Leftover discussion question, 1/30, part 4

This one's from Erin:
What do you think about Mike's description of Brett? "She loves looking after people." That seems to interrupt most of our ideas of Brett as a callous "man-eater." Does this change your opinions of Brett's ethics in intimacy?

Leftover discussion question, 1/30, part 3

This one's from Shelbi:
Who is the character with the most depth? Who do we think is most likely to succeed after the story is over?

Leftover discussion question, 1/30, part 2

This one's from Kyla:
Hemingway closes this novel with a fantastic but possibly enigmatic line. What do you think he means by "Isn't it pretty to think so?" [Lots of you actually brought up versions of this question--and questions about Brett's remark--it is cruel of her to say what she does?]

Leftover discussion question, 1/30

This one's from Amelia:
Jake looks down on Robert because he is completely shaped and controlled by the women in his life, but isn't Jake just as obedient to Brett?

Discussion Questions 1/30

1.      Is it just me or do these characters remain the same throughout the book? Usually characters will grow and change but these didn’t seem too.

2.      I thought the ending was sad.   It’s cruel what Brett says when she’s the one making it so that Jake and her cannot be together.  I do feel sorry for Brett after hearing about the way her husband treated her.  Does anyone else now see Brett differently?

Discussion Questions 1/30

1. After the fiesta, Brett leaves with Romero instead of Mike. Although Brett is usually free willed and Mike is very permissive, it is never clear what happens between Brett and Mike. Are they no longer getting married?


2. It is not directly clear why Hemingway decided to name this work “The Sun Also Rises.” It could function as a parallel to his objective, sequential writing style. What do you think?

Discussion questions for 1/30

1. I found the ending to the story very abrupt. Why do you think Hemingway chose to end it in that manner?

2. We can see that Brett is not sensitive to Jake, or in fact, to anyone. Is Brett's last line supposed to comfort Jake or emasculate him further?

Discussion Questions for Monday 1/30

1. We know that the male characters surrounding Brett know about her previous conquests and that they handle their attraction to her in different ways. Why do you think Brett's open sexuality affects them so much?

2. What did you make of the ending of the novel? Has Brett and Jake's relationship really changed at all after all of their travels? If yes, how so?

Discussion Questions for Monday 1/30

1. The fight between Robert and Jake was quite unusual. All Jake kept saying was "Go to hell" before he just tried to punch Robert. Why do you think Jake got so uptight about Robert asking about Brett? Especially since he didn't freak out when he first heard about Brett and Robert getting together.

2. The whole bankruptcy issue came in out of the blue. If they are all bankrupt, then how are they affording everything on these trips? DO you think it is all coming from loans or something else?

Defending Brett

I am going to attempt to counter the Brett-Bashers, as I feel that she is no worse than any other character in the novel. I'm not a huge Hemingway fan for his style, but i can appreciate the picture he paints of average people interacting. There is no real hero in this novel, and i feel that that can sometimes be the situation in real life. Not many people ever actually get a chance to be noble or heroic and Hemingway illustrates this by simply showing everyday people each complete with their own set of sins.

Brett is not a hussy, as has been stated before. We have all known women like this, those that have some invisible magnetism affecting all the men they come in contact with. For the most part, these types of women don't even notice it, they simply pay the same attention they're given to all of these men. In my opinion, Brett is simply taking advantage of her situation and the men are as much to blame for being mistreated. Saying that it is Brett's fault that all of these men are being used is not giving men any credit to think for themselves. She is nothing if not honest, and each man knows what he is getting when becoming involved with her. If he chooses to continue, it's at his own risk.

My Sympathy Vote For the Week and Drunken Stupors

I have felt bad for Robert Cohn for most of this novel. He always seems to get the short end of the stick. I began to think of him as the human punching bag. However, after the turn of events in San Sebastian with Brett and Robert hooking up, I now feel sorry for Mike. True he said some pretty nasty things to Cohn after the bull fight, but I think he had the right. After all, Cohn did screw around with his woman.
 On another note, I like the point that was made in class about how the true emotions came out during drunken stupors. If you ever want to know how someone really feels talk to them when they're drunk. There is no filter what so ever. I liked those moments of drunken rants because the characters were really able to say how they felt. I also thought it was interesting though how Robert never drank. Why didn't he conform to the culture of drinking like everyone else?

Would you be Robert's friend?

I personally feel bad for Robert, but in all honesty I would not want to be his friend. He is one of those people that you want to like, but just can’t. You know they have good intentions, but you just cannot seem to get past that completely annoying exterior. He is, quite honestly, a pathetic person; he never achieves much of anything and when he does no one remembers, he completely lets those around him shape his life (especially the women), and he even waits around on a girl when he knows he has no chance. Yet, if I were around Robert, instead of having a pull to sympathize with him, I would probably try to distance myself. The more I read, the more I notice that they literally want Robert to leave them alone. It is almost like a survival method people have so that they are not dragged down with someone in their inevitable embarrassment. This is a little harsh, but c’mon, you know it’s true.

Hemingway's Style - and Brett

The Sun Also Rises is the first novel that I have read written by Hemingway. I did not know what to expect when I first opened the book, but now that I've finished the novel, I'm pretty sure I enjoyed it. What I enjoyed was Hemingway's style of writing. I was not such a huge fan of the plot of the story exactly, but I did enjoy reading it. I'm not sure if that makes sense, but knowing Hemingway's style of writing now, I would like to go on and read another novel written by him. Does anyone else agree?

Also, is it so terrible that I am a fan of Brett's character? She does terrible things and seems to lead Jake on throughout the novel, but I feel like she has a reasoning behind them. Also, "cheating" or seeing other people while you are with another was not so frowned upon socially in the early 1900's. I'm not exactly sure why, but rules about monogamy were not how they are viewed socially now. Maybe Brett did have feelings for Jake, but knew it could never work (maybe because of his injury, but then again maybe not), so she wanted to keep him around as a friend...?

Week #3: The Sun Also Rises

In The Sun Also Rises by Earnest Hemingway their are a lot of sad and depressing characters.  The two that are the most sad and depressing are Jake and Cohn.  Jake was injured in the war and now cannot have sex.  This injury completely messes with the relationship he wants to have with Brett.  It is hard on Jake to be friends with Brett and he says that men who are friends with a woman are actually in love with them.  I do not think this is true in most cases but having friends of the opposite sex can lead towards feelings for each other.  I also think that Jake's belief to have something good you have to pay for it is incorrect.  I would say you have to work towards and for good things (happiness) but I do not think you have to pay for them.  Now poor Cohn, he's been getting the short end of the stick all throughout the book.  He's Jewish and for some reason everyone seems to have a probably with this even though one cannot help how they are born.  He annoys everyone and no one really likes him but they let him be around because he is so nice (and he also probably has money).  His liking Brett and, sort of, pursuing her is very wrong.  Brett is clearly with Mike even if she is stringing all these other fellows along (which is just a wrong).  The characters in this book have a lot of problems and probably need counselling for their many problems.

Hemingway frustrations

This may just be me and if it is, that's okay but I just can't wrap my head around this novel and Hemingway in general. This is the first book I've ever read by Hemingway so that could very well be my problem but I am at a loss for words as to what to say about what we have read thus far. While I understand the complexities of the novel's characters and can make the connections between subtle things such as the bull and the men of the novel and the details Hemingway uses, I am still very much just blah about this book. It isn't that I don't enjoy it, I do to a certain extent but the more I read, the more frustrated I get with it. Brett seems to be in a love triangle with just about every male character in the book, Robert Cohn is probably the most pathetic man I've had the displeasure of reading about, Jake and his love for a woman like Brett makes no sense to me and, poor Mike has to deal with his fiancé, the woman he loves, being, for lack of a better word, a hussy. I think my biggest issue with this novel is the characters. In the beginning I couldn't figure out where some of these people were coming from and where they were getting the money for all these outings and trips and now reading about this sick love rectangle Cohn, Mike, Jake, Brett, and Romero have going on just kills me. I can't say that I don't like the book, I'm just not understanding how this lifestyle is okay. Maybe I'm a sucker for simplicity in love and wanting Jake and Brett to just be together, or for Brett to just be a one man kind of woman, or who knows but I'm just very blah and a bit frustrated with Hemigway and the way he decided to write this novel.

The Animal Spirits

This post started as a response to Bethany Knight's post about her frustrations with Jake and others' seeming aimlessness and lack of development-- that there is nowhere to go and no consequences for not getting there.
I think it's patently wrong to say that nobody in this novel wants anything. This novel is so ABOUT want. Not an object, but the very experience of WANTING. Passion. Lust. Power is the point. Nietzsche would say that this drive within a species is the only story:

"... only in limited situations is the drive for conservation precedent over the will to power. The natural condition of life, according to him, is one of profusion.[69] In its later forms Nietzsche's concept of the will to power applies to all living things, suggesting that adaptation and the struggle to survive is a secondary drive in the evolution of animals, less important than the desire to expand one's power... Defending his view, Nietzsche describes instances where people and animals willingly risk their lives to gain power—most notably in instances like competitive fighting and warfare."
-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche

Bullfighting and Boxing, anyone?

It's obvious that these characters are not supposed to be telling us about the selves we want to be, either by negative or positive example. Like Dr. H said in class-- nobody in this novel, even Brett, really seems happy. I think Brett, Jake, Robert, and Mike are all struggling with those dark, ruthless impulses and desires that none of us want to admit are a defining point of all of our characters as human-animals.

The Sun Also Rises 1957 Film Trailer

I haven't seen this film, but this is certainly a fun trailer. Love the drama of impotence being described as "the most shocking thing a man ever heard!"

Dragging on with the Details

In a book where most of the detail describes scenery, why is the scene of the final bull fight so long and descriptive? Hemingway goes through each bull-fighter's ordeal during the final day of the fiesta. While Belmonte's story of coming out of retirement to compete with Marcial was intriguing at best, I found these details to be more annoying than relevant on the final day of fighting. Hemingway also reiterates what he said earlier about Romero's fighting techniques. For a part of the story that will no longer be relevant once the fiesta ends, Hemingway spends far too much time on the subject. I wanted the story to just move on.

The Writers Craft

When I read a novel, one of the the first things I look for is relatable characters. In this book I really cannot find any that I really enjoy or actually worry about as the plot progresses. While all of his characters have somewhat distinct personalities (I am sure someone will contest me on this), Hemingway has yet to make me care about them.While I will admit that I do have a tolerate-dislike relationship with the majority of Hemingway's writing, which admittedly, might skew my opinion a bit; I cannot help but feel that this is an issue that is keeping me from enjoying the book. I do not know how many of my fellow classmates are having this problem (I assume not many) or one similar, but it would be interesting to read about what everyone thinks.

First There's Misery, Then There's Jake.

Up to this point in The Sun Also Rises, I've believed that Hemingway was aiming for the reader to remain sympathetic towards Jake throughout the novel, but my patience is wearing very thin. While I like Jake's character overall, and don't think I would have liked the story from anyone else's point of view, I still find myself frustrated with him. Jake has remained in the role of everyone's "best friend" and I'm dying for Jake to find happiness of his own. He seems depressed at some point in every chapter. And, even though Jake is the protagonist I haven't seen much character development arrise with him. He still seems to be the same person he was at the beginning of the novel, unchanged by all of his traveling adventures. Instead he still tortures himself by pining after Brett and wishing he could be with her. Ultimately, Jake sizes himself up to be less than a man because of Jake Jr.'s incompetence, and also by the love he feels for Brett.

Jake will not and never will act on his feelings for Brett, not because she's engaged to Mike or has had a meaningless fling with Cohn, or the countless other men that are mentioned, but because he limits himself from the ability to have sexual relations with her (and Brett doesn't help him forget about it). Jake is so helplessly in love with Brett that it's almost pathetic. He is willing to drop anything and everything he is doing to rescue her like a knight in shining armor whose services seem to not be appreciated. Over the course of this novel, including the background information we have been told, Brett has easily manipulated Jake so much so that she knows he will always be there for her whenever she feels it's necessary.

I also thought the comment Mike shouts in Chapter XVI was very ironic: "Bulls have no balls!" For this reader, I really wish Jake would finally grow a pair and tell Brett to get lost and quit being miserable. And, this may be cheesy but I feel like Jake should break into a song every time Brett appears on the page...I'm thinking "Toxic" by Britney Spears should do it!

Friend Zone Frustrations

Was I the only one who was incredibly aggravated by the conclusion of Chapter XVI? Up until the last few pages, it seems that our lovable protagonist, Jake, has had a pretty good chance of overcoming his impediment and getting together with Brett. I don't mean to be a romantic, but to me, it is more enjoyable to experience a story in which the protagonist prevails. Jake is getting friend zoned! As if this friend-zonage isn't bad enough, he is pathetically accepting it! My frustration, however, doesn't lie entirely with Jake. Brett is not behaving well. Her malevolence can be clearly measured in her conversation with Jake on the way back into the town. She only tells Jake that she is in love with Romero after asking him if he still loves her. As if the fact that she is hopelessly captivated by Romero isn't enough, she rubs it in by continually calling him "darling" and asking him to stay with her and be her wingman. Jake is has been shoved into the friend zone, and it is a horrible place to be. It is even worse because Jake has been so deflated, he submits and accepts his sad condition.

Bullfighting: Despicable Sport Suits Despicable Characters

I will admit, I had a hard time reading the bullfighting scenes.  I think it is an absolutely abhorrent sport, and sets humans back about 2000 years to the mentality of the Romans (no offense to the Romans).  However, I found it fitting that Brett, Jake, Mike, and Robert traveled across the continent to see the bull fights (I will leave Bill out of this discussion because I actually like his character).  The excitement Brett was exuding when the cows were getting gored made me even hate her character more.  Jake didn't seem overly pleased with the performance, but that was because the bulls were not to his liking.  We have already seen that Jake likes to take pleasure in other's pain, so again, not surprising that this dreadful event intrigues him.  In fact, he is labeled as an aficionado.  Mike and Robert are both pretty pathetic as well, as the only reason they are probably even at the bullfight is because Brett wanted to see it.  I feel that this was a real turning point for me on my views of the characters.  I was feeling bad for Jake for his injury and suffering he has had to endure because of it, but at least he didn't have a crowd watching him get impaled by bull horns.  I'm just waiting for Mike or Robert to actually stand up for themselves, but I think I am holding out hope on that one.  And Lady Brett Ashley.  Not much of a lady if you ask me.  In fact, she acts much  more like a man, swapping lovers left and right, and having an extreme blood lust.  Anyway, that is enough rambling on about the sickening sport of bullfighting.  I am by no means a supporter of PETA, but as an avid sport lover, I hate to see sports that involve cruelty toward animals.  I think the novel would be much more entertaining if Lady Brett Ashley and Mike were gored.  At least then Brett and Jake could be together happily.

Vacuums and War

"In simplest terms, a novel is about a hero who wants something and the consequences if he or she doesn't get it. I'm surprised at how many aspiring novelists lose sight of this and write meandering stories that seem to lose their way, leaving readers adrift." - Jeff Gerke, Fiction Writing Tip #4, www.wherethemapends.com

This advice is what came to mind as I pondered what, exactly, frustrates me about The Sun Also Rises. With the possible exception of Lady Brett, the characters don’t really want anything. Even Jake, the narrator of the entire story, has no aspirations. Jake’s life basically involves going out and drinking, going fishing, and going to the bull fights in Spain. There are no great rewards attached to any of these activities; neither are there dire consequences if Jake can’t do any of these things.

And I think it all goes back to World War I. Jake participated in a war that had the potential to give great meaning to his life. The war held promises of participating in patriotism and gaining honor for defending the United States. Instead, the war basically stripped Jake’s life of meaning. Instead of feeling proud of his country, he seems to strongly dislike associating with Americans. He never talks about what
he witnessed in war, but I can’t help suspecting that Jake’s rather
anesthetized reaction to the bull fighting indicates that he’s become
desensitized to violence. He has been raised Catholic, but religion offers him no hope or purpose. I’d guess that he became disillusioned with religion because of what he witnessed in World War I. And the war took away his ability to have (in his mind) meaningful relationships, either with Brett or with anyone who hasn’t been through the same experiences.

One of the problems that I have in connecting with the story and the characters, then, stems from the fact that Jake seems so resigned to his situation. Maybe if Jake were trying to find fulfillment, I would feel more compassion toward his character.

Drinkers, Gotta love 'em

So as we were talking in class today about the abundance of alcohol consumed by the characters, I got to thinking about my discussion question. I wondered if you all thought if it was a societal compulsion or if it was something else. Well, once I got out of class and was walking to my math class, the psych major in me started to think about possible reasons. The one thing that stuck out in my mind the most was that i believe that their drinking amount was due to a cohort effect. I don't know how many of you all know what a cohort effect is, so if you do please excuse me while i try to sum it up a bit. A cohort effect is a common variable that applies only to a certain age range of people that cause them to perform a certain behavior or action. A cohort for us college kids could be something like 9/11 or another flashbulb event like that. For Jake and the others in this story, i believe that their cohort effect was the war. It does not have to be limited to just serving in the military. It would also reach out to women since they would have been effected by the war just like everyone else. War does not discriminate on gender. Some of you may not agree, but i thought it could be a very interesting way to look at why everyone drinks so heavily.

And on a side note, Brett is a hussy. (I'll use a nicer word than I used in class c: ) She is engaged, but she is having an affair with Robert, tells Jake she loves him, and kisses all different men. There are no if's, and's, or but's about it, the woman is a hussy.

Undecided

I'm not sure what to make of The Sun Also Rises. Obviously Hemingway is a distinguished writer and has many fans, but I do not think I can count myself to be one. To me, this book has been very Perks of Being A Wallflower for adults, which makes their aimlessness even more sad. I understand that Hemingway was probably trying to make a point about the effects of war on a generation of people, but I'm not sure if the effect this work has on people is still rooted in relevance, or simply the fact that this is a "must read". I don't want this blog post to be a "I hate Hemingway" fest, so I suppose I should move on.
I don't know if I could even say that I disliked this book, it just did not resonate with me, as a reader. I think my biggest issue had to do with the lack of feeling. While I respect the idea of not telling the reader what to think and feel, I also think that feelings are what makes literature great to me. I do applaud the intrigue that is created when the characters aren't viewed internally. It makes every one a mystery and every action a symbol. This being said, I'm not sure if that was Hemingway's intention.  I feel like this creation of his was made to mirror the characters. I suppose he couldn't really create this evocative and grandiose tale around people who really don't know where they're going and really don't care. Does anyone else want to defend Hemingway? I really do want to like him, I'm just bleh.

Is Jake (Hemingway) Anti-Semitic?

            One of my discussion questions for today centered on the idea of Jake’s sudden hatred for Robert Cohn.  I am skeptical as to whether or not Robert’s Jewish descent plays a role in Jake’s disliking for him, in addition to Robert’s sexual relationship with Lady Brett.  Obviously Jake uses Robert’s Judaism as a means for insult; however is Jake truly an anti-semtic?  More importantly, what is Ernest Hemingway trying to get across through his writing?  Obviously his Iceberg Theory plays a large role in his writing style for this novel, so the reader is not getting a clear, coherent explanation in regards to Jake’s true emotions on the issue.

            The Sun Also Rises was published in 1926, nearly eight years before the outbreak of World War II.  The world had yet to see the horrific images of the concentration camps that were responsible for murdering six million Jews.  I find it hard to believe that Hemingway would have considered adding the anti-semtism in the novel following the genocide that took place at the hands of the Germans.  Had this novel been published after the events that took place, I find it likely that Hemingway would have lost a lot of the popularity that he received throughout his life.  I do not find the language in The Sun Also Rises particularly offense, due to the time in which it was written, however I could not help but think of Shylock in The Merchant of Venice.  Is Robert portrayed by Jake as somewhat as a villain simply because he is a Jew, like Shylock was, or is it merely for his affair with Lady Brett?  What do you all think?  Personally, I believe that Jake is jealous, and the fact that Robert is a Jew makes him an easy target.  

1/25: Another leftover discussion question (more of a Franken-question)...

Several versions/iterations of this came up as I read over your questions: anyone care to defend Brett? (Her actions with Cohn, her rejection of Jake, etc.)

1/25: Leftover discussion question

Here's a question from Shelbi that didn't get brought up in class today. I thought it was a good one!

"Does the character's apparent post-war lack of direction still resonate with readers today?"

In other words, can you--in any way--understand, relate to, or sympathize with what Jake is going through? Some of the discussion questions I read from the rest of you seem to indicate that folks are having a hard time with these characters.

Thoughts?

Metaphors

Generally, I'm not a huge fan of Sylvia Plath. However, i really liked this poem. I felt that Plath definitely expressed some of the feelings that pregnancy can bring to a woman. I like that in class we touched on the fact that maybe Plath was not bitter about her pregnancy, but was simply remarking that on that particular day, she felt that she could not handle her situation. Pregnancy can certainly cause a woman to quickly change her mind from glowing to gloomy. I also like that her last line, "Boarded the train there's no getting off," could mean several things: that she is hesitant about her pregnancy and feels stuck, or that she is committed about this pregnancy although it is tough right now. So glad we read this poem, as i wouldn't have on any other occasion. 

Battle of the Sexes

I particularly love the way Glaspell wrote how differently the men and women behaved and reacted to each other. It was not simply to play on the typical dissimilarity of the sexes, but instead she used it to form and drive her story. This story displayed a real power for women, not only with their ability to recognize clues that the men missed, but also in their relationships and bonds as women.

The irony of the story is that the men never even considered that the women could make any valuable observation. The women noticed details that only they would recognize, such as the dirty pots under the sink or the crooked sewing on the quilt square. The men simply dismissed these out of place things as her failure as a housekeeper. The men dismissed these observations as women’s “trifles”, but the things they noticed actually solved the case. This also hints at the underlying theme of the community of women. These women didn’t just see the subtle hints, but they also saw what Mrs. Wright’s life was really like. They could empathize with her cold life of silence and knew exactly why she would want a bird; just to hear the singing.

One thing I really like was how the men and women reacted differently with one another. For instance, when they first come in the house the men rush to the stove and the women hang back, when the men are upstairs the women have no problem going directly to the stove and commenting about the cold temperature. Also, the women are markedly more quite when the men are in the room. The men give the women no respect, but rather speak to them like children.

The joys of womanhood, or not so much

I thought Clifton's "wishes for sons" was extremely comical. It gives a whole new meaning to the idea of walk a mile in my shoes. It was a different tone compared to the one in "Poem to my Uterus," "To My Last Period" and "Homage to my hips". In those poems she embraced her period, her uterus, and her hips. They were the things that in a sense defined who she was. However, "in wishes for sons," she describes the more negative side of being a woman. A period is not the "beautiful" thing she describes in "To My Last Period" (14). Instead of being something that is beautiful, she now speaks of her period in terms that make it seem more of a burden. It's something that puts a women in awkward situation like getting it early when she is wearing a white dress. It would be interesting to know what changed her perspective making her seem so bitter toward the things that make her a woman.

Female Intuition: Fact or Myth?

Being a feminist, Trifles will always be one of my favorite plays. When we read it last semester in Dr. Nixon's class, we talked about a subject that seemed to baffle him completely: A woman's intuition. So, as I re-read the play, I thought more about the concept and about a few of my favorite scenes.

Without a doubt, the women play the most important role in this play. Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale are ultimately the ones who find the evidence and draw their own conclusions about the murder. But at the beginning, when the five adults walk into the unkempt Wright residence and step into the kitchen, the County Attorney comments that Mrs. Wright, was “not much of a housekeeper”. During such times when women played a very specific domestic role in every household, the kitchen was often seen as a woman’s sanctuary—a foreign land for most of the male population. Glaspell demonstrates this idea well by maneuvering the entire play from the kitchen, the woman’s space; essentially all of the action happens in the kitchen.

Another aspect I found interesting was the interrogation scene between the County Attorney and Mrs. Hale. Glaspell definitely changed the tone between this interrogation scene and the previous one between the County Attorney and Mr. Hale. As the County Attorney is speaking to Mr. Hale, the Attorney politely asks Mr. Hale for a recollection when “you came here yesterday morning”. He proceeds to ask Mr. Hale other questions during the scene, but let’s Hale answer at his own pace without interruption. However, when the County Attorney turns to Mrs. Hale for answers, his tone is harsher, more fast-paced, and even interrupting of her responses. After the Attorney is through with the questioning, the men head upstairs into the bedroom to investigate the crime scene.

In the time period that Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are downstairs, they proceed to find the most significant evidence: fruit jars, a dish cloth, the setting loaf of bread, the broken bird cage, the half cleaned table, the unfinished quilt, and most importantly, the dead canary bird wrapped in a delicate piece of silk in the sewing box. Glaspell gave her female characters the gift of common sense, and the women were able to seemingly put the pieces of the murder together. Both women concluded that Mrs. Wright had strangled her husband because he had—in turn—strangled her beautiful singing canary. Mrs. Hale makes sense of the bird’s murder: “Wright wouldn’t like the bird—a thing that sang. She used to sing. He killed that, too”. By the end of the play, Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters do protect their own sex by hiding the evidence; Glaspell preserves the sacredness of female intuition and creates heroines from trifles.

Poem to my Uterus

Clifton makes some unusual associations like Plath does, but with fewer images. In "Poem to My Uterus" there is this interesting simile in the second and third lines which I skimmed over on first reading: "you have been patient/ as a sock."
What, if anything, is particularly patient about a sock?
The rest of the poem reveals to me through the metaphorical rendering of this defunct uterus, a look at a much mythologized, sometimes domestic, sometimes magical, "women's world."
I can see a sock as a product of women's labor-- a loving, quiet process carried on in private spaces, if we want to get romantic. It is a very useful, surprisingly intimate, little thought of thing. Wrapping up the object, organ, and labor and calling it "patient," tags all of this, and makes Clifton's lamenting "where can I go/ barefoot/without you/ where can you go/ without me," more intelligible and heartbreaking.
"My bloody print/ my estrogen kitchen/ my black bag of desire." An expansion upon the theme begins with a phrase that equally echoes something aggressively primal and strangely domestic. A paw print? A floral print? A fingerprint? Likely all of the above. An identity. And "estrogen kitchen," other than being an awesome band name, alerts me to something alchemical. And when we get to "black bag of desire," my imagination takes an energetic leap to cackling women in black hats with bubbling cauldrons. Something mysterious and otherworldly and powerful. A container of magician's tricks.

"To My Last Period"

Honestly, after reading this poem I was at odds on how to take the concept. On one hand, which I suspect might be among the more primal emotions, I can understand how menopause could make a woman more insecure and perhaps even doubt herself. On the other, this feeling I suspect stems from my more modern sensibilities, is basically that of a celebration. The phrase that I believe really displays my second emotion is: "without trouble for me/somewhere, somehow." Although, by addressing the biological process of mestruation as "a hussy", this brought up very negative connotations. It brought to my head the saying that only "hussies" got their period because they were sexually active. Though I like to believe that humanity has come a long way since then. This lead me to wonder if the author herself is struggling with whether menopause makes her any less of a woman, and is struggling with this new change. This is shown when the speaker is: "sit holding her photograph/and sighing, wasn't she/beautiful? wasn't she beautiful?" (12-15). So I guess that the whole poem is about being unsure how to take this event, and perhaps submitting to socities whims. After all, only young, fertile women are beautiful. 

Week Two: Plath and Clifton

For my second post I'm going to write about Clifton because I did not understand Plath's poem at all.  So, Clifton's poems are pretty graphic and focused solely on what makes her and other women women. In "Poem to My Uterus" she writes as if she loves and hates her uterus, mainly, because it gave her children but it also let her have miscarriages.  She is also upset because it appears that doctors want to take it out and she does not know how she will be a woman without it.   I personally do not think a uterus makes you a woman, it just allows you to have children.  In "To My Last Period" Clifton is upset because she will not have her monthly visit anymore.  She reflects on this as if she is no longer young or beautiful.  Losing her period makes her feel old and like a grandmother.  Losing your period and not having to deal with it anymore should be a blessing not something to remind you you're getting old.  The last one I'm going to write about is "wishes for sons".  This poem makes me think her sons did not respect her because she wishes the curse on them.  She wishes for all the worst situations possible to fall on them if they did have a period.  I do not think wishing ill on others is right.  I wrote a discussion question on this poem.  So, all in all Clifton is kind of a downer and reading her poems was not fun or uplifting more like depressing and uncaring.

random thoughts on Lucille Clifton

After reading Lucille Clifton's poems, my immediate thought was thank God, I am so glad I am not the only woman thinking these things. As a woman, Clifton's poems captured the feelings I have about my body and the feelings I have from month to month and also how I know I am going to feel as I get older and go through every change a woman eventually goes through. She describes womanhood and the connection a woman has to her body with the subjects of her poems focusing on the subject. Her poems are not only informative of a woman’s feelings but are also sexual with the poem, “homage to my hips.” Clifton’s poem, “wishes for sons” is exactly how I think most women feel towards men especially during certain times of the month because men have no idea what it is like to be a woman. My boyfriend disagrees with my thoughts that men get off easy compared to women that they don’t have to go through half the stresses a woman goes through when it comes to having children and everything that comes with it. While he sees my point that women do go through quite a bit more than men physically, his side to the argument is that men also face stresses such as worrying about getting a job that makes enough to provide for a family along with the stress of job security and ensuring that if the worst case scenario happens, he would still be able to provide for the family. While I see his point, I can’t help but argue that he still has no idea what a woman goes through. He cannot understand the connection a woman has to her body the way Clifton describes in her poetry.

Trifles

Every time that I read this play, the psychologist in me always wants me to analyze it further. When i look at this play through a psychoanalytical lens, i always place the three women into the 3 parts of the subconscious. To me, Mrs. Wright is the id. The id is the animalistic part of the subconscious. It is also seen as the pleasure seeking part of the subconscious. I always looked at Mrs. Wright as representing the animalistic part of the id. This woman brought out her inner beast in order to throw off the coldness and harshness of her life...by killing her husband. The next part of the subconscious is the superego. This part of the subconscious can be represented by Mrs. Peters. The superego is the "conscience". This part of the subconscious is responsible for having moral standards. Mrs. Peters holds up the idea that the law is the law and that there has to be some sort of moral standard for this type of situation. Lastly, we have Mrs. Hale. I believe that Mrs. Hale would be accurately represented by the Ego. The ego is the mediator of the subconscious. Mrs. Hale doesn't think that killing was the right thing to do, per se, but she also could understand why is was done. She empathizes with Mrs. Wright in a way that Mrs. Peters never could. Like I said, it may just be the psychology major coming out in me, but i can never read this play without analyzing it in this way.

Trifles...Another episode of "Snapped"

I really enjoy the comments regarding the innocence of Mrs. Wright but they are completely wrong! This is a classic case of a woman who fell in love with Mr. "Wrong!" She was a woman who loved life and enjoyed singing; but, after years of constant spiritual and mental deprivation, at the hands of her emotionally disturbed husband, she finally snapped. I believe her husband's vicious murder of her beloved bird is what sent her over the edge. When the bird was found, it had not decayed so it proves that the bird was killed very close to the time of Mr. Wright's death. The bird was also killed in a similar way as Mr. Wright which indicates the strangulation of Mr. Wright was clearly an act of revenge. I believe the bird was murdered the day of Mr. Wright's death and the bird's death killed everything honorable within Mrs. Wright. She carefully wrapped the bird (and her sanity) up carefully and then after Mr. Wright went to sleep she carefully knotted the rope in preparation to slip it over her husbands neck. She then proceeded to carry out his murder. Even if the women revealed their secret and the truth came out, I believe she would have been found innocent by reason of temporary insanity and sentenced to serve time in a mental institution...which is probably where she needs to be after being married to that man! After a couple years of treatment, she would have regained her sanity as well as her previous joy for life, been released, remarried and living happily in a small town singing lullabies while rocking her little baby to sleep!

Well I'll be

After reading Matt Myer's previous post that questioned whether or not she actually killed her husband, I got to thinking that this actually might be a statement in itself. This is a great play and really keeps the reader invested in the crime solving and the subtle gender statements. This may, however, only be on the surface. This may be a stretch, but I really love having a solid opinion about something, and then having that opinion be thrown off the bridge so I have to think again. There really is no solid evidence that Mrs. Wright actually killed Mr. Wright. The play gives clues to how happy and lively she used to be, and how her current state is a quiet and domestic woman. They make her husband out to be a bit of a bad guy, and the reader almost thinks that maybe he deserves it. Maybe our assumptions reveal something greater about feminism and another direction this play could possibly go. Maybe this play sets it up to look fairly conclusive that she did commit the crime, but there is still no proof. By our assuming that she killed him, we are perhaps reinforcing negative female stereotypes. The idea that if oppressed enough, we will snap and kill our husband over a "trivial" issue. I kept wondering what happens after the play ends, but then I just laughed at myself for not realizing that she could have very well been innocent and my presumed guilt reflects that I probably have watched too many Julia Roberts movies.

SPOILER: Clifton's Emphasis on the Female Body

            Upon first reading Lucille Clifton’s poetry, I had no idea that she was an African American.  I remember on the first day of class, Professor Hanrahan mentioned that many female poets who are of African American descent consider themselves in a whole different category in regards to feminist literature.  With this in mind, I tried to differentiate between Clifton’s writing and that of Sylvia Plath’s.  However, despite my attempt to locate any major differences between the two, I was unable to find anything incredibly major.  Both women focus heavily on the female body, which I am still struggling to understand.

            From what I can gather, though, the emphasis on the body aids in illustrating womanhood to the reader.  Women, from a man’s viewpoint, are generally expected to fit a certain role.  Women are expected to be slim, with curves.  Anything other than the status quo is deemed unattractive.  Fitting a normality was even more difficult for African American women, especially prior to the 21^st century, being that they were degraded in public and viewed as inferior.  Without going into too much historical detail, it is quite easy for the reader to understand the hostility that pours through Clifton’s words.  However, this justified anger aids in making Clifton’s poetry timeless.

Another Mystery in "Trifles"

I want to pick up on an idea that I've been pondering - an idea that Matt Myers actually mentioned briefly in his post. During class on Wednesday, I noticed that the two female protagonists never refer to each other by their first names. They always call each other "Mrs. Hale" or "Mrs. Peters."

Each time I've read "Trifles," I've gotten the impression that Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters are friends, at least to the extent that they understand each other quite well and discuss serious topics together. Maybe I felt that they are friends because they work together so quickly at the end to help out Mrs. Wright. But the way that they use only their last names to refer to each other creates a sort of artificial distance between two characters that otherwise seem close.

Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters know that Mrs. Wright's first name is Minnie (1997); don't they know each other's first names? Why don't they use them when addressing each other? Maybe Susan Glaspell is using this device to make a statement about women and the overarching reach of their husbands. But if this were the case, wouldn't it make more sense for the husbands to call their wives "Mrs. Hale" and "Mrs. Peters" and then have the women use their first names with each other to serve as a contrast? I'd appreciate anyone's thoughts on this.

Overused?

Looking at the syllabus for this class, I was almost disappointed to see that we would be reading Trifles. I've read it in at least 4 other English classes at Shepherd, and I didn't think I would be able to find any new insights or ideas. However, after discussing the play in class, I loved how we could come up with so many different interpretations of just the last line, "We call it -- knot it, Mr. Henderson." In addition to the interpretations mentioned in class, I saw that the women are now knotted together into a unified effort to keep Mrs. Wright from being found guilty of the murder. Perhaps I'm reaching, but I like the wordplay in that line. Whether Trifles is overused or not, something new can always be discovered in the text.

No Hard Evidence in Trifles

I’d like to start off by saying that I always appreciate a good play because it definitely gets the reader more involved. It can be so boring to read short story after short story. Trifles is a play that has been heavily covered in my past few English courses, but for some reason, it never struck me that Mrs. Wright was the actual culprit this time. Of course, she seemed very nervous and unsure of the entire situation, but that is not necessarily because she had killed her husband. Her awkward behavior could very easily be attributed to the general fact that her husband  has recently been killed. Perhaps she was in such shock that it never occurred to her to alert the authorities. Lewis Hale states that she seemed slightly scared when he was talking to her. Although this fear could have originated from the idea of going to prison, it could have been caused by the realization of the magnitude of the situation, or perhaps the thought of the potential proximity of the killer. I will, however, admit that the evidence against Mrs. Wright is overwhelming (probably enough to convict her in a court of Matt Myers). Does anyone else think that Mrs. Wright is innocent? 

Susan Glaspell does a really good job setting the patriarchal atmosphere of the time period in which this work was written. It is very interesting to note that the males in the script are given first names, but the women are only assigned the titles of their men. 

Women are like Birds

Throughout our discussion today on Glaspell's "Trifles," I really liked the metaphor linking women with birds.  I had never really linked the two together, but after thinking about it I think the metaphor is at least somewhat accurate.  In the context of the play, all the women exhibit an emotional fragility that coincides with the physical fragility of the bird.  I think it is an interesting point, and even know we touched on it in class today, I was wondering how the females and males in the class view this metaphor.

I think there is an unmistakable link between Mrs. Wright and the dead bird.  It almost seems as if they are linked spiritually, as they both share the ability to create beautiful music.  In addition, their fragility is exposed by Mr. Wright.  He physically strangles the bird, while emotionally scarring Mrs. Wright, not just through breaking that spiritual link between her and the bird, but also through (seemingly) years of neglect and/or verbal abuse.

As for Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters, the sight of the murdered bird is quite horrifying for both of them.  I personally see a real turn in their attitude when they see the lifeless creature, and at that moment I think their already fragile minds crack.  Both commit a serious offense (altering/hiding evidence), a large aspect of the play that should not be overlooked.  Whether they are championing a certain unity for women or feel embarrassed for Mrs. Wright is up for debate, but I am very confident that the sight of the dead bird shatters the psyche of both Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters.

Does anyone agree or disagree?  If you do not agree, you should listen to Nelly Furtado's "I'm Like a Bird," and then maybe you will reconsider :)

Fern's "BlueStocking"

I don't know if anyone else has wondered about Fanny Fern's term "BlueStocking" that she chose for her title, but it intrigued me. I did some research and thought that I would share where the term originated for anyone who doesn't already know. “Bluestocking” was an expression used to describe an educated and intellectual woman commonly used during the 18th century. These women possessed a certain degree of wealth, education, and accomplishment, but the expression was not always a flattering one. There was actually a Blue Stocking Society which was an English society of both females and males that encouraged academic thinking and conversation. It is rumored that a man named Benjamin Stillingfleet, who was a male publisher and translator, was too poor to afford the black silk stockings worn as formal attire during the time period; Consequently, he wore the informal blue woolen stockings during Blue Stocking Society meetings instead. Over time, the expression “bluestocking” came to describe the informal atmosphere of the meetings and an emphasis on intellectual conversation instead of the attendees fashion.

I believe that Fern's choice of title was meant to poke fun at the term "Bluestocking" and that no woman can possibly cultivate her intellect in a society that puts so little importance on feminine ambition and masculine domesticity.

Fern's Feminism

Fanny Fern’s “Mrs. Adolphus Smith Sporting the ‘Blue Stocking’” is brilliantly written. Only a female writer could create such a piece, most likely from personal experience. I’m sure both Fanny Fern and her character, Mrs. Adolphus Smith, received much criticism for leaving their children unattended in order to sit down and write their masterpieces. Fern wrote her character as a fellow authoress for newspapers and journals, which leads me to believe this was written due to some like scenario in Fern’s own home. I also find this to be a great women’s rights piece showing that men need to take some responsibility for things occurring in their own homes. Mr. Smith can’t even find his Sunday pants, much less save his own child from choking on a button. He also gets fed up enough to call his wife’s writing scribbling, which she more or less ignores because she knows she is in control.

Margaret (vs) Anne

I love the readings that we have read for our class so far. I was a bit wary at first learning all of what we were going to be reading because of the title of the class, but so far the readings are great!

I had previously read Anne Bradstreet's poem, "An Author to Her Book" before, but I had not yet read Margaret Cavendish's , "The Poetess's Hasty Resolution". I love reading Bradstreet and I'm learning to like  Cavendish. When I read both of the poems, I felt as if they were saying somewhat of the same things. Both authors thought of their works as their own children and that there should have been time between the writings of them and the publishings. I did not know that Cavendish wrote her poem before Bradstreet though and it made me wonder if Bradstreet had the chance to read Cavendish's poem before Bradstreet wrote her own. Did Bradstreet get ideas for her poem from Cavendish, or was it purely coincidence that both woman wrote about relatively the same thing? I would love to know the answer to that question.

I hope I enjoy our other readings as much as I have enjoyed what we have read so far. I'm very excited to discuss Susan Glaspell's, "Trifles" this week in class. I have read it for two classes previously and love the conversation it sparks with the students in the classroom.

King's "Balcony"

I really loved this piece. It reminded me of when I was young and could hear the women of my family talking to each other while i was supposed to be going to bed. The imagery King uses of that comforting, protecting mother is one that most children can understand and relate to. Although this is obviously a piece of writing geared toward women, i feel that this comforting, Southern characterization could describe any gender parent. This is what is so intriguing about studying sex in writing and exploring stereotypes, because it gives us a chance to look back at these stereo-types, such as the fact that "men are not balcony sitters," and disprove them.

I'm so glad to be taking this class and looking at the transition that writer's subject matter and ideas of gender (especially feminist writers) have made as the feminist movement's goals changed over time. I believe that all writing reflects hopes and struggles of the people in the time it is written and that especially in the last 200 years, feminist writing has changed drastically in regards to the goals of the writers. I hope to continue to see a shift in these writer's objectives as we move into more modern writing, and I'm also anxious to see how male feminist writers explore these stereotypes and change their objectives in writing as the semester goes on.

"Mrs. Adolphus Smith": The Use of Stereotype

The one thing that got my attention in this piece was the authors clever use of common stereotypes. The father is of course depicted as inept at childrearing and management of anything besides his own paperwork. He is obviously opposed to his wife taking time out of her duties to write. This might be based on the old idea that women should not indulge in intellectual pursuits, because they might get ideas. With ideas come power and with power comes change which is the last thing that the patriarchy would want. However, this does not mean that the author has painted women to be this pious, holy, can do no wrong creatures. The wife in this case really does seem like she has a temper on her, and the description of barely helping when one of her twins chocked on a button kind of hit a nerve with me; even though this piece is supposed to be more humorous. While I did find it rather amusing, that does not mean that I did not see what the author was trying to say, which to me was basically making fun of stereotypes of both genders.

Grace King's The Balcony as an Escape

I found Grace King’s “The Balcony” to be the most intriguing work that we have covered so far. The first paragraph does a wonderful job detailing the scene of a lazy southern evening. To agree with Ryan, I did feel somewhat conflicted by the idea that men aren’t fit to sit on balconies. Apart from the slight rush of peering over an edge to find myself a great distance from the ground, I have always found balconies pleasant. However, King seems to refuse the presence of men as an attempt to keep the one area that she values sacred. 

However, I can certainly respect the desire to preserve the “unique and peculiar pathos” of the women’s story telling. The balcony functions as an escape for the women of the household, as it is as far away from the house as possible (while still being part of the house). It is almost as if King is suggesting that the women cannot escape the confines and responsibilities of the house that have tied them down. They try to separate themselves from it as much as possible by occupying the balcony and tasting the fresh air that does not permeate from the house. 

Fanny Fern

I love Fanny Fern's, "Mrs. Adolphus Smith Sporting the "Blue Stocking"." I love it now just as much as I did after reading it last semester in English 312 and I think the reason I love it so much is because I can identify with Mrs. Adolphus. I can completely identify with finally being able to find the time to sit down and write and focus only to be completely distracted with a million and one interruptions (like right now as I am trying to write this). I find the time in between to get work done and convey the message to my family that I am busy for them to completely ignore me and bug me with a bunch of questions that are not life and death and can wait to be answered after I finish the task I am working on. I also love the relationship between the wife and her husband. Fern captures the stereotype that men are incapable of doing anything remotely domestic with the example of the child choking and the husband not knowing what to do. The humor Fern writes with makes the tone of the poem so easy to understand and that is another factor that makes it so easy to relate to. Fern also captures the time period in which she wrote this beautifully. When she wrote this in the 1800s, women were only supposed to be wives and mothers and not really have a life outside the home. Fern shatters that image with this poem as she writes while so many other things in her home are occurring and with her husband saying, "Wife! will you leave off scribbling?". To me, that is the best example that women weren't supposed to be engaging in other activities that do not relate to their kids or husbands. I could continue to go on and on about how easy it is to relate to this poem and how much I love it but I think you all get the point by now.

That's What They Want You to Think

An observation I made while reading Bradstreet’s “The Author to Her Book” and Cavendish’s “An Excuse for So Much Writ upon My Verses”, was that they talk about their writing as their children. In one way, their writing was precious to them and was created by them like a child. For example, Cavendish said “Condemn me not for making such a coil/About my book, alas it is my child.” It is literally an excuse for writing, as if she could not help but pursue her maternal instinct. This gives the impression that they were taking on a socially accepted maternal role, but toward their writing. These women were basically saying that it was acceptable for them to be writers because they took on such a feminine role towards their work. Also, they take on a very inferior position in their explanations. For instance, Bradstreet talks about herself as a weak writer who had no business being published. She makes it sound like her writing is so bad that even she does not like it, but she has to take ownership for it as her motherly duty, just like the mother of a flawed child. This paints a picture of weak women who cannot help but indulge their natural need to nurture. This is such a clever approach because they use the guise of socially accepted inferior women to accomplish their socially rebellious goals of being women writers.

Those Trifling Blue Stockings.

I have really enjoyed the poetry we've read for class this week, but the one that grabbed my attention the most was Fanny Fern's "Mrs. Adolphus Smith Sporting the 'Blue Stocking.'" First, I was mostly intrigued by the title because I honestly had no idea what the meaning was behind "Blue Stocking." So, with the convenience of Google, I quickly searched the term. Wikipedia (Yes, I said it) defines the term under "The Blue Stocking Society" as "an informal women's social and educational movement in England in the mid-18th century." I thought this was interesting enough as I read the beginning of Fern's piece, the speaker seems to be writing a rather masculine piece.

Nonetheless, in true realistic style, Fern's writing is interrupted repeatedly by everyone around her. I don't know about anyone else, but I know I've experienced a similiar situation in my academic career. It seems I can waste most of the day doing absolutely nothing important, but when I make the decision to sit down and start writing a paper, reading an assignment, or anything that has to do with school, suddenly the entire world wants to communicate with me. My mom comes in wanting me to do 10,000 things, or the phone starts ringing, or 50 text messages start ringing through my phone. All at once, the concentration I've been building up is shattered and frustration sets in. At the beginning of this piece, Fern seems to finally find time to sit down and work a story and then is simultaneously interrupted to the point where she gives in and returns to her personal life. It's very comedic.

My favorite part of the piece was when Mr. Smith interrupts and says, "Wife! will you leave off scribbling?" I know I'm jumping the gun a little, but that line instantly reminded me of Susan Glaspell's Trifles, when Hale makes the comment: "Well, women are used to worrying over trifles." It's as if the men are dismissing that anything the woman is suggesting or trying to accomplish is worth the time. To Mr. Smith his wife is doing little more than "scribbling" meaningless words, instead she should be conducting her duties of taking care of the children and performing her female duties. The same goes for Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters in Trifles. The men would rather dismiss any of their suggestions or intuitions than gather any sort of credibility from women who clearly should know their place.

Why do we care about gender again?

What I found most interesting about these poems was that, aside from the pronoun usage, there was nothing inherently female about them. While I did assume without much initial question that these were written by a female, I could not help but give my assumptions a second thought. During class, we criticized the dismissal of female writers by their male counterparts. I found that criticism should be directed towards ourselves as well. By assuming that these poets are female, we suggest that the emotions and insecurities they feel about their writing is exclusively feminine. This idea of the “emotional female” presents itself frequently and, unfortunately leads to hindered talent. I am also aware that we all have preconceived notions about the gender of writers that have been built within our society, but I am very excited to challenge myself to perhaps start thinking differently.

                I think that it would be interesting to have had a male during this time write about the anxiety he feels when discussing a work that he created. I believe that when a poem can be of some great meaning to both sexes, it will insure the continued significance. If these works that we discussed in class were actually overtly feminist and only served today to be praised or satirized, it would still be too narrow to maintain relevance with today’s modern readers. This is important because any suppression that women writers feel from men comes from the lack of security felt within the males themselves. A cyclical repetition is found when female writers are criticized for publishing works that are too “emotional”. The criticism comes from the fact that women are prevented from their writing being taken seriously, but also the fact that being emotional is associated with women at all is a criticism within itself. This stereotype may only  be present from men because they can perhaps write of love, trials and insecurities, as long as it isn’t their own. The male writers discounted the females, because they may have been afraid themselves to write about their feelings, but females weren’t. Poets like Cavendish and Bradstreet are important because these fears make the writers more human, and allow them to connect more to their writing. By noting the differences between men and women, a disservice is done to literature. It allows us not to think or to question, and maybe one day we will not need or want to. Judging writers as merely being a product of our surrounding, and not from our genetic disposition might be a middle ground for not discounting gender entirely. Viewing it as an interesting fact rather than the sole reason for that writer to be writing would disallow stereotypes and incorrect assumptions.

I am very excited to take this class, and interested to see how my own brain processes gender issues found within the writings. I am also excited to ramble and complain more about how I think the world should be, this is all just my opinion so I’m really sorry if I got carried away.

In which books are neither read nor written on The Balcony

Of all of the pieces we've read this week-- Bradstreet, Cavendish, Fern-- Grace King's The Balcony stands out to me for several reasons. First, it places the woman writer in a supportive context of other women, in contrast to Fern's depiction of distracted, daytime demands of motherhood. Second, it suggests a unique relationship between story-telling/talking and writing -- that women find the same freedom and meaningful respite in an evening conversing on the balcony with one another that the "ennui of reading and writing books" cannot convey.

This piece also tries to make a case for women's writing springing from a particular way of being-- a similar mothering sensibility that Cavendish alluded to in her poems "Each story is different, or appears so to her... And so she dramatizes and inflects it, trying to make the point visible to her apparent also to her hearers. " Men are explicitly excluded from this process.

I think primarily that this piece is trying to relate how powerful and desirable it is to be at the center of this closed, intimate, social universe. The children are "not even afraid of God" under this meeting of the woman hivemind. The influence of shared "experiences, reminiscences, episodes" among women on the balcony is gathered and impressed upon the world not through writing, but through enveloping and shaping the minds of the next generation.

Week One: Which includes Bradstreet, Cavendish, Fern, and King

This first week we focused on different poems written in different styles.  My favorite is Bradstreet's "The Author to her book".  Bradstreet expresses how authors view their works as children.  I have read many prefaces and notes to the reader about how characters in a story will grow and change and become something completely different then the author intended.  I also really liked the cover of Joanna Russ's book How to Suppress Women's Writing it is a good example of how people viewed women in the past.  It reminds me of an article I read last semester where a critic was degrading Harriet Beecher Stowe.  They also said that the books written by Francis Hodgson Burnett were crap.  I highly disagree with this critic and love both Stowe and Burnett.  If those same books had been written by men they would have been viewed differently.  The poem by Fern "Mrs. Adolphus Smith Sporting the 'Blue Stocking'" shows the struggles a women would have had.  With women being the primary care givers for their children and husband it would have been hard for them to have time to sit down and write.

Bradstreet, Cavendish and Fern

It is fascinating to see the different perceptions the women have of their work. It’s also interesting to see the obstacles that come into play and challenge each woman’s ability to publish her work. On the one hand, the challenges Bradstreet and Cavendish face are more of an internal dilemma. They struggle with an inner dialogue that tells them their work is not good enough even before they attempt to publish it. The limitations that society places on them that they should adhere to their roles as women and the limitations they place on themselves, causes them to belittle their work. 

Bradstreet goes so far as to call her work an “ill-informed offspring” of her “feeble brain,” (1) and she deems it “unfit for light” (9). Bradstreet has already judged her work a failure before it even goes to press. Cavendish also struggles with the idea of publishing her work and questions the validity and worth or her writings. Unlike Bradstreet, Cavendish expresses that she sees some promise in her work because she is not worrying about how others would perceive it. However, that optimism quickly fades and she begins to second-guess the value of her piece.

In the authors’ poems, it seems to be a female voice that tells them “Don’t do it, your work is not good enough.” This voice calls Bradstreet’s work a “rambling brat in print” (9) and asks Cavendish “Will you, said she thus waste your time in vain, on that which in the world small praise shall gain?” (9-10).

While an inner conflict keeps Bradstreet and Cavendish from publishing, it is more of an external conflict of having to balance the tasks that women are expected to perform in addition to writing that interrupts Fern and keeps her from pursuing her work. She comes across as empowered, confident in her ability and ready to write.  However, she can’t physically write because a male voice, her husband or the butcher, keeps calling on her to sew a pair of torn pantaloons or speak with the butcher.  

Mrs. Adolphus discussion

So I know that we haven't discussed Fanny Fern's "Mrs. Adolphus Smith Sporting the 'Blue Stocking'" yet, but I wanted to possibly get a discussion going on so I can see if I am reading the piece how it was intended to be read.  For me, I really enjoyed the piece.  I thought it was funny and had a sense or realism to it; it seemed as though Mr. and Mrs. Aldophus Smith were an everyday, run-of-the-mill couple.  The dynamic of their relationship seems to clearly be defined by gender roles in my opinion.

First and foremost, Mr. Adolphus Smith is portrayed as someone who looks toward his wife when he can't quickly figure out a problem, instead of spending time thinking up a solution.  For example, he could not find his Sunday pants, did not know what to do when their child swallowed a button, and could not remember what his wife wanted to order from the butcher.  The piece is extremely stereotypical, with the husband unable to problem solve, while at the same time expecting his wife to easily and quickly come up with a solution.  At the end, Mr. Aldophus Smith clearly has no clue how to do what would be considered *stereotypically* female work, as he had been holding his child upside down for quite some time to get the button out of his throat.

If I didn't find this piece so funny, I might actually be offended by it.  However, I think men do have a tendency to look toward their wife, girlfriend, mother, or other major female relation to solve problems for them.  I do believe that both Mr. and Mrs. Aldophus Smith are conforming to their gender roles, and expect the other to do so as well (even Mrs. Aldophus Smith taking her husband's name is following gender role norms).  I have no problem with clearly defined gender roles, as I think they would exist naturally anyway.  That being said, I really like this piece.  I think it is hilarious and I am looking forward to discussing it in class with everyone!

Anne Bradstreet: A Visionary for American Literature

            I have always been fascinated by Anne Bradstreet, particularly by the fact that she was America’s first published poet.  In class, we have briefly discussed how women’s writing was often times in the past suppressed and not seen as true art.  I find it ironic that such writing was diminished when in fact it was a woman who initially started what we now know as American literature.  Was the attention span of prior generations so small that they clearly forgot this fact for hundreds of years?

            What I find most intriguing about Bradstreet’s poetry is the genuine honesty and emotion that is present throughout her writing.  In “The Author to Her Book”, Bradstreet laments the fact that some of her work was published without her permission.  If one did not know the true circumstances, it would be quite easy to mistake the topic for that of a child rather than writing, which shows the reader how much she truly cared about her work.  The love that Bradstreet had for her poetry, as well as her protective nature of it, is both interesting and, as time would inevitably prove, warranted.  Due to the scrutiny that society would have regarding women’s writing, Bradstreet was right in regretting the publication of her work for all eyes to see and judge.  Thankfully, though, society has progressed, and we can now see Bradstreet’s poetry for what it is: timeless.

Ramblings

Maybe it's because I've read "The Author to Her Book" at least a few times and have already discussed the cleverness and necessity of Bradstreet's presenting her book in this manner. Or maybe it's because I wrote my annotated bibliography on Anne Bradstreet last year for 301 and thus have read multiple articles about her poetry. Whatever the reason, I admit that I was a bit bored with "The Author to Her Book" when I reread it for this class. The girlish language was quite obvious, with references to "offspring" (1), "mother" (8), and "homespun cloth" (18). I didn’t really have any new revelations about feminist writing. This is not to say that I think that “The Author to Her Book” is a poorly written poem – not at all! In terms of structure and wording, I found this poem much better written than either of Cavendish’s. Maybe it’s the creative writer in me and having had a class with Dr. Messenger that makes me tend to scrutinize the structure and wording of the poems rather than paying attention to the content.

Anyway, I did like the idea that Cavendish’s poems reflect, as the introduction to her poetry put it, “psychological reactions to the process of writing” (160). The description of the sheer joy of writing for oneself, the anxiety that follows when one realizes that others will read this precious writing, and the desire for somebody to say, “No, this is good!” were definitely relatable.

I think both Brittany and Angela commented that Bradstreet and Cavendish were “rarities” in their days: most authors were men. I was thinking about the fact that things are sort of opposite today, or at least there are equal numbers of men and women writers. Maybe I was thinking more of fanfiction.net, the website where I’ve posted stories and frequently read others’ “fics.” The majority of the authors on that website are female. Likewise, out of the seventeen people in my Intro to Creative Writing class last semester, only three were male. Now, I realize that
there are plenty of male English majors and authors. I just think it’s interesting that sometimes we – or at least I – think of writing as a more feminine pursuit. I’m not saying that this is true – my favorite author, Ted Dekker, is obviously male.

I’m also reminded of an article that we had to read last semester for English 377 – “Composing as a Woman” by Elizabeth Flynn. Among other topics, Flynn discussed the contrast in the typical subjects that men and women tend to write about: women write about relationships, while men write about accomplishments (427-32). Bradstreet’s and
Cavendish’s poems seem to be a combination of the two: the poets describe their mother-child relationships with their writing as well as the tentative accomplishments that their poems represent.

Bradstreet and Cavendish

I have read Anne Bradstreet's poem "The Author to Her Book" before and struggled with the message she was trying to convey. I think I found it difficult to relate to her passivity, as a writer, because times are so different now. Women have a lot more freedoms that, as a gender, they didn't have before and are now taken for granted. When I read it this time, about a year after the first time, I read it much differently. I found myself comparing the plight of women writers, like Bradstreet and Margaret Cavendish, to those of African American writer Phyllis Wheatley. In her poem "On Being brought from Africa to America" Wheatley takes a passive, and yet crafty, approach by placing herself in an inferior role but with the ability to be transformed by the influences of the Caucasian race who had claimed themselves to be superior and enlightened when compared to the African American race. Samson Occum, a Native American writer, did the same thing in "A Short Narrative of My Life when he stated that the reason for his troubles was because he was a poor Indian but that it wasn't his fault because God made him that way. This absolved him of responsibility for what he is and spark sympathy from the reader, which would have been mainly white men.

I believe that Bradstreet and Cavendish are another reflection of the era they lived in. Becoming a published, woman writer was not a respected profession for a gender condemned to find complete fulfillment as a wife and mother. A woman was to have no wants of her own or desires apart from her husbands. If Bradstreet or Cavendish had not displayed their writing through a humble, passive, and submissive lens they would have been shunned and most likely never published. Bradstreet describes her own poetry as inferior and flawed. She also implies a lack of control over the outcome of that symbolized inferiority. She portrays herself as a woman incapable of producing any better because she is a woman. Cavendish also takes a similar stance in "An Excuse for So Much Writ upon My Versus." She presents her work as juvenile, incomplete, and in need of guidance. She also appears to absolve herself of all responsibility for her poems outcome in the very first line, "Condemn me not for making such a coil." I don't believe for a second that either of these women actually considered themselves inferior writers; but, instead of screaming "Screw You!!" to the men who controlled their world they chose to play their hand in the most effective way and I applaud and respect them for knowing how to work the system!

Bradstreet and Cavandish Discussion

Okay, so since I haven't seen any posts up yet I figured I would go ahead and be the first. I have never done one of these blog posts before, either for a class or in my spare time, so please bear with me. I have read Anne Bradstreet's poem, "The Author to her book" in two of Dr. H's previous classes so I feel that i have a pretty good handle on that particular poem. I know we haven't went over it in class as of the time I am writing this post, but I am going to go ahead and make a few comments of mine on it. I feel that Bradstreet is playing the expected role of a woman in her time period. Women in 1678 did not publish their poems. Bradstreet's friends thought her poems were very good and had them published, even though Bradstreet herself did not want them published. Bradstreet says that her poems were "irksome" to her sight, but she tried to dress them up and send them out the door. She is saying to the audience, "I know these poems are not very good because I wrote them." that is the feeling I am getting anyway. I also like how she attributes her poem as a child. That domestic role of child-rearing would fit in with a woman of Bradstreet's time. The unusual part about this is the fact that Bradstreet does not seem to like this "child" at all. This could just be due to the fact that she did not want her poems published or it could mean something deeper. As for Cavandish, I do not believe she has the same poetical chops as Bradstreet. I just could not get over that she asks for pity and for people to tell her that her poem is good. That just made me dislike her.