The Madwoman in the Garden - The Irony of the Beginnings of a Final

In both his epic poems, Paradise Lost and Paradise Regained, John Milton is portrayed by feminist critics to be a misogynist. However, when the character of Eve is taken in light of Milton's major themes throughout his life, the importance of intellectual growth, the importance of liberty over license, and the refusal to assimilate traditional values and norms because they are custom, a different interpretation of Eve's character emerges. In her role as the domestic goddess who maintains the beauty of the nuptial bower while carefully pruning the flora and fauna, Eve does match the "angel" image described bySusan Gilbert and Susan Gubar in "The Madwoman in the Attic." Similarly, in her role as the temptress who seduces Adam not only with the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, but also with his refusal to give up the sexual pleasure he has enjoyed with her, she is reduced to the "monster."
However, scrutiny of her character shows more than this one-dimensional impression. Milton deviates from traditional religious texts to offer a portrait of a woman who has not had the time to mature into the self-sacrificing and resourcefully brave heroine of his poem. By referencing the beliefs that Milton freely expresses in his prose, where he is unrestricted by the need to re-tell an existing story, it is possible to see that Milton had deliberately painted a positive image of the defamed and maligned feminine role.

The Internationality of the Subversion of Women

Some of the readings from last week were familiar, but others were new and different for me. All of them were interesting, but they had a much different feel, a detachment from relevance, since they were read only in relationship to each other and to refresh or glean information. This week, as I read Woman Warrior for the first time, the readings suddenly were grounded by looking at their relationship to literature. The theory and concepts, which had been abstracts, take on true meaning when there is an identity with which to ground them.
I was intrigued by the title of the book, and I thought I had no pre-coneived notions of the subject matter. However, as I started reading, I was quite surprised at the concepts. Of course, it morphs into something very different in subsequent sections. The words of Andalzua kept resonating through my reading. Not even the words, but the emotions to the situation. As a native to the United States, it is difficult to comprehend the culture shock of trying to maintain the familiar - home, family, traditions - while simultaneously trying to incorporate and be accepted into new traditions, language, economics, and laws.
Because of the Asian references and the repeated reference to foot binding, I think that I was immediately reminded of Snow Flower and the Secret Fan, as well as Memoirs of a Geisha. However, different cultures have their ways of suppressing women through dress and the ideals of beauty and modesty. Whether they are laced in a corset or shrouded in a burkah or bound at the feet, the message is the same: women are expected to maintain constructed and imposed ideas of what is acceptable for them. Conversely, men are often allowed to adapt to more modern attire while simultaneously demanding "tradition" from their female counterparts. Through all of this, women have been split in their reactions. At times, there are strong alliances and support systems that have emerged, sometimes in spite of the threat of physical and emotional punishment and/or isolation. At other times, this has served as the impetus to alienate women from each other, as opposing camps are set up to subvert or support the system. However, there has also been men who have emerged as ardent and vocal supporters of the lifting of gender boundaries.
In A Thousand Splended Suns, Khaled Hosseini is so impassioned about presenting the case of the plight of the Muslim woman that it is difficult to remember that it is written by a man. The sensitivity with which he notates the actions, thoughts, and emotions of his fictional characters has such authenticity and depth that the reader cannot help but to internalize their plight. There has, for quite a while, been a camaraderie between those who are identified by their "otherness." However, this unity between the disenfranchised or the fringe of mainstream and "the other" does little to change the social dynamics in most of the world. The target keeps shifting, and it almost seems as if we have a need to define ourselves by our reflection of our ideals as well as our identity formed by our separation from "the other."
While our country touts the successes it has made in thinking it has broken the glass ceiling because women now make up more of the work force, or a gay relationship is featured in movies and television, we stop to pat ourselves on the back and bask in the glow of self-congratulations, while little has really changed. If living in a global economy has really changed the way the world in a positive way, has united us, then why do we worry more about being called Ms. instead of Miss or using the term administrative assistant instead of secretary, rather than focusing on a 13-year old who is stoned by 50 men in front of 1,000 witnesses in Somalia for being raped by 3 men. Partisan politics in our own country have closed us off to what a person has to say instead of what his party affiliation is. We fight our own small battles, and take baby steps forward, only to remain paralyzed to take that giant leap. So, what is the solution? I wish I knew. What I do know is the power of the written word, no longer just in diaries and journals and encoded fiction, but in the blatant dissemination of information. Truth and Knowledge are Power, to borrow a concept that is predominant in the theory of Foucault. However, this idea are also inherent and explicitly stated in Andalsua's theory. As long as we subscribe to "predefined concepts that exist as unquestionable, unchallengeable," then we are susceptible to fall prey to travesties of injustice, to the hegemony that allows cultural norms to override an inherent moral base that constitutes ethical treatment of the individual.

Rivkin and Ryan and Verse - Oh My!

This poem by May Swenson, entitled "Women" is such a deliciously simple yet insightful commentary on the willingness of women to be subjected to domination. The irony of the word pedestal, with the traditional concept of putting a woman on a pedestal, removed and untouchable, pure and chaste is convoluted to be something that men mount, not just in sexual positioning, but in a domination. The implication that women should be "sweet, painted, and wooden" brings in images of The Stepford Wives.

Women Or they

should be should be

pedestals little horses

moving those wooden

pedestals sweet

moving oldfashioned

to the painted

motions rocking

of men horses

the gladdest things in the toyroom

The feelingly

pegs and then

of their unfeelingly

ears To be

so familiar joyfully

and dear ridden

to the trusting rockingly

fists ridden until

To be chafed the restored

egos dismount and the legs stride away

Immobile willing

sweetlipped to be set

sturdy into motion

and smiling Women

women should be

should always pedestals

be waiting to men

Another of her poems uses the phallic image of the knife and the feminine symbol of blood to reference the menstrual cycle. Again, she has the idea of the mastery of the male persona in the knife, and the woman is the wound. However, this also could be applied to the ideas of "the other" set forth in post-colonialism. In the exploitation of the indigenous populations, the willingness of the oppressed to accommodate the oppressor is contrasted with the interloper insinuating the blame for any sufferings on the victim, the disgust and aversion to looking at the damage that is a by-product of the action, and a failure to accept any culpability, which is all relevant to domination by a "civilized" force.

Bleeding

Stop bleeding said the knife

I would if I could said the cut.

Stop bleeding you make me messy with the blood.

I'm sorry said the cut.

Stop or I will sink in farther said the knife.

Don't said the cut.

The knife did not say it couldn't help it but

it sank in farther.

If only you didn't bleed said the knife I wouldn't

have to do this.

I know said the cut I bleed too easily I hate

that I can't help it I wish I were a knife like

you and didn't have to bleed.

Well meanwhile stop bleeding will you said the knife.

Yes you are a mess and sinking in deeper said the cut I

will have to stop.

Have you stopped by now said the knife.

I've almost stopped I think.

Why must you bleed in the first place said the knife.

For the same reason maybe that you must do what you

must do said the cut.

I can't stand bleeding said the knife and sank in farther.

I hate it too said the cut I know it isn't you it's

me you're lucky to be a knife you ought to be glad about that.

Too many cuts around said the knife they're

messy I don't know how they stand themselves.

They don't said the cut.

You're bleeding again.

No I've stopped said the cut see you are coming out now the

blood is drying it will rub off you'll be shiny again and clean.

If only cuts wouldn't bleed so much said the knife coming

out a little.

But then knives might become dull said the cut.

Aren't you still bleeding a little said the knife.

I hope not said the cut.

I feel you are just a little.

Maybe just a little but I can stop now.

I feel a little wetness still said the knife sinking in a

little but then coming out a little.

Just a little maybe just enough said the cut.

That's enough now stop now do you feel better now said the knife.

I feel I have to bleed to feel I think said the cut.

I don't I don't have to feel said the knife drying now

becoming shiny.
May Swenson

Survival of the Fittest in the American Jungle

Sinclair and PETA - I could post a video of a celebrity showing the practices of corporations in their bid to produce maximum profit at minimal expenditure, but like the images expressed in The Jungle, they are difficult to take. Of course, the novel extends beyond the cruelty to animals. Sinclair uses the animals as a parallel to highlight the exploitation of the worker and the futility in trying to capture the American Dream. However, although the dynamics of Sinclair's novel were published during a period of limited media coverage, they still resonate as loudly today as during Sinclair's lifetime.
The early 1900s saw waves of immigrants who came with hope and innocence, both of which were systematically destroyed during a desperate struggle to survive. However, where are the safeguards one hundred years later that prevent this mercenary approach to the workforce that is the backbone of any corporation? True, there are child labor laws to protect the children; there are minimum wage laws to "guarantee" a supposed living wage; there is OSHA to watch out for violations that endanger the life and health of workers. However, the reality is that backroom deals are still made, there are ways to skirt the laws, such as paying under the table, there are expensive court fights that take too much time and money for the average worker to prove his case. So, as miners die in explosions, farm workers drop dead in strawberry fields from the exposure to lethal pesticides, and government bailouts protect the companies that are "too big to fail" while the homeowner is forced to abandon an upside down mortgage, one wonders what loyalty is owed to the Kings of the Jungle, the Captains of Industry? Is Sinclair correct when he points suggests that these problems are endemic and inherent in a capitalistic society. Sadly, although there are companies with a conscience, who treat employees well, until the American public is willing to stand up and use its power both in the voting booth and the boycott of products that exploit animals and workers, Sinclair will be as relevant in the next hundred years as he is today.
I am also reminded of one of my favorite short stories, "'Repent, Harlequin!' Said the Ticktockman" by Harlan Ellison. Although the point of this "new wave" science fiction is to alert society to the dangers of technology, it is also a warning of the exploitation of the worker in the name of efficiency and profit. The opening of the story really says it all, and I feel no need to elaborate with commentary, since its clarity and poetry suffice.

          The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men mainly,
         but as machines, with their bodies. Others--as most legislators, politicians, lawyers, ministers,
         and office-holders--serve the state chiefly with their heads;
         and, as they rarely make any moral distinctions, they are as
         likely to serve the devil, without intending it, as God.
         A very few--as heroes, patriots, martyrs, reformers in the
         great sense, and men ---serve the state with their consciences
         also, and so necessarily resist it for the most part; and
         they are commonly treated as enemies by it.