made a citizen and lead to vote for the Democratic party by the agents of powerful and corrupt political bosses like Scully. Scully is also a member of the bourgeoisie, as he sells the rancid water that collects in the dump site cisterns and in bubbly creek. He is also at the head of the advertising/real estate scheme that Jurgis and his family fell pray to. Scully poses as a good social Democrat; however, like all Democrats he works with the Republicans and bourgeoisie against the interest of the workers.

Ch. 10: Jurgis goes to the real estate agent and finds out exactly what all of the costs are for their home. Marija is fired from Brown's because she is outspoken about worker's rights—something she learned from the union she joined. She finds another job, which is more grueling and pays less. Ona finds that her boss, Mrs. Henderson, who works as a madame in a brothel, resents Ona because she is loyal to her husband and honors her marriage vows. Ona has a baby and is back to work the next day (missing work for being sick is not allowed). Her early return to work damages her health permanently. This was a common occurrence among women of the labor class. Women make ½ of what men make and children make less than that.

Ch. 11: There is a run on the bank—a common occurrence during this time. Marija, who has a savings account, stands in line for days to withdraw money during a bank run. If workers are fortunate enough to save money, it is never safe. If they leave it at home, it can be robbed. If it is deposited in a bank, it is not insured and can be lost during a bank run. All businesses are safe because of monopolies. They work together to fix wages and keep unemployment high. Jonas seriously injures his leg when a steer runs loose in the factory. He is forced to convalesce at home and loses his position at Durham's. His only consolation is spending more time at home with his son, whom he barely sees because of the grueling hours he has been forced to keep.

Ch. 12: During one of the severe winter snow storms, Stanislovas's hand becomes frostbitten, permanently disabling him. As a result, Jurgis has to beat him to go to work whenever there is snow. During his convalescence Jonas becomes very thin and sick. The family loses money during his convalescence. Jonas leaves the family at this time. The family speculates that he either fell into one of the rendering vats at Durham's and died, or he had enough of the pressure of taking care of the large family and struck out on his own. Because of Jurgis's illness, Marija is spending all of her savings to support the family and putting off her wedding to Timoszius Kuszleika, the violinist. The family even borrows money from Timoszius. It is decided that the two younger children Vilmas and Kikalojus will work as newspaper sellers. They meet with misfortune in the beginning because their money is taken by a con artist. The children eventually learn the tricks of the trade and bring home as much as 40 cents a day (p.128). After Jurgis recovers, he tries to find work; however, he has a difficult time because he is thin and sickly. Sinclair tells us that injured workers had little legal recourse and often received nothing for their work-related injuries (130).

Ch. 13: Kristoforas, the youngest of Teta Elzbieta's children dies. He had congenital dislocation of the hip and was a sickly child. His illness was exacerbated by their unsanitary living conditions. We begin to see the family values disintegrate as we learn that everyone in the family is not saddened but relieved upon hearing the news of young Kristoforas's death. Jurgis refuses to pay for a funeral for the useless child, so Marija steps in a pays for it (note: the Church charges more than most can afford to conduct proper burial rights). Jurgis finally finds work in the worst possible place, a fertilizer factory. He constantly smells like feces and breathes in germs, chemicals, and other poisons during the course of the work day. He also pollutes his home with residual waste from work. Teta Elzbieta must find a job and finds work in a sausage packing factory at a machine. Kotrina, the youngest daughter becomes prematurely old as she is left to care for young Antanas, her little brother, and to cook and clean and take care of all of the domestic needs of the workers (138).

Ch. 14: We are given graphic details about the how factories repackage spoiled meat for public consumption. It is made into sausages, headcheese, pickled, and treated with various chemicals to mask decay and odor. Life becomes worse for the family as they fall into a numbing routine of work and sleep. They eat little and Ona and Jurgis are growing more distant from each other. Little Antanas is constantly sick. Ona is pregnant again and has nervous fits often, puzzling Jurgis and leaving him feeling helpless.

Ch. 15: Ona starts to stay away from home at night. She makes excuses, telling the family that the snow storm kept her at her friend's house. Jurgis, talks to her friend and finds out that Ona has been lying to him. Ona reluctantly tells him that her forelady and Phil Connor, a supervisor at her factory, forced her to become Connor's mistress. If she refused, he threatened to fire her and her family and to prevent them from finding employment anywhere in town. He raped Ona and forced her to have sex with him at Mrs. Henderson's brothel several times. Jurgis becomes enraged at the news, goes to Ona's place of employment and attacks Connor. It takes several men to stop Jurgis from beating him to death.

Ch. 16: Jurgis is sent to jail. The jails are very unsanitary, where the men are packed into dirty, small, insect-infested cells. He hopes he won't be tried by "Pat" Callahan, who is described in the book as a bully and a corrupt judge. Sinclair states, "If Scully was the thumb, Pat Callahan was the first finger of the unseen hand whereby the packers held down the people of the district" (163). He hates foreigners and owns brothels and dives and decided to get into politics to earn himself a respectable reputation. Unfortunately, Callahan oversees his bail hearing and sets the bail at an impossible $300.00. He spends a bitter Christmas behind bars worrying about his wife and family who must manage financially without him.

Ch. 17: He meets and befriends a con-man, named Jack Duane, who shares a cell with him. Jack Duane likes Jurgis because of his honesty and takes an interest in him because of his hardships. He tells Jurgis that eventually he will have to leave his family behind if he wants to make it in the world and that he may contact him once he is freed from prison. After and unfair trial where Jurgis represents himself and Connor presents false evidence, Jurgis is sent to Bridewell prison for thirty days. The judge does not care that Jurgis's family will most likely starve in his absence. The prisoners at Bridewell are sentenced to hard labor, which is nothing compared to the work the average laborer performs in the factories at home. The prisoners are also fed three times a day and given a reasonably comfortable place to live. We see that prison life is almost better than the life outside in the "free" world. Stanislovas visits Jurgis in prison and asks for money. Jurgis gives him fourteen cents. He learns that Ona, Teta Elzbieta, Marija, and Stanislovas have all lost their jobs. Marija has blood poisoning from an injury at work. They cannot find work elsewhere because Connor has blacklisted them. Kotrina is being sent to work the streets as a newspaper seller.

Ch. 18: Jurgis is held a few extra days to pay for the "privilege" of being maintained as a state prisoner. He has trouble finding his way home and walks for miles to get from the prison to his home. He discovers another family living in his home because his family has been evicted and lives in a dirty boarding house in town. Jurgis arrives to find Ona in labor with their child who is going to be delivered early. There are complications; however, the family cannot afford to pay a doctor to attend to her (the laborers did not have access to health care).

Ch. 19: He borrows some money and begs a midwife to help his wife during her delivery. The woman reluctantly comes to help Jurgis and Ona and chastises Jurgis for not taking care of his wife when she sees the squalor of the boarding house Ona is living in. Madame Haupt is unable to save Ona as she was called too late. The baby is dead and Ona is dying. Jurgis gets drunk, after she dies, using Kotrina's earnings.

Ch. 20: Jurgis agrees to stay with the family and help support them after Ona's death for the sake of little Antanas. He cannot find work because Connor has blacklisted him. He finds temporary work in a harvest machine manufacturing company. He is treated well there, but the work is only seasonal and he finds himself unemployed after a few months.

Ch. 21: Jurgis struggles once again to find work. Teta Elzbieta's youngest son, who was crippled when a wagon ran over one of his legs, goes through the garbage dump area to search for food and treasures for the family. The family is also sustained by the wages the other children are bringing home (in this world, child labor is immoral but in most cases necessary). A wealthy woman, engaged to be married to a superintendant of a mill, sees Juozapas sifting through the trash, learns of the family's problems and gives Jurgis a note that allows him to find employment at her fiancée's mill. He comes home on weekends because the mill is out of town. One day, he returns to find that little Antanas has fallen off of the boardwalk and has drown in a puddle of mud outside of their boardinghouse. Jurgis leaves the family, severing all ties.

Ch. 22: Jurgis goes into the country and lives as a tramp. A farmer tries to employ him for the summer; however, Jurgis turns him down. He has money in his pocket and decides that he does not want to work. He finds that work in the country is only seasonal and that although working conditions are cleaner and more humane in the country, they are only temporary. He bathes in a lake, washes the smell of manure out of his clothes, and for the first time feels clean, relaxed, and free. He enjoys his life as a tramp and looks at his former life as a dark trap that he was freed from once his wife and children died. He learns the tricks of living life as a tramp. He learns that the seasonal pay is good and once he earns it, he spends it on alcohol and women. He begins to tire of this lifestyle, however.

Ch. 23: Jurgis comes back to the city in the fall and finds work digging subway tunnels. It is dangerous work, where men are injured and die on a daily basis. Jurgis is injured on the job and goes to the hospital, where they give him the minimal amount of care and attention before sending him out into the winter cold before he's had a chance to completely recover. The hospital serves the patients canned and pickled meat from the meat packing factories that Jurgis knows is spoiled and diseased. Jurgis attends a revival meeting where an evangelist pastor preaches about "sin and redemption" (236). Jurgis feels that these preachers are out of touch, telling people to be ashamed of their sinful actions, while they do nothing to help the poor rise above their crushing circumstances. Jurgis describes the homeless and the beggars who develop elaborate systems to get money from passersby.

Ch. 24: Jurgis is reduced to begging on the streets because he cannot find work due to his tunneling injury. He meets Freddie Jones, drunken son of the packinghouse owner. He complains about what he perceives are the hardships of bourgeoisie life and takes Jurgis home. He gives him a hundred dollar bill to pay the taxi driver and Jurgis pockets it. Jurgis has dinner with Freddie at his home and is promptly removed from the home by the butler once Freddie passes out.

Ch. 25: Jurgis meets Duane again after he finds himself in jail a second time for beating a bartender who steals his hundred dollar bill when Jurgis asks him to change it. He decides to dedicate his life to crime and helps Duane mug people at night. When Duane flees the city because his associates turn against him, Jurgis makes friends with Scully's vote buyer, Harper. He is instructed by Scully to join a union and goes to work in packingtown to help Scully's candidate win an election. In this chapter we see how the Republican and Democratic parties are really two sides of the same coin, each helping the other buy votes for their chosen candidates by conferring citizenship on and paying off a new round of labor immigrants for their votes. This corrupt system even allows people to cast multiple votes for a candidate. Jurgis is finally making a decent living and has powerful friends, including Scully, who make life easy for him as long as he assists them in their criminal activities. We learn that Scully is ultimately responsible for the shoddy construction of the street outside of Jurgis's home that caused the accident that lead to his son's death.

Ch. 26: The unions go on strike in packingtown. Jurgis is advised by Scully to remain at work as a scab, where Jurgis negotiates a higher salary for himself. The packers, desperate to keep production going, hire unskilled, inexperienced workers from around the country. Jurgis becomes a supervisor and has a lot of trouble maintaining order among the new workers. They know that the packers desperately need them and take every opportunity to rest, moonlight at other factories, and slack off (the argument that capitalists often make is that workers become content and lazy if conditions are too good and that keeping unemployment up to a certain level at all times is necessary in order to keep the workers ready and eager to do their jobs). The strike ends briefly and then resumes when the packers break their promise not to punish/discriminate against the union leaders for the part they played in the strike. Jurgis sees Connor and attacks him again. When he is in jail, his friend, Hart, arranges an affordable bail for him so that he can escape because Jurgis knows he will be punished for attacking Connor again after Hart informs him that he is one of Scully's trusted agents.

Ch. 27: Jurgis cannot find work and resorts to begging again. He finds Marija working as a prostitute in a brothel and she tells him that this is the only way that the family could survive. Jurgis feels guilty for leaving them so abruptly. Marija tells him that he has nothing to apologize for. She tells him to go to Teta Elzbieta. Before he leaves, they are all arrested in a police raid.

Ch. 28: Jurgis and the prostitutes are set free after the madame pays a fine. He learns that most of the prostitutes (some who wandered into the profession as a last resort and some who were tricked into it, lured by the promise of respectable employment) are addicted to laudanuma, including Marija. The morphine addiction ensures that the prostitutes will be bound to their profession for life. The female slave trade in Chicago at this time is a profitable business. The traders can make up to fourteen dollars for every girl they bring into the profession. He also learns that Stanislovas was working in an oil factory, had a fondness for alcohol, got drunk one night, and passed out in the factory. When the workers returned the next morning, they found that he had been eaten by rats. After Jurgis leaves Marija, he does not go straight home to Elzbieta out of shame for his abrupt departure. He wanders into a socialist meeting and is inspired by the message.

Ch. 29: During the meeting he meets a party member, Ostrinsky, who explains the tenets of the socialist party to Jurgis. Jurgis begins to see how the system reduced him and his fellow laborers to the status of the animals they killed, profiting from their labor and disposing of them once the workers ceased to be useful. Jurgis stays over night with Ostrinsky before returning to Teta Elzbieta.

Ch. 30: Jurgis returns to Teta Elzbieta, who welcomes him back without judgment. He finds work as a porter at a hotel owned by a Socialist. His new boss encourages Jurgis to speak to people about his travails and includes him in all socialist meetings. This chapter covers some of the magazines and newspapers, such as Appeal to Reason, that featured literature written by and for the proletariat. Jurgis learns that the Railroad Trust owns most of the Senators and US House of Representatives, thereby controlling the United States government. The Beef Trust is at odds with the Railroad Trust because of the private car. The two trusts are battling it out for ownership of the United States.

Ch. 31: Teta Elzbieta's boys are "wild and unruly" because of their lives on the streets as newspaper sellers (341). Jurgis attends a meeting where different socialists discuss socialism. Dr. Schleiman and Comrade Lucas are among the speakers. The book ends with news of the tremendous gains the Socialist Party is making in all of the elections.

Works Cited


Sinclair, Upton. The Jungle. New York: Barnes & Noble Publishing, 2003.

Monday, March 22, 2010

Marxism: Imagining Utopia

Photobucket

Karl Marx, taking a materialist perspective, saw that the world was driven by material and economic needs. As feudalism was replaced by capitalism a new class system emerged, which formed according to a division of labor. There were the laborers or the exploited working class proletariat and the ruling class bourgeoisie, who were the "the owners of the means of capitalist production" (Communist Manifesto, 25). In order to acquire capital, the bourgeoisie paid the laborer a wage for his labor power (or his labor potential) and then sold the goods produced by the laborer at a profit, obtaining a surplus value (Das Kapital, 25). In order to increase profits, the bourgeoisie would try to pay the laborer as little as possible while squeezing as much work as possible from him or her. As a result, laborers often worked long hours under terrible conditions for very little pay. In order to maintain the profitable status quo, the bourgeoisie would flood the labor market with immigrant labor and child labor and destroy any attempt made by the proletariat to form unions or political organizations to improve working conditions.

Karl Marx proposed a solution that would liberate the proletariat from capitalist slavery— unification of the working class proletarians from all different countries around the world in order to revolt against the oppressive bourgeoisie so that private property would be abolished in favor of a collective sharing of resources (Parker, 187-194). He and Friedrich Engels outlined their proposal in the Communist Manifesto.

When I read the Communist Manifesto, I remembered certain passages from Sir Thomas More's Utopia, a political satire, in which he discusses the economic problems of his time and then talks about a fictional society that found a solution to the economic problems by abolishing private property and distributing all of the resources equally. He states, "all goods be shared equally by all…the one and only path to the welfare of the public is the equal allocation of goods; and I doubt whether such equality can be maintained where every individual has his own property" (47). More also states that once men are freed from the constant struggle for survival, then they can, "devote their time to the freedom and cultivation of the mind, for that they think, constitutes a happy life" (66). This is the goal that the socialist, Dr. Shleimann, in Upton Sinclair's The Jungle has in mind for the post-revolutionary socialist society. He states that once man is freed from his constant need to work in order to survive, he will be free to pursue academic interests and improve his mind (354).

Although the socialist model is a beautiful one and seems to be the best solution to capitalist exploitation, the model set forth by Marx and Engels makes no provision for dealing with the worst of all human faults—greed—and does not account for the possibility of power and wealth being amassed in the hands of a few enterprising individuals in the new system. There are no checks and balances to protect the new system from corruption. Fully aware of the problem of greed, More states, "since there is plenty of everything and no one need fear that anyone would want to ask for more than he needs? For why should anyone be suspected of asking for too much if he is certain he will never lack for anything…in the Utopian scheme of things there is no place at all for such a vice" (68). According to this statement, then, there will be no Utopia because without the elimination of greed or the implementation of a system that could effectively deal with this vice, the system Marx proposes and world More writes about will remain the stuff of dreams, existing only as a fictional Utopia, which means both "good place" and "no place" (very upsetting thought for a democratic socialist such as myself).

I included a YouTube clip of John Lennon's song,"Imagine" as the lyrics seem relevant to this topic.




Works Cited


Lennon, John, "Imagine," from the album Imagine, 1971

Marx, Karl, Das Kapital, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.

Marx, Karl and Engels Friedrich, The Communist Manifesto, New York: Pocket Books, 1964

More, Thomas, Utopia, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001

Parker, Robert. How to Interpret Literature: Critical Theory for Literary and Cultural Studies, New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.

Sinclair, Upton. The Jungle. New York: Barnes & Noble Publishing, 2003.

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Midterm: Deconstructing G-ds, Monsters, and Heroes in John Gardner's Grendel

In Western mythology gods, monsters, and heroes exist beyond social, cultural, and religious boundaries and are marked as "other," living in a permanent state of exile. It is important to note, however, that whereas monsters are viewed as an evil other and banished from society, gods and heroes are viewed as the good other, pedestalized and elevated beyond its boundaries. Both groups form the "other" or "outside" half of a binary pair with society, which constitutes "self" or "inside." The "outsiders" are further divided into the following binary pairs: good/evil, presence/absence, and light/dark. This essay will examine the existence of and interaction between binary pairs in John Gardner's Grendel—that is, Grendel (evil, darkness, and absence) versus Beowulf (goodness, presence, and light); and Grendel, Beowulf, and G-d (those who are outside of society) versus Hrothgar's Danes (those who are inside). Gardner's story is an adaptation of the 8th century Old English epic poem, Beowulf, and is told from the perspective of Grendel, the monster, offering a surprisingly sympathetic perspective of the monster's life. As the story unfolds, we see that although there is a sharp division between the so-called civilized world that King Hrothgar inhabits and Grendel's wild mere, the boundaries between these worlds sometimes blur and disappear as we learn that Hrothgar's people can be just as wild, brutal, and barbaric as Grendel and his mother. I will examine how Grendel's universe is structured according to these binaries and how each member of the binary pair is defined by and depends on the other; each containing elements of the other within itself. I will argue that Grendel and Beowulf are really two sides of the same coin, just as Hrothgar's hall, or the "inside" world is closely related to and inseparable from Grendel's mere, or "outside" world. I will also examine the god(s) that rule over the divided and chaotic worlds and how these gods are (de)constructed by the language of their mortal creators.

When Grendel first encounters Hrothgar and the Danes, he believes that because they speak his language, they must be related to him in some way. Grendel follows the humans back to their mead hall and sits outside, listening to their songs and conversations for awhile before he is moved by loneliness to join them inside. After he enters the hall, the Danes immediately attack him because they are threatened by his frightening alien appearance and force him to retreat to his mere in the forest. It is at this point that Grendel begins to identify himself as the "other" and "outsider" existing in direct opposition to King Hrothgar and his Danes, who occupy the center of society and constitute "inside." Thus the lines are drawn and each side has been assigned its role. Grendal realizes that in this world he "must be the outcast, cursed by the rules of this hideous fable" (55).

According to structuralist theory, in each binary relationship, the boundaries between each member of the pair are static and clearly defined and one member is always privileged over the other, defined by what the other lacks. Thus, meaning is relational and defined by how it differs from its opposite (Eagleton 84). However, Derrida slightly twists the static structuralist binary model, and posits that rather than existing as separate and opposite forces, each member of the pair is connected and necessary to the other and to the overall structural system they occupy. Each member of the binary pair contains elements of the other within itself, causing each to draw closer to the other at certain times and repel, expel, and exclude one another at other times. There is a constant striving between each member of the binary pair, a push–pull relationship of constant movement, unsettled tension, and of becoming, rather than being. Derrida states, "Every concept is necessarily and essentially inscribed in a chain or a system, within which it refers to another and to other concepts, by the systematic play of differences. Such a play, then – difference – is no longer simply a concept, but the possibility of conceptuality, of the conceptual system and process in general" (Differance, 285-286).

Derrida posits that there is a constant shifting between signifier and signified that there is no static one to one relationship or central idea that binds the pair absolutely (Of Grammatology, 303). It is through language that Grendel first begins to re-imagine his world as a fragmented place and starts to see himself as a wicked outsider walking the boundaries between the outside and inside of this world. The court harper, whom Grendel refers to as the Shaper, re-creates reality with his words as he composes heroic ballads about the battles men fight and recasts the bloody and violent deeds of men into something laudable, thus reshaping reality and making heroes of monsters. The Shaper also sings G-d and the Devil into existence. The Shaper separates light from darkness and deems man good and assigns a god of light to rule over him and declares Grendel dark and evil and assigns him the role of man's chief adversary. Grendel states that the Shaper sings of, "an ancient feud between two brothers which split all the world between darkness and light. And I, Grendel, was the dark side, he said in effect. The terrible race G-d cursed. I believed him. Such was the power of the Shaper's harp!" (51). Through the power of words, the Shaper creates gods, monsters, and heroes, defining everything according to his own conception of the universe.

Grendel believes in the illusions the Shaper weaves with his words until he meets a dragon, who is not a god himself, but is endowed with the power of transcendent knowledge and foresight, and tells Grendel that man, in order to give meaning to life, creates, "New laws for each new form…New lines of potential. Complexity beyond complexity, accident on accident…It's all the same in the end, matter and motion, simple or complex. No difference, finally" (71). He also tells Grendel that he is the, "brute existent by which they learn to define themselves. The exile, captivity, death they shrink from—the blunt facts of their mortality, their abandonment…you are mankind, or man's condition: inseparable as the mountain-climber and the mountain…[you must] scare him to glory" (73). Grendel understands that although humans are brutish and violent—as he followed them on many occasions and has seen them kill their neighbors for gold, property, and other trivial things—men need to define themselves against a monstrous other in order to justify their actions and give meaning to their existence. The dragon warns Grendel that if he refuses to play the role of monster, then men will find another to take his place.

Grendel's otherness is defined by men and the society they created; and he, in turn, defines them and gives structure to their society. In her book, Embodying the Monster, Margrit Shildrick, states, "The monster is not simply a signifier of otherness, but an altogether more complex figure that calls to mind not so much the other per se, as the trace of the other in the self. And as Derrida reminds us…we should learn, 'how to let it [the monster] speak…or how to give it back speech, even if it is in oneself, in the other, in the other in oneself'" (129-130). The power of the monster lies in its ability to express itself as a monster, and in doing so, he allows man to define himself as man against his aberrant image. In Grendel we see the line between monster and man collapse as they share many of the same qualities and are dependent upon each other for their identity.

In Grendel's world, meaning is relational and there is a constant shift and change between signifiers and signifieds. In his new understanding, Grendel realizes that the G-d that the Shaper sings of "is an illusion of language…[and] where alternatives exclude…Theology does not thrive in the world of action and reaction" (159). If meaning is relative and each member of a binary pair creates and defines the other, then there is no room for the kind of G-d the Shaper and Hrothgar's priests talk about. In his article, "Monsters in Eden," Colin Milburn states, " Derrida challenges the metaphysics of man, 'the name man being the name of that being who, throughout the history of metaphysics or of ontotheology-in other words, through the history of all his history-has dreamed of full presence, the reassuring foundation, the origin and the end of the game'" (616). Derrida denies the existence of a transcendent universal being, or superessential universal reality. Similarly, the dragon in Gardner's novel denies the existence of the Shaper's anthropomorphic G-d, and tells Grendel that it is simply another creation of man in his attempt to make sense of his world.

However, Anselm Min, in his article, "Naming an Unnamable G-d," states that according to Derrida, "the God of ontotheology is an idol to be rejected, that there is no way of direct, predicative reference to God, and that we have to go beyond the language of predication to some mode of testimony and invocation" (113). In other words, if there is a G-d, then he is beyond anyone's ability to comprehend or express him. Because all language falls short in the attempt to describe what is ineffable, apophasis explains G-d in terms of what we cannot know about him and argues that we will never fully have the ability to understand or describe what he is.

When the dragon, starts to describe how the universe originated, he eventually falls silent when he realizes that he is losing Grendel because the concepts he is trying to explain are beyond his comprehension. The dragon is unable to frame his explanation in terms that would make sense to Grendel, so, in frustration he states, "It's damn hard, you understand, confining myself to concepts familiar to a creature of the Dark Ages" (67). At this point, Grendel understands that the Shaper's G-d does not exist and that if any sort of a deity does exist, then it is beyond his comprehension and beyond anyone's ability to describe it him.

This new understanding allows Grendel to conduct his raids on Hrothgar's mead hall for many years without fear of reprisal either from men or the gods they created. Grendel is invulnerable until Beowulf arrives on the scene. Upon seeing Beowulf, due to a connection they share, Grendel immediately recognizes him as a fellow "outsider not only among the Danes but everywhere" (154). Grendel understands that he has met his equal and opposite in the world and states, "the world is divided, experience teaches, into two parts: things to be murdered, and things that would hinder the murder of things" (158). Beowulf is Grendel's moral and physical opposite. He is not only the hero who has come to stop the monster from "murdering things," but, in stark contrast to Grendel's alien form, he is physically perfect and represents the ideal man.

Although Grendel and Beowulf are binary opposites, they have much in common, which connects them, making them like two sides of the same coin. They are both outsiders, who are endowed with super human strength and are extraordinary in their physical appearance. They are invulnerable and cannot be hurt by the ordinary men that exist "inside" society. And, lastly, and most importantly, they are mad. Grendel states, "I understand at last the look in his eyes, he was insane" (162). When Grendel is waiting for the hour when he confronts Beowulf, he says, "I too wait, whispering, whispering, mad like him" (165). The madness that Grendel speaks of is not clinical insanity, but the Platonic madness described in the "Allegory of the Cave." Those who have left the cave moving beyond its false gods and constructed truths to learn higher truths, are perceived as mad when they return to the cave to tell those who have never left about what exists outside. Those who have never been outside of the cave insist on holding on to their small ideas and comfortable limitations and see those who have traveled beyond the cave's walls as insane (Republic VII, 760-766). It is the kind of madness shared by those extraordinary individuals who have crossed society's boundaries and live outside its limitations, gaining wisdom and understanding that seems strange, alien, and even mad to those who are blinded by the darkness of their limited understanding.

Georges Bataille defines this outside place as the:

heterogeneous world…[which] includes everything rejected by homogeneous society as wasted or as superior transcendent value. Included are the…numerous elements or social forms that homogeneous society is powerless to assimilate: mobs, the warrior…different types of violent individuals or at least hose who refuse the rule (madmen, leaders, poets, etc.) (Heterology 276).


In Gardner's story, Grendel and Beowulf are the heterogeneous outsiders, the madmen who live beyond the boundaries of what is ordinary and normal—one being exiled and the other elevated by the homogenous to the heterogeneous world. To this group I will add the gods—the anthropomorphic gods that man created in his own image, who are simple gods and can be explained in simple terms, dwelling as a real presence accessible to all minds; as well as the gods who cannot and do not exist in human conception, the uncreated, the ultimate absence. The homogenous and the heterogeneous define themselves against each other. The latter group is further divided between Grendel, who represents evil, lack, other, monster, and darkness in a binary whose other half is Beowulf, who represents goodness, presence, self, hero, and light. It becomes clear very early in the story that Grendel is not wholly evil and Beowulf is not perfectly good and that the two embody a mixture of good and evil.

John Gardner's story exemplifies a fragmented, Derridean universe where there are no knowable universal absolutes because there are no particulars that can instantiate with absolute accuracy the forms they attempt to represent. Signifiers and signifieds are constantly shifting and moving against each other to create meaning. Such movement is reflected in the binary pairs that exist in this world, which are dependent on each other for meaning and definition, sometimes divided from each other and sometimes united. Gardner takes the simple tale of Beowulf where good and evil are clearly defined and ruled over by a G-d who can be described in positive terms, and reworks it, completely turning the tale on its head by placing its characters in chaotic, disjointed worlds of a post-modernist universe where nothing is as it seems and meanings shift and change with each extraordinary line.



Works Cited


Bataille, Georges. "Heterology," Literary Theory: An Anthology. Eds. Rivkin, Julie and Ryan, Michael. New York: Blackwell Publishing, 2004, pp.273-277.

Chapman, Robert L. "Alas Poor Grendel," College English, Vol. 17, No. 6, Mar., 1956, pp. 334-337. .

Derrida, Jacques. "Difference," Literary Theory: An Anthology. Eds. Rivkin, Julie and Ryan Michael. New York: Blackwell Publishing, 2004, pp.278-299.

Derrida, Jacques. "Of Grammatology," Literary Theory: An Anthology. Eds. Rivkin, Julie and Ryan Michael. New York: Blackwell Publishing, 2004, pp.300-331.

Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2008.

Gardner, John. Grendel. New York: Vintage, 1989.

Milburn, Colin Nazhone. "Monsters in Eden: Darwin and Derrida," MLN, Vol. 118, No. 3, German Issue (Apr., 2003), pp. 603-621. .

Min, Anselm K. "Naming the Unnameable God: Levinas, Derrida, and Marion," International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Vol. 60, No. 1/3, pp. 99- 116 .

Plato. "The Republic," Plato: The Collected Dialogues. Trans. Lane Cooper. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1989.

Shildrick Margrit. Emboying the Monster: Encounters With the Vulnerable Self. London: Sage Publications, 2002.

Wheeler III, Samuel C. "Derrida's Differance and Plato's Different," Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 59, No. 4 (Dec., 1999), pp. 999-1013 .

Wyschogrod, Edith. "Autochthony and Welcome: Discourses of Exile in Levinas and Derrida," Derrida and Religion. Eds. Yvonne Sherwood and Kevin Hart. New York: Routledge, 2005, pp. 53-62.


Annotated Bibliography


Chapman, Robert L. "Alas Poor Grendel," College English, Vol. 17, No. 6, Mar., 1956, pp. 334-337. .

In this article, Chapman argues that the anonymous author of the Old English epic poem, Beowulf, treats Grendel and his monstrous mother with ambivalence and even sympathy, using such expressions as, "'unhappy man' (105); 'deprived of joy'(721); 'destitute man' (973); 'sin-afflicted' (975); 'deformed' (earmsceapen, 1351). 'alone-goer' (165, 449); 'his death was to be miserable' (805-807); 'Grendel must flee, fatally hurt, to seek the joy- less abode under the fen-slopes' (819- 821); and 'how he, weary-minded and set upon, doomed and chased, on the path to the mere took his bloody track' (844- 846)" (334). Chapman states that the author, "who had recently been pagan, and whose understanding of Christian doctrine was perhaps unrefined," may have treated Grendel and his mother with sympathy because they were evil not by choice, but had the role of monster thrust upon them by society. Beowulf includes many elements of Northern paganism, which does not recognize a universal order of heaven, hell, or purgatory. A man is judged by his community. If Grendel is evil because he is doomed to be evil, like the Biblical Cain, then the author removes some of the blame and treats him with sympathy. I selected this article because John Gardner takes the same approach in his work, which is an adaptation of the 8th century Old English poem, and takes it a step further by telling the story from the monster's point of view. Gardner's account of Grendel's story is a sympathetic one, demonstrating that the monster is evil because he is chosen for the role, not because he chooses it.

Milburn, Colin Nazhone. "Monsters in Eden: Darwin and Derrida," MLN, Vol. 118, No. 3, German Issue (Apr., 2003), pp. 603-621. .

This article provides a Derridean and Darwinian reading of monsters in nature and in literature. Derrida defines a monster as something that challenges what most consider "normal" and moves beyond acceptable boundaries both with its transgressive actions and abnormal appearance. Milburn argues that, "Derrida employs homologous textual strategies. He attempts to deconstruct metaphysics and undermine humanism by stripping structure of its center and boundaries. He engages the concept of a generalized writing for a violent reversal of natural orders. And invokes the myth of the Garden of Eden so as to deconstruct the metaphysical 'fall narrative,' to break its stranglehold on Western culture" (608). Both Darwin and Derrida collapse the traditional Western dichotomies of good versus evil, outside versus inside, and presence versus absence, deconstructing the boundaries that separate each binary, and empowering the monster by giving it a more important and more central role. Derrida deconstructs the structure of each dichotomy and replaces it with instability where each element is in a constant state of flux and change.

Min, Anselm K. "Naming the Unnameable God: Levinas, Derrida, and Marion," International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Vol. 60, No. 1/3, pp. 99-116 .

Min points out that Derrida's earlier rejection of apophatic theology stemmed from his understanding that although negative theology rejects an anthropomorphic conception of G-d, it still affirms the possibility of, "hyperessential presence…and the possibility of union with G-d" (104). In his later works, however, Derrida returns to negative theology and begins to see it is another form of deconstructionism. Negative theology becomes a way of moving beyond everything—unity, essence, reference and referent, and G-d. It posits that we are not only incapable of understanding G-d or universals, but all means of expression—all forms of language—fail to communicate these concepts. Thus, Derrida favors silence when it comes to the question of universals. Min states, " such, negative theology constitutes an essential part of deconstruction itself applicable to all areas of life. It embodies not only a subversive critique of all claims to identity, unity, and presence but also the most intense yearning behind such a critique for a life freed from all enslaving ideologies" (107). This article aided me in my Derridean analysis of the idea of G-d in John Gardiner's Grendel.

Shildrick Margrit. Emboying the Monster: Encounters With the Vulnerable Self. London: Sage Publications, 2002.

Margrit Shildrick's book explores the concept of monsters in Western thought. She asks what it would mean to, "reflect on, rework and valorise them" (1). Shildrick examines the boundaries that are set up to define what is normal as opposed to what is abnormal or monstrous. She rejects the long accepted, clear cut binaries of good and evil, outside and inside, and self and other; and argues that the boundaries between the elements in each binary are permeable. In other words, the line between monster and self is not so clear. Referring to Derrida she states, "I shall argue, neither vulnerability nor the monstrous is fully containable within the binary structure of the western logos, but signal a transformation of the relation between self and other such that the encounter with the strange is not a discrete event but the constant condition of becoming" (1).

Wheeler III, Samuel C. "Derrida's Differance and Plato's Different," Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 59, No. 4 (Dec., 1999), pp. 999-1013 .

Wheeler compares Plato's discussion of universal forms and the particulars that instantiate them to Derrida's discussion of Difference and the relationship between signifieds and the signifiers that represent them. Neither the signifiers nor the particulars can accurately capture the full meaning of the signifieds or the forms that they attempt to represent. Meaning is relational and there is a constant shift and change between signifiers and signifieds. I chose this article and Anselm Min's article, "Naming the Unnameable G-d" because they offer information about Derrida's response to Platonic philosophical concepts, such as universals, and how these concepts may have shaped his own philosophy. In my paper, I use Plato as a point of comparison in my analysis of G-d in the universe that John Gardner creates in Grendel.

Wyschogrod, Edith. "Autochthony and Welcome: Discourses of Exile in Levinas and Derrida," Derrida and Religion. Eds. Yvonne Sherwood and Kevin Hart. New York: Routledge, 2005, pp. 53-62.

In her article, Edith Wyschogrod examines what constitutes the boundaries between public and private, between outside and inside within a society. She states that the, "The home is always already a place of inclusion and exclusion, of friend and enemy, a place in which the stranger may evoke distrust: is s/he friend or enemy?" (56-57). She points to Derrida's argument that the line between political and private and between friend and enemy is often blurred or nonexistent. Friendship is defined upon the exclusion of others—or creating a set of non-friends. Also, showing hospitality to a friend or allowing an outsider to enter into a community involves risk to the host, in that the stranger may harm the host. Welcoming an outsider into a community may also involve an expectation of reciprocity, which leads one to question whether true friendship really exists. This article helped in my analysis of the boundaries that are drawn in Grendel and what constitutes inside versus outside and friend versus enemy in this text.

Sunday, March 14, 2010

The Eyes Have It

Photobucket

In the opening act of Equus, the audience is told that a teenage boy, named Alan, has committed an unspeakable act of violence against six horses. Alan, for reasons that are unclear in the beginning to the audience and the psychiatrist who examines him, has blinded the horses. As the story unravels we learn that this twisted act was born of a mind that was formed, in part, by his parents' conflicting ideas about love, sex, and religion. His smothering mother is a religious woman, who comes from an upper middle class Christian background and his controlling father is her opposite as an atheist and a member of the working class.

Early on, we are told that Alan is educated about sex by his mother and that she places her explanation of love and sex within a Christian framework. She states, "I told him the biological facts, but I also told him what I believed. That sex is not just a biological matter, but spiritual as well. That if G-d willed, he would fall in love one day. That his task was to prepare himself for the most important happening of his life. And after that, if he was lucky, he might come to know a higher love still…." (29). His mother also initiates him into the world of stories and fantasy. She tells him about a horse named Prince, who will only let a faithful rider mount him. She also tells him about the passage in The Book of Job that refers to the nobility of horses.

Alan begins to conflate horses, religion, and sex--a process which was started by his mother and is continued by his father when he replaces the picture of Jesus at the foot of Alan's bed with a picture of a horse. Alan has been taught by his mother that G-d is a judgmental G-d, with eyes everywhere that watch and see everything. The image of the horse, which Alan's mother describes to Dr. Dysart as being "all eyes," has replaced the image of G-d, and now stares down in judgment with eyes that see everything as Alan sleeps (40). Alan associates the horse's gaze with shame as it is only at two removes from his judgmental mother and at one remove from her judgmental Christian G-d.

This recalls Michel Foucault's description of the Panopticon in Discipline and Punish, where everyone in society is locked in a permanent state of surveillance, watching everyone else and being watched at all times. Thus, behavior becomes normalized by the collective gaze of society's judgment (551-555). In Alan's world, everyone is watching one another and being watched. And there is a real sense of shame whenever one of the characters steps outside of what is considered normal. The father watches and shames Alan when he catches him in the act of worshipping his horse-gd, Equus. Alan's mother watches and judges her son through her Christian G-d, which Alan has morphed into his horse-gd. The father attempts to escape the shaming gaze of his wife by sneaking off to watch a dirty movie. Father and son catch each other at the dirty movie and shame each other for being at the theater. Alan, who has learned to view sex as a shameful act, is unable to consummate his sexual relationship with Jill in the stables because he feels that the eyes of his G-d/mother/society are upon him in the form of the watchful horses. In order to relieve his shame, he blinds the horses and destroys their power to judge him. In doing so, Alan creates a world where, if only for a brief moment, the all-seeing eyes of G-d and society see him no more.

Works Cited

Foucault, Michel. "Discipline and Punish." Literary Theory: An Anthology. Eds. Rivkin, Julie and Ryan, Michael. New York: Blackwell Publishing, 2004. 549-566.

Shaffer, Peter. Equus. New York: Scribner, 2002.

Saturday, March 6, 2010

Deconstructing Binaries

Derrida offers a new way of seeing the binary system of structuralism, which neatly divides everything into mutually exclusive categories, such as: good/evil, presence/absence, mind/body, spirit/matter, inside/outside, high/low, light/dark, male/female, etc. In each binary relationship, one is privileged over the other and is defined by what the other lacks. Thus, meaning is relational and defined by how it differs from its opposite (Eagleton 84). If man is strong, positive, rational, and present, then woman must necessarily be weak, negative, emotional, and absent. These categories are fixed and privilege one category over the other, implying a sexist, ethnocentric, and rigid hierarchy.

Rather than seeing binaries as separate and opposite forces, Derrida states that each member of the pair is necessary to the other and to the overall structural system they occupy. In examining the male/female binary, Eagleton states, "Man therefore needs this other even as he spurns it, is constrained to give a positive identity to what he regards as no-thing. Not only is his own being parasitically dependent upon the women, and upon the act of excluding and subordinating her, but one reason why such exclusion is necessary is because she may not be quite so other after all. Perhaps she stands as a sign of something in man himself which he needs to repress, expel beyond his own being, relegate to a securely alien region beyond his own definitive limits. Perhaps what is outside is also somehow inside" (115). Each member of the binary pair is defined by and depends on the other. Sometimes they draw closer together and sometimes they repel, expel, and exclude one another. There is a constant striving between each member of the binary pair, a push–pull relationship of constant movement, unsettled tension, and of becoming, rather than being. This is in stark contrast with the simple, static structuralist model with clearly defined boundaries between each member of the pair who belong to a settled and immovable hierarchy.

The relationship between David Dunn and Mr. Glass in M. Night Shyamalan's Unbreakable illustrates the post-structuralist model of binary opposition. Mr. Glass, the arch villain, identifies his opposite in David Dunn, the superhero, and leads Dunn to discover his identity over the course of the movie. In this scene, Mr. Glass explains that he earned his name because he suffers from a rare disease that attacks his bones and makes them as fragile as glass. He is physically weak and has searched all of his life for his opposite in the world—someone who would not only be physically strong, but absolutely unbreakable. In order to find this superman, he bombed buildings, caused plane crashes, engineered mudslides and finally finds his indestructible opposite when David Dunn miraculously walks away unharmed from a large train wreck Mr. Glass masterminded. He tells Dunn, " Your bones don't break, mine do. That's clear. Your cells react to bacteria and viruses differently than mine. You don't get sick, I do. That's also clear. But for some reason, you and I react the exact same way to water. We swallow it too fast, we choke. We get some in our lungs, we drown. However unreal it may seem, we are connected, you and I. We're on the same curve, just on opposite ends." Mr. Glass points out that although they are on opposite ends of the spectrum, they have more similarities than differences, connecting them and making them like two sides of a coin, rather than two separate and opposite members of a pair. The two define and sustain each other. Mr. Glass tried to make sense of his physical weakness by finding someone as extraordinary as himself. In searching for his counterpart, he blew up buildings, derailed trains, and killed thousands of people, defining himself as evil and casting himself in the role of "villain". In finding Dunn, Mr. Glass has affirmed this identity as "villain" and proceeds to tell Dunn who he is. Dunn then defines himself against Mr. Glass and becomes the good member of this binary pair, as he is not only Mr. Glass's physical opposite, but his moral opposite as well. If Mr. Glass is the evil destroyer, then Dunn must be the good protector. Mr. Glass asks Dunn, "Do you know what the scariest thing is? To not know your place in this world, to not know why you're here. Now that we know who you are... I know who I am. I'm not a mistake! It all makes sense, in the comic you know how you can tell who the arch villain is going to be? He's the exact opposite of the hero! And most times they're friends, like you and me. I should've known way back when. You know why David? Because of the kids! They called me Mr. Glass." By the end of the movie, both characters have a clear understanding of who they are and what their purpose is. Each has defined himself against the other. Each is linked to the other, representing the good/evil, strong/weak, hero/anti-hero binaries who must strive against, but remain forever linked to one another.




Works Cited

Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2008.

Saturday, February 27, 2010

Negotiating the Oedipal Complex

According to Freud, every person must surmount his Oedipal Complex by repressing his desires into the subconscious. In his pre-Oedipal stage, a child harbors an incestuous love for his mother, which he overcomes when his father enters the picture. The father possesses the mother completely and represents the ultimate authority which has the power to punish and castrate. Unable to replace his father, a child learns to identify with him, sublimate his desires and channel his repressed energies into socially acceptable forms of expression. His father, "symbolizes a place, a possibility, which he himself will be able to take up and realize in the future…the boy makes peace with his father, identifies with him, and is thus introduced into a symbolic role of manhood" (Eagleton, 134). Freud also outlines the steps a female child takes in moving past the Oedipal Complex; however, in this blog entry, we will focus on Freud's analysis of the male child.

What happens when a child is unable to successfully navigate the treacherous waters of the Oedipal Stage? Freud argues that the Oedipal Complex is the "nucleus of the neuroses" and in certain cases sublimated desires can cause sexual deviance and confusion, phobias, obsessions, hysterics, paranoia, and schizophrenia (Eagleton 137-138). To demonstrate what can happen when a child never transitions out of what Freud calls the Phallic Stage of the Oedipal Complex, I included a clip from Sex and the City, where Charlotte York walks into her bathroom and finds her husband with his mother, Bunny, who is giving him a bath. In the television series Bunny is portrayed as Trey's strong, interfering mother, who retains a powerful hold over her son and refuses to relinquish any of that power to her new daughter-in-law. In this scene, Bunny is smoking a cigarette next to her naked son and tells Charlotte how much she reminds her of herself. Charlotte realizes that in choosing her, Trey has married his mother. Her husband's inability to separate from his mother is a constant source of tension in their relationship and eventually leads to their divorce.



Another example of a child's failed transition out of the Phallic Stage can be seen in the movie In Dreams, where Robert Downy Jr., who is obsessed with his dead mother, abducts Annette Benning in an attempt to recreate his childhood. Robert Downy Jr., who in a previous scene appeared in his mother's clothes, dresses Annette Benning in the same clothes so that she resembles his mother. He tells her that he will not hurt her if she loves him like his mother loved his father. When Annette Benning refuses to become his mother/wife, he tries to kill her.



Sometimes, the target of a person's neurosis is the father because the child continues to resent the father's authority and never learns to identify with him or the patriarchal role he is expected to assume as an adult. I included a clip from Hamlet 2, which is a movie about a play of the same name, written and directed by Steve Coogan's character, who is a frustrated actor turned high school drama teacher. In choosing an acting career, he disappointed his father and these father issues manifest themselves in the play, which is mostly about how the two main characters, Jesus and Hamlet attempt to gain independence from their strong fathers. In the final scene of the movie, Steve Coogan's character, Hamlet, and Jesus are conflated and become "The Son" who finally gains an independent identity from his father and finds freedom and happiness in the separation.



Another problem that arises from the failure to resolve the Oedipal Stage is when a man transfers his fear of castration to women. In other words, he may believe that a woman can drain his life force during the act of sex—a common belief among Classical and medieval scholars. Aristotle and Galen believed that sexual activity would drain a man's vitality, leaving him permanently debilitated (Blamires 38). I included a clip from Dr. Strangelove; Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb. In this scene, General Jack D. Ripper holds a giant gun in his hand while he tells Mandrake that because he once felt a "profound sense of fatigue" after sex, he believes that sex can lead to a "loss of essence" and has taken great care to avoid losing any more of his vital power to women during sex.



Works Cited

Woman Defamed and Woman Defended. Ed. Alcuin Blamires. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992

Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2008.