http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMLEAAnfxYw
I will admit that I am a huge fan of the show Wicked. Actually, I saw it five times, and seriously considered a sixth. So, it seems natural that as I read the ideas of Marxism and his theory that the illusion of the ruling class is created by the intellectual elite of the ruling class; however, eventually a schism of hostility erupts. I immediately thought of the Wizard of Oz, with the Wizard behind the curtain pulling all the strings. I thought of how the people and the Wizard were like one. Both seemed synonymous in their interests and outlook, and that made the people eager to have a "strong personality" with incredible power as their protector. However, when one looked behind the curtain, there was a resounding hostility that a charlatan had been hiding behind smoke and mirrors and actually usurping the credit that belonged to the people. Unfortunately, there seems to block on importing that scene.
However, I was also reminded of the scene from Wicked, where Glinda is presented as Eva Peron. Someone else chose to make the connection for me, so I am presenting their video work.
The idea that a ruler to further his own power, prestige, and economic interests is not new. Nor is it new that the interests of the general populace must appear to be the focal point of the representative is also not new. It was interesting to read the book, which is even more graphic than the play, where the manipulation of a public figure by forces that remain behind the scenes and appear to represent the common man are historically almost stereotypical and trite. The fact that the reality mirrors the fiction is not surprising.
The main concept that the video highlights is that Glinda always emerges from the heights to mingle with the people she is "one of." She is adored by them, put on a pedestal, but never really on their level, except when she chooses to drop in. The idea of a bubble, something that is ephemeral and reflective. Therefore, like many ideologies of government, it reflects what is around it, even though it is not really the composition of the object. In addition, it will soon burst and disappear, only to be replaced by the next optically pleasing illusion.
Although Baum's book can be looked at as a classic struggle of good vs evil, the political ramifications assessed by adults. Obviously, as supported by Marx, in order to understand the literature more fully, one most understand the political influences that were in place or in flux at the time of writing the work.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Mid-Term
Catherine Foley
Dr. Wexler
English 638
13 March 2010
Included in his concept of humane punishment, Michel Foucault borrows from philosopher Jeremy Bentham in a section that is entitled “Panopticism.” Foucault theorizes that the power of the observer lies in the uncertainty of the observed. Since the observed is unable to return the gaze, he must make the assumption that the observer’s gaze is falling upon him at any particular moment in time. He becomes self-governing, and in this self-regulation, he becomes complicit in asserting the power of the observer. He is part of the machinery that enslaves him. Using this concept as a genesis, Laura Mulvey subscribes to the theory of an imbalance of power between the observer and the observed. She combines the idea with Freud’s concept of “scotophilia [or] taking other people as objects, subjecting them to a controlling and curious gaze“ (Hawthorn 510). She then examines the effect that gaze has in a world where gender determines the sexual power in relationships: the male is associated with the gaze that objectifies women, and women are conditioned to assume the role of the exhibitionist. This theory helps to explain choices that William Faulkner makes in Sanctuary.
Faulkner never hides the importance that observation plays. As the reader ingests the written text, characters and events are offered through vision: what others see, the image a mirror affords, or the word choices that Faulkner uses to characterize the type of looking being performed. In some way, every character is introduced by the concept of observation. The establishment of dominance through vision is set forth in the opening sentence of the novel. Faulkner begins with,” From beyond the screen of bushes which surrounded the spring, Popeye watched the main drinking” (Faulkner 3). Repetition of watching is repeated one sentence later, but power then transfers to the man (Horace Benbow), who sees both himself and his observer in a reflection. Because the medium is water, the gaze shifts from direct and clear, although screened, to overt, yet indirect, distorted, and fragmented. Popeye’s first description, although later augmented by the narrator, is presented through what the Benbow sees. Elements in his description seem strange: “His face had a queer bloodless color, as though seen by an electric light” (Faulkner 4). Obviously, the personification of the light shows the importance of watching, looking, and seeing throughout the novel. Faulkner illustrates the point that even when man feels alone, he is being observed by inanimate objects. The other oddity is the narrator’s description of Popeye (notice the second syllable of the name): his eyes are defined as “two knobs of soft black rubber” (Faulkner 4). The metaphor for the eyes removes the sense of humanity usually articulated through the description of the eyes. Strangely, they then sit face to face for two hours without speaking. The power play is almost like a game of who will blink first, as if these two strangers have an innate cognizance of a ritual of dominance, a tacit agreement of how power is determined. This is a glimpse of meaning that Faulkner repeatedly affords the reader throughout. However, there are always puzzle pieces that are missing.
Sanctuary is unlike most novels where the narrator is able to silently and unobtrusively impinge on the actions, thoughts, emotions, and desires of the characters. Faulkner provides the reader with images that are fragmented and sometimes distorted by the perception of reality that conflicts with the truth of the situation. There is an emphasis on mirror image to check on appearances. However, the reader is left to discern which is more accurate, the form or the image. The questions arises of whether the image in the mirror serves as a distorted illusion of reality, or is it a clearer image of the truth, uncomplicated by the distortions of the psyche. The mirror, like the novel, provides the medium by which the source is replicated, but never with an assurance of a complete image or the avoidance of distortion.
The reader seems to stumble forward with an air of uncertainty; events unfold that seem to confuse rather than demystify. In his essay “Corruption in Looking: William Faulkner's Sanctuary as a 'Detect’ve’ Novel," Andrew Wilson explores this concept as an intentional device that Faulkner sets into play by the gaps and prolonged delay of information. Wilson expands his analysis of the novel by stating that “ Faulkner reveals only by persistently veiling a part of what he uncovers. Rather, he provides glimpses, parts of the whole. He offers data as the typical eye sees, or `detects: sporadically, collecting mere bits of information about people, objects, events, all of which are seemingly chosen willy-nilly. Only occasionally does the typical human eye, in a typical moment, zoom in and thoroughly imbibe a person, thing, act in its entirety” (Wilson).
Certainly, Faulkner does exactly this. Everything seems to exist on the exterior. The reader is given a narrative that mainly is descriptive, offering little insight into the thoughts and emotions of the characters. The dialogue is stilted, incomplete, guarded, and intentionally vague. Answers do not seem to respond to the questions; characters have discussions in which there is implicit knowledge between them that is omitted from the text. The reader is repeatedly told that the characters are mainly engaged in the art of watching. Therefore, the other senses are dulled, and the vocabulary of the story is centered on words related to observation, such as “look”, “watch”, “gaze” and “eyes“. The old blind man, Lee Goodwin’s father, is portrayed as impotent because he is blind; again, vision becomes the privileged marker of sensory power. As Foucault suggests, the power is determined by the role that one plays, observer or observed. However, the in Foucault’s work, the determination of power stays in the hands of the observer as the observed becomes an unwitting part of the process. He imagines or surmises that he is being observed, even when he is not, and adjusts his behavior in accordance to the rules of conduct the observer demands.
In Sanctuary, the full revelation of a change in the regime of power unfolds slowly. The reader realizes that Popeye, Drake’s antagonist, is always an observer, rather than a true participant in life. In his sexual encounters, he is incapable of sexual performance, and observing is a necessity, not a choice or preference. Drake is a woman who is engaged in living and experiencing life, but she has become reduced to one who uses her powers of observation to serve her need for revenge. Faulkner subverts the traditional roles of gender identification. Popeye seems to have the power, but it is attained and maintained through surrogates, either other men or inanimate objects. Faulkner equates power with sex, and Drake, once the objectified, quickly gleans how to dominate. She becomes the one with real power, as she asserts her control over situations and men’s lives.
The events of the rape come to full light in the courtroom scene. However, what is more telling than the facts of the crime is Temple Drake herself, particularly the way the narrator chooses to describe her appearance and actions. He uses great detail, with images such as, “From beneath her black hat her hair escaped in tight red curls like clots of resin. The hat bore a rhinestone ornament. Upon her black satin lap lay a platinum bag. Her hands lay motionless, palm-up on her lap. …Her face was quite pale, the two spots of rouge like paper discs pasted on her cheek bones, her mouth painted into a savage and perfect bow” (Faulkner 284). Any detailed description of her eyes is missing; they are defined by what they do, not how they appear. The narrator states that “her gaze fixed on something at the back of the room” (Faulkner 284). The other participants in the room are described as having looks or glances, but Black is repeatedly detailed in terms of a gaze. The former objectified has become the objectifier. She is now the subject, the author of her destiny, she holds the power. She uses that power to have a man convicted of a crime he did not commit. She uses her power to have another man question his values, his worth, his motivations, and yet another comes to his eventual demise, drained of his power and his will to live. Except for her father, she emerges as the strongest of the men who thought they were in control of her. She loses her innocence, but she gains the cool, detached eye of the impartial observer, the gaze. Once again, Faulkner seems to subscribe to the theories of Foucault. In The History of Sexuality, Foucault questions the theories of Freud’s id and repression in the formation of sexuality and power. Foucault hypothesizes “that sexuality is ‘an especially dense transfer point for relations of power…Sexuality is not the most intractable element in power relations but one of those endowed with the greatest instrumentality’” (Purvis 434). Ironically, Drake’s power seems to be taken from her on the night of the rape. However, the ultimate outcome is that she gains power in her realization of the power that she holds over men. Both she and Popeye are described as small and thin, not the obvious candidates for an image of power. However, true power comes from the internal, not the external; the mental and psychological, not the physical. Like the glass tower, it is not the physical presence of the guard, but the sheer memory of the experience held by the prisoner that dominates.
The thematic message that Faulkner offers, a failure to find a safe place is applicable to complete resolution of the novel. Faulkner offers clues, but never enough to provide definitive answers. The author removes power from every character, since each story is related by a limited narrator. This competition for power is mirrored, as the author and reader jockey for the power of interpretation. The reader never feels completely secure that the impressions being formed are accurate or complete, yet he struggles to accomplish the impossible. The normal binaries are subverted, the traditional roles of man and women, good and evil, strong and weak take either lose meaning or take on new meanings. Therefore, the sanctuary of resolution is denied: complete power remains with the author; the reader is simply part of the mechanism that is set up for him, unable to return the gaze.
Fiction 24.2 (1996): 171+. Gale. 13 Mar. 2010.
Asserts the difference between power lies in a combination of gender and social class.
Defines the tropes that represent power in novels are related to masculinity in the guise of
phallic symbols. However, social constructs force men into different behavior with
women and dictates that women can never be unmasked, or they become undesirable.
Faulkner, William. Sanctuary. New York: Vintage, 1993.
Faulkner explores the modern anti-hero through this fictional novel. The story revolves around a central figure, Temple Black, but there is no clearly defined protagonist in the story. The plot has three narratives that all converge at one moment in time, with the lives of Horace Benbow and Lee Goodwin taking a new direction after their encounter with Black. The rape scene of Black forms a pivotal twist in the plot that serves to highlight the depravity of mankind, his impotence, the need for revenge, and the survival instinct, and the constantly shifting positions of power.
Hawthorn, Jeremy. “Theories of the Gaze”. Literary Theory and Criticism. Ed. Patricia Waugh. New York: Oxford, 2006.
Presents a clearly defined selection of essays and synopsis of books relating to the recognition of the importance of observation. References the schools and works of theory that relate to this modern approach with extension occurring in feminist, narrative, and post-colonial theories. Asserts the importance of the gaze in life, written text, and cinema.
Watkins, Floyd C. “Through the Glass Darkly.” The Sewanee Review 85.3 (1977): 484-493.
JStor 13 March 2010.
Warns of the danger of the both unsophisticated reader and the theorist misinterpreting the works of Faulkner because of their lack of knowledge and expertise in a crucial arena.
Asserts that theorists have an ulterior motivation to make a name for themselves by espousing their personal agenda for self-aggrandizement.
Purvis, Tony. “Sexualities.” ”. Literary Theory and Criticism. Ed. Patricia Waugh. New York: Oxford, 2006.
Covers a range of topics that deal with sexuality and relates these to relevant theories.
Discusses gender identity, social constructs, queer theory, and sexual nature. Uses ideas
formulated from Freud and Foucault to Sedgwick and Butler.
Wilson, Andrew J. "The corruption in looking: William Faulkner's 'Sanctuary' as a 'Detect'ive Novel." The Mississippi Quarterly 47.3 (1994): 441+. Gale. 13 March 2010.
An examination of the elements of voyeurism in Faulkner's Sanctuary. Implies the voyeuristic tendencies people practice isolate them, since observation is a solitary act. Man is removed from touch; therefore, there is a distancing from flesh, both sexually and socially.
Dr. Wexler
English 638
13 March 2010
Foucault and Faulkner’s Gaze: The Power of Observation
The main theme of William Faulkner’s novel Sanctuary is that as much as one may seek a safe refuge, such an opportunity does not really exist. Whether searching for a physical, intellectual, psychological, or spiritual retreat, the expectation will only be met with disappointment. However, within the story and related to the theme, an obvious motif emerges: voyeurism. The motivations for this action are different: sometimes salacious, sometimes curious, sometimes accidental, but there is an emblematic and recurring power that Faulkner gives to the observer. The power that is granted to the voyeur parallels Michel Foucault’s theory in Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, only with a twist. Faulkner writes his novel with intentional gaps in plot, character development, and conclusion. Therefore, he makes the reader a detective, an observer who must carefully watch for clues in an attempt to construct meaning. The reader is given access to information only through a third person limited narrator. Therefore, the reader obtains insight into every character and event, but never completely. Ultimately, the power of total understanding is retained by the author. Faulkner himself becomes the observer in Foucault’s glass tower: through his written word, he remains invisible yet omnipresent. In a relentless search for complete and accurate divination, the reader unknowingly becomes a participant in establishing Faulkner’s regime.Included in his concept of humane punishment, Michel Foucault borrows from philosopher Jeremy Bentham in a section that is entitled “Panopticism.” Foucault theorizes that the power of the observer lies in the uncertainty of the observed. Since the observed is unable to return the gaze, he must make the assumption that the observer’s gaze is falling upon him at any particular moment in time. He becomes self-governing, and in this self-regulation, he becomes complicit in asserting the power of the observer. He is part of the machinery that enslaves him. Using this concept as a genesis, Laura Mulvey subscribes to the theory of an imbalance of power between the observer and the observed. She combines the idea with Freud’s concept of “scotophilia [or] taking other people as objects, subjecting them to a controlling and curious gaze“ (Hawthorn 510). She then examines the effect that gaze has in a world where gender determines the sexual power in relationships: the male is associated with the gaze that objectifies women, and women are conditioned to assume the role of the exhibitionist. This theory helps to explain choices that William Faulkner makes in Sanctuary.
Faulkner never hides the importance that observation plays. As the reader ingests the written text, characters and events are offered through vision: what others see, the image a mirror affords, or the word choices that Faulkner uses to characterize the type of looking being performed. In some way, every character is introduced by the concept of observation. The establishment of dominance through vision is set forth in the opening sentence of the novel. Faulkner begins with,” From beyond the screen of bushes which surrounded the spring, Popeye watched the main drinking” (Faulkner 3). Repetition of watching is repeated one sentence later, but power then transfers to the man (Horace Benbow), who sees both himself and his observer in a reflection. Because the medium is water, the gaze shifts from direct and clear, although screened, to overt, yet indirect, distorted, and fragmented. Popeye’s first description, although later augmented by the narrator, is presented through what the Benbow sees. Elements in his description seem strange: “His face had a queer bloodless color, as though seen by an electric light” (Faulkner 4). Obviously, the personification of the light shows the importance of watching, looking, and seeing throughout the novel. Faulkner illustrates the point that even when man feels alone, he is being observed by inanimate objects. The other oddity is the narrator’s description of Popeye (notice the second syllable of the name): his eyes are defined as “two knobs of soft black rubber” (Faulkner 4). The metaphor for the eyes removes the sense of humanity usually articulated through the description of the eyes. Strangely, they then sit face to face for two hours without speaking. The power play is almost like a game of who will blink first, as if these two strangers have an innate cognizance of a ritual of dominance, a tacit agreement of how power is determined. This is a glimpse of meaning that Faulkner repeatedly affords the reader throughout. However, there are always puzzle pieces that are missing.
Sanctuary is unlike most novels where the narrator is able to silently and unobtrusively impinge on the actions, thoughts, emotions, and desires of the characters. Faulkner provides the reader with images that are fragmented and sometimes distorted by the perception of reality that conflicts with the truth of the situation. There is an emphasis on mirror image to check on appearances. However, the reader is left to discern which is more accurate, the form or the image. The questions arises of whether the image in the mirror serves as a distorted illusion of reality, or is it a clearer image of the truth, uncomplicated by the distortions of the psyche. The mirror, like the novel, provides the medium by which the source is replicated, but never with an assurance of a complete image or the avoidance of distortion.
The reader seems to stumble forward with an air of uncertainty; events unfold that seem to confuse rather than demystify. In his essay “Corruption in Looking: William Faulkner's Sanctuary as a 'Detect’ve’ Novel," Andrew Wilson explores this concept as an intentional device that Faulkner sets into play by the gaps and prolonged delay of information. Wilson expands his analysis of the novel by stating that “ Faulkner reveals only by persistently veiling a part of what he uncovers. Rather, he provides glimpses, parts of the whole. He offers data as the typical eye sees, or `detects: sporadically, collecting mere bits of information about people, objects, events, all of which are seemingly chosen willy-nilly. Only occasionally does the typical human eye, in a typical moment, zoom in and thoroughly imbibe a person, thing, act in its entirety” (Wilson).
Certainly, Faulkner does exactly this. Everything seems to exist on the exterior. The reader is given a narrative that mainly is descriptive, offering little insight into the thoughts and emotions of the characters. The dialogue is stilted, incomplete, guarded, and intentionally vague. Answers do not seem to respond to the questions; characters have discussions in which there is implicit knowledge between them that is omitted from the text. The reader is repeatedly told that the characters are mainly engaged in the art of watching. Therefore, the other senses are dulled, and the vocabulary of the story is centered on words related to observation, such as “look”, “watch”, “gaze” and “eyes“. The old blind man, Lee Goodwin’s father, is portrayed as impotent because he is blind; again, vision becomes the privileged marker of sensory power. As Foucault suggests, the power is determined by the role that one plays, observer or observed. However, the in Foucault’s work, the determination of power stays in the hands of the observer as the observed becomes an unwitting part of the process. He imagines or surmises that he is being observed, even when he is not, and adjusts his behavior in accordance to the rules of conduct the observer demands.
In Sanctuary, the full revelation of a change in the regime of power unfolds slowly. The reader realizes that Popeye, Drake’s antagonist, is always an observer, rather than a true participant in life. In his sexual encounters, he is incapable of sexual performance, and observing is a necessity, not a choice or preference. Drake is a woman who is engaged in living and experiencing life, but she has become reduced to one who uses her powers of observation to serve her need for revenge. Faulkner subverts the traditional roles of gender identification. Popeye seems to have the power, but it is attained and maintained through surrogates, either other men or inanimate objects. Faulkner equates power with sex, and Drake, once the objectified, quickly gleans how to dominate. She becomes the one with real power, as she asserts her control over situations and men’s lives.
The events of the rape come to full light in the courtroom scene. However, what is more telling than the facts of the crime is Temple Drake herself, particularly the way the narrator chooses to describe her appearance and actions. He uses great detail, with images such as, “From beneath her black hat her hair escaped in tight red curls like clots of resin. The hat bore a rhinestone ornament. Upon her black satin lap lay a platinum bag. Her hands lay motionless, palm-up on her lap. …Her face was quite pale, the two spots of rouge like paper discs pasted on her cheek bones, her mouth painted into a savage and perfect bow” (Faulkner 284). Any detailed description of her eyes is missing; they are defined by what they do, not how they appear. The narrator states that “her gaze fixed on something at the back of the room” (Faulkner 284). The other participants in the room are described as having looks or glances, but Black is repeatedly detailed in terms of a gaze. The former objectified has become the objectifier. She is now the subject, the author of her destiny, she holds the power. She uses that power to have a man convicted of a crime he did not commit. She uses her power to have another man question his values, his worth, his motivations, and yet another comes to his eventual demise, drained of his power and his will to live. Except for her father, she emerges as the strongest of the men who thought they were in control of her. She loses her innocence, but she gains the cool, detached eye of the impartial observer, the gaze. Once again, Faulkner seems to subscribe to the theories of Foucault. In The History of Sexuality, Foucault questions the theories of Freud’s id and repression in the formation of sexuality and power. Foucault hypothesizes “that sexuality is ‘an especially dense transfer point for relations of power…Sexuality is not the most intractable element in power relations but one of those endowed with the greatest instrumentality’” (Purvis 434). Ironically, Drake’s power seems to be taken from her on the night of the rape. However, the ultimate outcome is that she gains power in her realization of the power that she holds over men. Both she and Popeye are described as small and thin, not the obvious candidates for an image of power. However, true power comes from the internal, not the external; the mental and psychological, not the physical. Like the glass tower, it is not the physical presence of the guard, but the sheer memory of the experience held by the prisoner that dominates.
The thematic message that Faulkner offers, a failure to find a safe place is applicable to complete resolution of the novel. Faulkner offers clues, but never enough to provide definitive answers. The author removes power from every character, since each story is related by a limited narrator. This competition for power is mirrored, as the author and reader jockey for the power of interpretation. The reader never feels completely secure that the impressions being formed are accurate or complete, yet he struggles to accomplish the impossible. The normal binaries are subverted, the traditional roles of man and women, good and evil, strong and weak take either lose meaning or take on new meanings. Therefore, the sanctuary of resolution is denied: complete power remains with the author; the reader is simply part of the mechanism that is set up for him, unable to return the gaze.
Bibliography
Dunleavy, Linda. "'Sanctuary, Sexual Difference, and the Problem of Rape." Studies in AmericanFiction 24.2 (1996): 171+. Gale. 13 Mar. 2010.
Asserts the difference between power lies in a combination of gender and social class.
Defines the tropes that represent power in novels are related to masculinity in the guise of
phallic symbols. However, social constructs force men into different behavior with
women and dictates that women can never be unmasked, or they become undesirable.
Faulkner, William. Sanctuary. New York: Vintage, 1993.
Faulkner explores the modern anti-hero through this fictional novel. The story revolves around a central figure, Temple Black, but there is no clearly defined protagonist in the story. The plot has three narratives that all converge at one moment in time, with the lives of Horace Benbow and Lee Goodwin taking a new direction after their encounter with Black. The rape scene of Black forms a pivotal twist in the plot that serves to highlight the depravity of mankind, his impotence, the need for revenge, and the survival instinct, and the constantly shifting positions of power.
Hawthorn, Jeremy. “Theories of the Gaze”. Literary Theory and Criticism. Ed. Patricia Waugh. New York: Oxford, 2006.
Presents a clearly defined selection of essays and synopsis of books relating to the recognition of the importance of observation. References the schools and works of theory that relate to this modern approach with extension occurring in feminist, narrative, and post-colonial theories. Asserts the importance of the gaze in life, written text, and cinema.
Watkins, Floyd C. “Through the Glass Darkly.” The Sewanee Review 85.3 (1977): 484-493.
JStor 13 March 2010.
Warns of the danger of the both unsophisticated reader and the theorist misinterpreting the works of Faulkner because of their lack of knowledge and expertise in a crucial arena.
Asserts that theorists have an ulterior motivation to make a name for themselves by espousing their personal agenda for self-aggrandizement.
Purvis, Tony. “Sexualities.” ”. Literary Theory and Criticism. Ed. Patricia Waugh. New York: Oxford, 2006.
Covers a range of topics that deal with sexuality and relates these to relevant theories.
Discusses gender identity, social constructs, queer theory, and sexual nature. Uses ideas
formulated from Freud and Foucault to Sedgwick and Butler.
Wilson, Andrew J. "The corruption in looking: William Faulkner's 'Sanctuary' as a 'Detect'ive Novel." The Mississippi Quarterly 47.3 (1994): 441+. Gale. 13 March 2010.
An examination of the elements of voyeurism in Faulkner's Sanctuary. Implies the voyeuristic tendencies people practice isolate them, since observation is a solitary act. Man is removed from touch; therefore, there is a distancing from flesh, both sexually and socially.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Dickens says it all
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way - in short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only.
It appears as though Charles Dickens may have had insight into the future of literary theory when he sat down to pen The Tale of Two Cities. First of all, there is the address to the binaries of life, which thanks to the ideas of Derrida have now split into quadnaries, then octonaries, then decatetranaries..... Please do not bother to reach for that dictionary; I decided to make up my own terms in order to address the massive division process that correlate to the destabalization process.
Then, on to Foucault, where he demonstrates how the pretense of the establishment or restoration of order can easily be abusive power under the guise of protection. Dickens once again comes to the rescue, just a little farther down the page, in his description of France: "Under the guidance of her Christian pastors, she entertained herself, besides, with such humane achievements as sentencing a youth to have his hands cut off, his tongue torn out with pincers, and his body burned alive, because he had not kneeled down in the rain to do honour to a dirty procession of monks which passed within his view, at a distance of some fifty or sixty yards." This idea of power that separates, confines, marks, alters, and all in the name of a well ordered society is an emblematic theme that is pervasive in the arts. The image that immediately comes to mind is any science fiction that labels the alien, or the other, as unfit to cohabit with man. The recent movie District 9 is the perfect example. However, other movies and books are just as relevant. The movie Snake Pit or One Flew Over the Cuckoo's as Nest with the abuses in the mental institutions, the proliferation of novels and movies that dedicate themselves to prison reform, such as The Green Mile, are all predicated upon Foucalt's thesis. There is also the point of those in power seeing only binaries. However, there are so many degrees that lie between the polar opposites, that reality discredits the simplicity of a binary system that is as simplistic as good/bad, man/woman, light dark. Below is a clip from 1984, which seems to clearly exemplify the ideas in "Discipline and Punishment" with the elements of the Panopticon, isolation, punishment, and the mindless acceptance of the state's offer of "beneficial" remediation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4rBDUJTnNU
It appears as though Charles Dickens may have had insight into the future of literary theory when he sat down to pen The Tale of Two Cities. First of all, there is the address to the binaries of life, which thanks to the ideas of Derrida have now split into quadnaries, then octonaries, then decatetranaries..... Please do not bother to reach for that dictionary; I decided to make up my own terms in order to address the massive division process that correlate to the destabalization process.
Then, on to Foucault, where he demonstrates how the pretense of the establishment or restoration of order can easily be abusive power under the guise of protection. Dickens once again comes to the rescue, just a little farther down the page, in his description of France: "Under the guidance of her Christian pastors, she entertained herself, besides, with such humane achievements as sentencing a youth to have his hands cut off, his tongue torn out with pincers, and his body burned alive, because he had not kneeled down in the rain to do honour to a dirty procession of monks which passed within his view, at a distance of some fifty or sixty yards." This idea of power that separates, confines, marks, alters, and all in the name of a well ordered society is an emblematic theme that is pervasive in the arts. The image that immediately comes to mind is any science fiction that labels the alien, or the other, as unfit to cohabit with man. The recent movie District 9 is the perfect example. However, other movies and books are just as relevant. The movie Snake Pit or One Flew Over the Cuckoo's as Nest with the abuses in the mental institutions, the proliferation of novels and movies that dedicate themselves to prison reform, such as The Green Mile, are all predicated upon Foucalt's thesis. There is also the point of those in power seeing only binaries. However, there are so many degrees that lie between the polar opposites, that reality discredits the simplicity of a binary system that is as simplistic as good/bad, man/woman, light dark. Below is a clip from 1984, which seems to clearly exemplify the ideas in "Discipline and Punishment" with the elements of the Panopticon, isolation, punishment, and the mindless acceptance of the state's offer of "beneficial" remediation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4rBDUJTnNU
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)