So, since: a) no one reads this blog, and b) I am not currently writing anything outside of my classes, I have decided to do something of an archaeological dig into my "creative past." I am searching my archive for all things written and I will post it. It will be embarrassing and it will be true.
My proudest poem for creative writing. Outlet A breath of conscious thought Jolting me into reality Electrocutes my circuit veins. How quickly I pull my hand away, But that tickle lingers. My flesh is reddened-raw. The heart struggles to escape its prison. Tears splash into my wiry hair As the scream reverberates. But it’s done more good than harm. Pain, another Life Lesson learned.
The sonnet assignment for creative writing. Get kinky with it ;)
Hades’ Shadow You are but a shadow dancing in light Disappearing in the darkest hour. Whilst I lie alone in the dead of night, I cannot elude your siren power. This addiction to your bitter-sweet touch Is beyond what my poor heart can withstand. I am in anguish from living as such; While I watch the ebbing hour-glass sand. I loath what fuels this eternal flame’ For it burns with insatiable desire. I forever seek to escape this game Yet at every turn I’m engulfed by your fire. Because I remain victim of your spell, Faithfully, I wait, at the gates of Hell.
Another piece for creative writing. Sweet Demise He escapes into the dark night As black as his liver must be To purchase a long necked idol And worships with clasped hands, eyes shut. Salty water baptizes his cheeks As he kisses what is holy. The liquid burn ignites his soul Relief floods throughout his body. Finally he is born anew.
He knows these nightly prayers are false. Promising only a moment, And the façade is quick to fade. But at least it’s a chance at bliss, However short lived it may be. How can he not give thanks and praise To the sweet spice of sacrifice? It has to be a gift from God. It’s been his only connection.
When the sky becomes a medley Of pink, purple and golden hues; And birds sing melodiously To thank the sun for its return He does not stir, idol in hand. His limp body of gray and white, Will not be found for days on end, The silent pretense of his house Gave no alert to the neighbors. There was no one left to notice A man’s shameful whiskey downfall. But in the end he wasn’t wrong, His prayers had finally brought him One step closer to meeting God.
Fourth British Horror paper, don't ask me what happened in between these one's my memory falls short. I don't hate it though.
The Horror of Fear
Professor
Leicester’s essay, “What’s a Horror Movie?”, discusses the concept of defining,
“the discourse of horror,” by the repetition of certain, “elements, whether
words or images or bodily motions or institutions that can be used to signify
horror (the affect), because they’ve been used that way before” (2). Michael Reeves’ Witchfinder General (1968) conforms to these criteria of “horror”. Based on its basic content of gore, rape, the perceived supernatural, and screaming women it can be discerned that this movie has clearly, “seen other horror films”. While the movie does mirror its predecessors, it also serves as its own form of, “the mirror stage,” to its viewer by mimicking repetitive human nature, thus, “convert[ing] the image to, and treat[ing] it as, a body capable of being desired or feared” (Leicester 13, 15). Witchfinder General (1968), based on real events, is set in a time of great upheaval during Britain’s civil war, and genuinely reflects the way
people react during times of political unrest. The witch hunt performed
by Mathew Hopkins and his sadistic assistant, John Stearne, exemplifies the
results of powerful people using fear-mongering as a control device.
Actual witch hunts took place around the world until the late 18th
century, causing several innocent people to be tortured and killed. Witchfinder General (1968) depicts the cruelty that had been administered to the accused during the scenes in which the priest, chained and imprisoned, is brutally abused in order to coerce his “confession”, as well as the “public trial,” where he and two women are thrown into a moat as a test of witchcraft. Beyond the disgust and discomfort that the “elements of horror” cause, the film illustrates the frightening reality of human vulnerability to manipulation.
After
Hopkins informs Stearne that he is finally allowed to inflict pain upon John
Lowes, the accused priest, the camera closes up on Stearne’s smiling face and,
in accordance with the stock elements of “horror”, the man breaks into maniacal
laughter. A match cut then displays Lowes, chained and bleeding, as
Stearne beats him and demands a confession. Hopkins, Tom Salter, and another
man watch the interrogation from outside the cell. Despite his suffering,
a weakened Lowes still refuses to admit to any crimes. It is at this
point that Hopkins insists that, “he confessed, you heard him.” When Tom
Salter -out of explicit voyeuristic pleasure, rather than the pursuit of truth-
denies this assertion, Stearne, “refresh[es] his memory.” He grabs
Salter’s shirt collar and slams him into the bars that separate them.
Salter immediately revokes his previous position with a frantic nod.
Although Salter has no difficulties watching an innocent man treated with
great cruelty, when his own safety is threatened he becomes inclined to protect
himself. He has seen the torment these men have subjected and his terror
compels him to succumb to their demands. Unlike Salter, who stands as
close as possible to observe the physical violation of Lowes, the other man
stands at a considerable distance from the action. He immediately accepts
Hopkins’ assertion that he too heard the confession. This man has now
seen the agony Hopkins is capable of producing to the accused, as well his
reaction to being contradicted. Beyond any physical threats, the man has
now ascertained the magnitude of power these men have within the alleged
judicial process. Naturally, his instantaneous compliance is motivated by
his own trepidation at these discoveries. The scene ends when, with a nod
of his head, Hopkins utters a single word: “witnesses”.
Once
again, the following scene transitions with a match cut featuring several
villagers following the condemned with the intention of being, “witnesses,” to
the atrocious treatment of their peers. As the mob makes its way towards
the moat, the camera closes up on three nooses hanging from a tree. This
particular shot serves to represent the preconceived fate of the three,
“confessed idolaters.” During the journey to the destination, the crowd
is rambunctious and seemingly excited for the proceedings. When “Stearne
go[es] on with [his] task,” the group’s attitude rapidly shifts as the yells
and laughter cease, leaving only the pleading screams of the victims. The
previous enthusiasm for the theoretical swiftly depreciates as reality sets in.
This type of response identifies with the notion that, “failures of
repression... make[s] the source of what turns [someone] on and what horrifies
[someone] the same thing,” implying that the general group is both aroused and
appalled by their own fear (Leicester,12) . After the alleged are lowered
into the water, Lowes and one other woman swim to stay afloat while the second
woman sinks and is allowed to drown. As a result, the first two are
considered to, “have the mark of Satan upon them,” while the latter, now dead,
is determined innocent. Hopkins’ skewed version of, “Due Process,” in
this scene manages to instill fear amongst the masses. Those who believe
in his accounts of witches and their characteristics will undoubtedly spread
their fears by speaking of their “firsthand encounters”. After seeing the
unavoidable results of being accused, others might join the mob mentality as an
instinctual method to remain safe from suspicion. In other words, those
who contradict Hopkins’ practices, such as Sara Lowes and Richard Marshall, are
susceptible to torture and quite possibly death.
“What a
horror movie offers is ‘horror,’ a discursive or Symbolic presentation of what
has been previously made by culture in order to call forth horror” (Leicester,
16). Witchfinder General (1968) uses Mathew Hopkins as a representation of powerful self- serving people who find opportunity in despair. During
times of unease, such as war, citizens can often feel uneasy about their safety. During the introduction the narrator states that, “the structure of law and order has collapsed, “and the “justice and injustice are dispensed in more or less equal quantities, and without opposition.” This environment allows for the easy manipulation of frightened citizens in search of some sense of safety. The need for control causes the people in this film to go along with these witch hunts. Mathew Hopkins capitalizes on the unease and fear of these people by fostering a greater sense of fear through the public torture of innocent people. The “horror” offered in this film is the breakdown of society without structured government and law and the loss of morality brought about by such circumstances.
My first paper in British Horror. Erik Bachman said that it was "a promising start to the quarter." I'll hold onto that win forever!
Camera Angles: An Effect on Affect
Director, Val Guest, creates a world that is once again faced with the threat of conquering aliens in his film, “Quatermass 2”. Throughout the sci-fi horror film, certain techniques are employed to establish inter-film connections to its audience. When two of the characters first arrive to the scene of paranormal occurrences, the use of a high-angle shot creates a link to a preceding image. Later on in the movie, when Quatermass involves his detective friend, several film devices are used to establish the point where “the plot thickens.” In this particular scene there is a shot-reverse-shot sequence in the first person as well as a close up that make this encounter markedly dramatic. It is with the use of these angles and shot sequences that the characters discover the most disturbing oddities, producing moments that are more noticeable and therefore more meaningful to the viewer. When the protagonist, Quatermass, enters his laboratory he and one of his colleagues begin to discuss their plans to colonize the moon. During their conversation, there is a clear view of the structural model that they plan to build as the two men look down upon it. Later on in the film, Quatermass and his assistant, Marsh, head to the location of the alleged meteorite landing. It is here that the audience is presented with a similar image. When the men arrive, a high-angle shot frames what has become of Winnerton Flats. Several futuristic-looking large steel domes can be seen beneath them. The shot is filmed from behind the two men displaying their distance from the structure, along with their size relation. At the same time, the high-angle shot has the effect of making to structure appear smaller than it would be from a different angle. With the size distortion that this angle projects, the buildings look very similar to the model seen in the laboratory. Because the view is partially blocked by the men, it is difficult to tell how exact the structure is. The two men look down upon the “factory” as they would look at their own design to create a sub-atmosphere beyond their planet. Although Quatermass dismisses the likeness as, “a coincidence of shapes,” an eerie parallel has been drawn.
After Quatermass has confirmed his suspicions of alien life forms, he pays a second visit to inspector Lomax to inspire a government investigation. He convinces the inspector to bring the matter to the commissioner. Lomax approaches his superior with an air of respect, but a shot-reverse shot sequence leading to a revealing close-up create instant fear. The shot originally is aimed at Lomax when something clearly catches his eye. Then, in the first person perspective, the camera closes up on the commissioner's right hand. He seems to be casually scanning over his reading material, holding a pen between his fingers. What really stands out in the shot is the, “jagged V,” embedded into the skin. The shot then refocuses on Lomax’s horrified face, then there is one more close up of the commissioner’s mark. The dramatic angles and shot sequence signify frightening realization of further infection. The close up of the hand, a small part of the human body, takes up the greater part of the screen. The shots of this scene mirror the goings-on within the film; what they thought was infecting a small area may actually be a large-scale invasion.
Although, unlike conventional literature, film does not have the opportunity to describe in great detail what it wants to be seen, several cinematic techniques can be used to convey a deeper context to what may otherwise seem like an unimportant scene. Music and lighting are often applied in films to set a particular mood or tone. More subtly however, the way the camera captures a film singles out the most important subject matter. A simple shift in angle can force the viewer’s eye to the most significant aspects of a story. In the case of this film these methods emphasize the most paranormal moments, which implies that its intention was to zero-in on, “what the film thought ought to scare you.”
This one is a little newer from my very first quarter at UCSC. My first assignment for my creative writing class last fall was a response to the question "Why do you write?" Apart from the bit about knowing no one who cares (I found my people) it is still true.
Why
I Write
It is ironic that when asked why I write I am at a loss for words. I
suppose that I write because I rarely have nothing to say. In a world
where spontaneous verbal outbursts are generally frowned upon, writing becomes
the only viable outlet.
When I began school it became apparent that the way I chose to communicate
would never be understood. My teachers and peers did not appreciate my
“excessive” interest in the randomness of life. It was only when we were
taught to write that I could spend my days expressing myself. The scratch
of my pen was easily mistaken as the execution of times tables. When I
write, I can say anything and everything.
Recently a friend of mine asked me what my ideal job would entail. After
a moment of thought it came to me; I want to talk all day long.
Naturally, she suggested teaching. But she didn't understand. I
want to spend my days talking about the things that interest me: my everyday musings
and observations. Things that matter to no one, but affect everyone.
I want to spend a four-hour car ride contemplating the invention of the
automatic seat-belt. Who came up with this creation? Were the government
and car manufacturers in alliance to encourage car safety? And why are
humans so intent on such simplifications? As you can imagine, not many
people are so fascinated by my boundless curiosities. But I would suffer
greatly without an outlet for all of my questions: the things I need to know and
want other people to think about.
So I write. I write because I know no one who cares. I write
because I know there is someone who cares. I write for my own
sanity. I write because with my pen I can translate the language of my
mind. I write because it is the only thing I have ever loved. I
write because words are my medium, my art.
This is a write up of some in-class essay I had to write from my AP Lang class Junior year. Total crap.
Rhetorical Strategies for Persuasive writing: A Letter From Birmingham Jail
In his Letter from Birmingham Jail, Dr. Martin Luther king Jr. discusses the pain caused by racism and segregation. He communicates the feelings of isolation and humiliation that African Americans are forced to endure at the hands of racism. Through his use of serious tone and emotional diction that appeals to pathos,King explains why he and other African Americans can no longer "wait" for equality.
King’s tone throughout the letter is
serious and establishes the fact that African Americans are suffering.
His use of the phrase "stinging darts" suggests that he is hurt
directly by racism in American society. This imagery is an implication
that the white clergymen he is addressing might not see how serious the
situation is, but simply consider it a game. White Americans have not had
to suffer through the pain that African Americans have endured. King
wishes to show the reader that he cannot wait when this sort of injustice is
still happening. He explains that people are being "lynch[ed] at
will." This statement clarifies that the laws are not being followed
by either side of the issue. Clearly the government does not have control
over what is happening to these people and this lack of control applies to the
African Americans themselves. King does not take the issue of segregation
lightly, and uses his tone to communicate to the American people that they too
should stand up against the injustice.
The emotional diction that King uses
appeals to pathos and is a primary rhetorical strategy used in his argument.
His biggest appeal is the use of familiar terms such as referring to his fellow
African Americans as "[his] black brothers and sisters." The
idea of the unity he feels with his fellow black man makes them seem more like
a community. At this King assumes that the reader will think of their own
family and their own community being harmed. From this point of view
people can understand his need to protect his family. King also uses an anecdote
about the tears in the eyes of his, "six year old daughter," allowing
the audience to better understand and sympathize with their pain. He uses
his young children to show that innocent people are being victimized.
Through the use of this story as a method of appealing to pathos, King
associates himself to every parent or family member who reads his letter.
The idea of his "twenty million Negro brothers smothering in an airtight
cage of poverty," is sickening. The imagery in this statement
implies mass amounts of suffering. The pain that the poverty brings about
is like a slow death that they cannot escape. It is almost unbearable to
even imagine this sort of agony which is exactly what King intends. King
wants the reader to know that the only escape from this "cage" is to
no longer have to "wait" for liberty.
The grief that is brought about by
segregation and racism in America is clearly displayed in King's letter.
By showing white Americans exactly how he and his, "Negro brothers,"
are treated, he is intending to open the eyes of his audience. He invites
them to see the pain in the lives of the average African American, and asks
them to understand why he can no longer wait for equality. He knows that
the law is unfair, and he has to break some in order to change his world.
Another work for my community college, this time English 1B. I am left to assume that these assignments were primarily intended to express opinions.
Body Image
With the fashion industry and the media focusing on women and men who have bodies beyond the realm of possibility for the average person, unrealistic expectations have been set for young, impressionable girls and boys. While clothing no doubt looks better on a lithe figure, the use of these images in magazines, movies, and the media have caused body image distortion. This is particularly apparent in young girls, who may become unhealthy as a result of trying to meet these excessive standards. As a young women in this society, I find this practice to be harmful, but not the only cause of self-distortion. Women in magazines and Ads are often too skinny. This leaves girls with the idea that it is unacceptable to be a natural healthy weight, but occasionally these images are offset by fit, powerful women who are not outrageously thin. It is important for young people to understand that the women in these magazines are not average, and should not be emulated to the point of extremes. Magazines and media are not the sole cause of unhealthy body issues, however the expectations they set are harmful to young women. Instead of advertising absurdly unhealthy women, magazines should focus on women who have healthy, fit bodies who would be good role models for young people everywhere.
THIS is the type of BULLSHIT assignments that I had to do in my senior English Lit class. In order to graduate early, I had to go from AP classes to "regular" education. I remember I specifically dumbed down my answer because my teacher constantly yelled at me for my "expansive analysis." I have to say that this class made me ashamed of the K-12 education system in California.
Mrs. Irwin
World Lit
25 October 2008
The Road Not Taken
What does Robert Frost discuss in his poem, The Road Not Taken?
+ + E + S S + T + + + W + + + + + + C O D + + R + + A + + + + + + R N + A + + A + N + + + + + R D + E + O + + V T + + + + Y + E + + R + R + + E + + + + + + G + + + E + + + D L + + + + + R + + + + F + + + + + + + + + E + + + + + F + + + + + + + + V + + N + + + I + + + + + + + I + E + + + + + D + + + + + + D D K C A L B R + + O + + + + D + + + + + + A + W + + + + O + + + + + + + E T + + + + R D O U B T E D + W + + + + T + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
(Over,Down,Direction) BLACK(10,11,W) DIFFERENCE(12,10,NW) DIVERGED(4,11,N) DOUBTED(3,14,E) ROADS(9,5,NW) SORRY(6,1,SW) TRAVEL(8,1,SE) TRODDEN(1,15,NE) TWO(12,13,NE) WANTED(12,1,S) WEAR(11,14,N) Robert Frost's Poem, The Road Not Taken, is about the hesitation one man feels when choosing one path over the other. In a literal sense, Frost discusses the wariness one feels when they come to a fork in the road and must their way. It may also be perceived as a poem about life choices. Every decision a person makes may change the course of their life. In this poem, Frost expresses that pondering of whether or not his choice was right.
This is a paper I wrote for my Women in Art class at Saddleback College in 2008. I would have been going into my senior year of high school. I have no idea what the prompt was, but I am sincerely hoping that it was meant to be an opinion piece about the evolution of art in relationship to cultural constructs. Who the hell knows, but I got and A in the class. Try not to let that make you doubt the system too much. (Photos were included for contextual purposes.)
Changing Ideas About Women
In art, women have almost always been perceived as sexual objects. Whether the artist intends for the painting, picture, or film to portray women as vain nymphomaniacs, it can be argued that this is how most viewers see them. This lead to people not only believing this of the women in the artwork, but women in general. Beginning in the mid 60's and throughout the 70's, people began to make more sexually explicit films. These films showed women in more compromising sexual situations. Throughout time women have been shown as secretly seductive. In pieces in the eighteenth century, a painting of a young women writing a love letter might have been considered scandalous. People would believe the surely this girl is thinking impure thoughts, as all women do. As these films in the 60's and 70's were being made, women were no longer only thinking impure thoughts but acting them out as well. It may have seemed to the creator of the film that he was making women seem more independent, but instead it made women look even worse. It gave males in society even more of a reason to look down upon them. In her book, Vision and Difference Griselda Pollock explains that being a women is not necessarily an inborn trait. She explains that another writer, Elizabeth Cowie, writes that to be a woman is not decided by biology or society but rather to be a women is the act of not being a man. These beliefs are further shown in biology and society by the products of media and art. If an artist wishes to change the ideas and beliefs that femininity entails then they have to portray a women in a way that cannot be seen as purely sexual objects, but rather as actual beings.
Julie Christie starred in the film Shampooreleased in 1975. This film was about a man who had sexual relations with many women, while maintaining a “personal” relationship with one particular woman. The women committed adultery and chased after the man in the film. They were not portrayed particularly modest or chaste fashion. The women all chased after men and relied on them in their lives. Christie played the role of a women who escaped the clutches of the hairdresser that had so many sexual relations. The writers, Robert Towne andWarren Beatty may have thought that by liberating this woman they were showing women with more independence and status in society, however she was actually shown as a gold digger who only cared about money rather than actual love. Pollock quotes Elizabeth Cowie, “'Film is a point of production of definitions but neither unique and independent of, nor simply reducible to, other practices defining the position of women in society.'”(Pollock, 43). In saying this, Cowie shows that although filmmakers may try to project different views of women, they are no different than the works of art that are displayed in museum. They will portray women in the way that they are perceived in society, whether that was the intention or not. In this particular film, Christie is still shown as a narcissistic nymphomaniac just as the paintings of Eve, or the eighteenth century painter Pietro Antonio Rotari's “Young Girl Writing a Love Letter” were perceived during the time that they were painted. Although films were generated during the twentieth century, and became most popular during the most prominent years of the women's movement, they have done nothing to help the image of women in society. Although they have made the idea of sexual independence for women more feasible, these films did not make women seem independent in other aspects of life; such as financially or emotionally.
Recently, artists who have seen the perceptions of women remain unchanging have attempted new types of art that portray women in different ways. These pictures are generally not sexually related, but make women look odd and in some cases ugly. In one untitled photo by a recent artist named Cindy Sherman, a woman is shown in a distorted way. The area around her eyes is painted white, and her stomach is protruding as if she is pregnant. Her facial expression is intense, and somewhat frightening. Her hair is spiked up in a androgynous fashion. Although her skin is shown, and nipples are visible, it is not shown in a sexual way. She is not over sexualized as many paintings and photos show women. She is distorted and would be considered ugly by popular culture. Apart from her breasts she does not seem to be of any biological sex. Her hair could be short like a man's, or put up like a woman's. Her shirt is collared like one that a man would wear. When looking at this photo a viewer might see it as sexual, but most likely people will view her with curiosity, and have to take a second look to decide whether it is a man or woman. This kind of art has become a way to show women in a new way. She is not in a vulnerable position nor is she over exposed like most women in art. Now, when this photo is being looked at, viewers will not look at is and think immediately of feminine stereotypes. They will have to concentrate on the photo to understand its meaning and look at the woman as an individual rather than part of a group that has never been well perceived.
With this sort of contemporary art surfacing, women might not only be seen as sexual beings. The independence and individuality of women is better shown through these pieces than they had ever been in any other forms of art. These feminist artists are using the distorting of images to make people think more about the actual existence of females rather than the idea that to be a woman is to not be a man. Women will become recognized for their impact on society around the world. Film has become better at portraying women in this way, however these ideas still need to progress, and these forms of art will only assist this process.
As I am about to graduate with a B.A. in modern literature from UCSC, I have begun to recognize my own potential for growth in relation to my academic history thus far. So, since: a) no one reads this blog, and b) I am not currently writing anything outside of my classes, I have decided to something of an archaeological dig into my "creative past." I am searching my google docs and my gmail archive for all things literary that I have written and I will post it on my blog. I realize this might be incredibly embarrassing but it is true. I am fascinated by the opportunity to understand my own intellectual development and the evolution of my writing style as I have wondered (that was a typo but I've decided to stand by it) the lovely path of public education. Should be quite a journey.
"You know what this is? You've forgotten what it's like to see your own reflection- to be faced with yourself, what you are everyday."- George being human, S1E2 (14 min)
In section we were given a passage from Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness. There was one line in the piece that obviously stands out, as Marlow quotes Kurtz's postscript on the report he wrote, "Exterminate all the brutes!" What this means and why it was included- like almost everything else in the novella- is not made clear in Marlow's telling of the story. He does not make any attempt to interpret the meaning behind these words for the audience, but he refers to it as "valuable."
This leave us, once again, to make assumptions about what these four words could mean. Is he referring to the savages that surround him? Or is he perhaps making a commentary on the people that sent him there? The "Europe [that] contributed to the making of Kurtz." We don't really find out what team Kurtz is playing for after Marlow discovers him.
I stand by the comment that I made in section about why Marlow calls Kurtz's exclamation valuable. I think that any hint about the makeup of Kurtz's new personality serves as valuable to Marlow. He has become Marlow's subject of study, so the extreme change in the man is nothing if not fascinating to him. What I wish we knew was when the postscript was written. We have no clue as to whether he wrote it at the same time as the rest of the pamphlet, or if it was a new opinion that he had made.
Personally I think that Kurtz is restating bluntly what he likely already said. Marlow says that the report, "was eloquent, vibrating with eloquence, but too high-strung." It is hard to say something like "exterminate all the brutes," in a delicate manner. It is very likely that the high-strung language that Marlow is detecting is the tiptoeing around the truth of the matter. I imagine that people who consider themselves superior to the "savage" land that they have occupied would not want to admit straight out that they are disgusting human beings. Instead they send each other reports that are full of innuendos that paint the picture for the club that knows the code.
So Kurtz has decided to decode the report for the masses. This is what the report is expected to say and what it does say. "Exterminate all the brutes!" This leads me to believe that Conrad is making a point about imperialism and what was actually happening during this time. He wants people to know what isn't being said... by not saying it. He speaks the code and therefore we must too.
I belong to a generation that can only be defined by its lack of definable characteristics. We are Generation Why?: the generation of facebook, texting and general apathy. Current events are hardly a blip on the perpetual computer screen, but there is a bloody war raging between teams Edward and Jacob. So what is it about vamps that has caused such a stir in pop culture in the past few years?
Here is where I introduce this crazy theory I'm working on that I like to call The Vampiric Reverse Mirror Stage. This is the idea that if we, as humans, all go through the mirror stage then there must be a similar process for vampires. I propose that the first time a Vampire looks in the mirror after the transformation, the opposite effect occurs.
According to Lacan, "We have only to understand the mirror stage as an identification, in the full sense that analysis gives to the term: namely, the transformation that takes place in the subject when he assumes an image." So the VR Mirror Stage, is a fragmenting process rather than the identification that Lacan is talking about here. In this case the subject loses its image, rather than assuming one. They are, essentially the others in the world now, and no longer have an other to look at in the mirror. They are a set of limbs flailing about reaching for some semblance of wholeness. They are no longer human and this symbolizes the absolute absence of humanity.
So you might be thinking, "What the heck does this have to do with apathetic youth?" and my answer once again refers back to the concept of identification, but this time we're back to the "real" world. We, as a group, have no identity as shown by the previously discussed lack of defining characteristics. So I think that it becomes easy to identify with these non-existent creatures who have always been somewhat illusive in their lore.
Hence the creation of the misunderstood vampire in the last decade or so. Vampires with souls and the capability to love (yada yada yada.) Young people can relate to these ideas of monsters who are just searching for their identity in the big bad world, because that's how they like to see themselves. They look through the screen and see themselves as the enchanting characters who are simply trying to figure out who the hell they are.
Plus, Vampires are the teenagers of all monsters: They are always hungry, they answer to no one, they go through friends like toilet paper, and they sleep all day. Anyone would feel connected, really.
More textual evidence about my fun little theory to be developed. Stay tuned!
In class we talked about how during the Victorian Age, a proper woman could fill one of two roles pertaining to her sexuality. If she was unmarried, she could be pure and virginal in hopes of one day gaining a husband. Once she was married she could be seen as a "sexual" being. To be a bit hackneyed, society basically realized that it takes two to tango. The woman had to be involved in sex in order to have children, so only then was it okay. If women couldn't be wrapped into either of these pretty little boxes and tied up with ribbon, then she was a whore. End of story.
There was a similar notion in the 50's when the nuclear family came about and image became just as important as it had been in the 1800's. We can look at the characters in Blue Velvet (1989) as a quick example. Sandy is the ideal that society want's Jeffery to fall in love with. She is pure and wholesome and could easily settle down and pop our 2.5 children. Dorothy is a woman who is married and has a child, so her sexual nature is established. But because she is perceived by society as a sexualized single woman, she is looked at in the role of the whore.
The image of Audrey Hepburn shown above is a depiction of this sexuality in its controlled state. Do we know if this woman is married? No. She fulfills the fantasy that men were trained to have at the time. What makes this picture so erotic, despite being completely pg? A woman, cooking for you in a flattering dress, with a cigarette dangling casually- but sexily- from her lips. If she's someone's wife, you better believe that dinner will be on the table when her husband walks through the door. If she is a girlfriend, she'll be that kind of wife someday.
What makes this photo so sexy? Subservience of course! If that's not a reiteration of Victorian ideals, I don't know what is. Seems like a reoccurring theme don't it?
"It amazed me that I had not seen him, since the reflection of the glass covered the whole room behind me... I turned to the glass again to see how I had been mistaken. This time there could be no error, for the man was close to me, and I could see him over my shoulder. But there was no reflection of him in the mirror!" (Stoker 26).
I can imagine that the connection between Lacan and vampires' inability to see themselves in the mirror have been linked to the nth degree, but I suggest that this class doesn't assign The Mirror Stage if you guys are sick of hearing about it. As it stands, I am going to go ahead and take a look at this unmistakable connection. There are several ways to interpret this scene in Bram Stoker's Dracula, all of which I can't really cover in this one post, so I am going to focus on Jonathan Harker's reaction to the missing "man" in the mirror.
Harker, being a grown man, has long ago experienced "The Mirror Stage," in which he gained recognition of his image and, therefore, his identity. In this class we have discussed this experience as a moment of self-othering, in the discovery of one's self as an object. This is why I propose that when Harker notices Dracula's lack of reflection, he is once again appearing to himself as other, as though going through this process all over again.
Despite the fact that Dracula is clearly in the room, he can only see himself in the mirror. So how can he differentiate himself from this vampire who stands before him? He looks back at Dracula and this is the moment where he is face to face with his Gothic other. The other that no longer exists in the mirror, but has found his way into the real world. This, "increase[s] the vague feeling of uneasiness that [he] always [has] whenever the Count is near" (Stoker 26).
This minor description of what has just been unleashed within the text is not lost on me. I think that this further proves my point in that, like a child, Harker has no clue what he has just discovered. He is only confused at the realization that he is facing a man, who he can see is whole, and yet there is no image in the mirror. Harker has yet to realize that he is, in fact, the equivalent of a mirror image to Dracula.
So the idea is that when I look at my Gothic other in the mirror every morning, my other is looking back at me. Harker can see himself in the mirror, because his other is right there beside him, being reflected.
Professor Moglen has placed a lot of attention on Female Hysteria in our study of the Gothic. She compared the impact of this illness on Victorian society to the wave of Anorexia Nervosa that can be seen in my own generation. After stumbling on the story of "The Girl on Page 194" I found myself looking more into the issue of eating disorders. I think that the comparison that Moglen makes is appropriate considering who is being effected by this sickness, and what is causing it.
This image of plus-size model, Lizzi Miller, appeared on page 194 of Glamour Magazine in their September 2009 issue. The response was explosive, as thousands of women wrote in to commend the publication for including a "real woman" in their magazine. Miller has become a staple for the (slow-going) movement to change the types of images displayed in magazines.
Models in fashion shows and advertisements tend to be stick-thin, leading to unrealistic expectations of both women and men. Looking at magazines and seeing the western ideals of beauty has made body image a major issue for women young and old. By being bombarded with these images, we begin to accept this body type as a realistic goal. There is no healthy way of living up to those standards unless you have the very rare genes for it. This is why it has resulted in the occurrence of overwhelming cases of weight loss in young girls who want to live up to these pictures.
This is where Female Hysteria and Anorexia intersect, as both of these illnesses are a result of the surrounding environment of the women who suffer from the diseases. The pressures of society lead to this sort of mental distortion. During the Victorian Age women were also expected to look and act in a way that was incredibly stressful on the psyche. It was outrageous for a woman to act as though they had feelings and personalities outside of the role that they were supposed to inhabit. So like in The Yellow Wallpaper they were further forced into helplessness.
In the case of Anorexia, the illness has reached the point of effecting the people who have already reached a point of "the ideal." After the picture in Glamour made such a stir, Ellen had Lizzi and several other plus sized models on her show to talk about the dark world of modeling.
When the women who's images are evoking this body image dilemma in the masses suffer to a further deterioration of health, it is clear that something needs to change. And that is what these women are trying to do to some degree. My more cynical self says that the women in this interview are using this opportunity to make work for themselves, but I have to ask myself, "Why the hell not?" I think that they are more beautiful than the disgustingly thin models who look like they might snap in half on the runway. So they deserve to be cut out and posted on mirrors everywhere, if they so desire.
I digress, the point that I am trying to make here is that the Gothic literature that we have been reading in this class have been written largely by people who are clearly trying to make a point about othering. Stevenson and Gilman had to be passive aggressive about the way that society was treating them, but this episode of Ellen hits the problem head on. This is the new Gothic. A world in which we can look at the problems within our society and say, "Shove it skinny bitches, we want real examples of how to be healthy on the cover of our magazines."
So I may or may not have walked in the the showing of the film Sweetie (1989) with a bit of a bias, and not a good one. I'm not going to name any names (it was you Brian) but I was influenced to dread sitting through this 97 minute adaptation of contemporary. Let's just say I wasn't disappointed. (Don't worry I would have hated it all on my own.)
So per suggestion (Brian again), I gave it about 10 minutes before focusing the remaining 87 on why I hated the film so much. What was so bothersome about it? What about the characters and storyline irked me to such an intense degree? I think I came up with a semblance of an answer: a lack of control.
I have found in the last 20 years of my life that control happens to be a pretty big issue in my life. This is why I find it so surprising that I never noticed this element of the Gothic before viewing Sweetie. It seems that there is a reoccurring theme of lack of control throughout most of the texts that we have read. This starts as early as The Castle of Otranto, in the case of Isabella who is at the mercy of her duty to her family, and then to Manfred as she is living in his castle. Matilda and Hippolita are also controlled in this way, as all women seem to be in early Gothic literature.
We continue to see this idea throughout the earlier literature and on a less general level in The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde when Jekyll wakes up in the skin of his alter-ego Hyde, without having taken his potion. By becoming two separate selves, he looses control of the bad within himself. He completely gives up to the evil within him, giving all of the power to Hyde.
On the same small scale- less to do with a greater society and more with the smaller constructions of an individual family- Sweetie (1989) revolves around characters who refuse to deal with their problems, letting them fester until the infection is so deep that it is nearly impossible to cure. Jane Campion successfully creates a family dynamic that is, by anyone's definition, absolutely Gothic. The film deals with very Freudian family issues, as well as self examination of the protagonist and her other, found in her sister who she (not-so-affectionately) refers to as Sweetie.
The title character is absolutely crazy: enter my distaste for the movie. Somehow, like a two-year-old who badly needs a spanking, Sweetie remains in control of her entire family through the use of tantrums. Too bad her father's parenting style is the equivalent of the new-aged, punishment-free households that made babysitting hell for me in high school. He treats his daughter, now a grown woman, as though she can do no wrong. Which is clearly not the case. This breeds the competitive nature of the relationship between his two daughters.
Yes, it was the appearance of Sweetie that stirred up my hatred for the film, but it wasn't actually her character that bothered me so much. It was Kay's reaction to her sister's arrival that made me want to punch the screen. If Sweetie is a two-year-old, Kay is her whiny, tattle-tail five-year-old sister. The day after her sister drops by uninvited Kay tells her, "you're supposed to have gone." I was pulling my hair out at this point. I'm sorry, but are you kidding me? This is an adult woman sharing a home with her lover, if she wants someone out of her home, she ought to just kick her ass out. I love my sister more than anything in the world, but you better believe if I walked into my two-bedroom home to find her having sex with a strange man in my bed she would be on the street.
Then there is an entire section from when they are leaving on their holiday which I've included below:
This is the perfect example of how she is to remain forever a child. She reacts to things that she doesn't like in the manner of a toddler, and she is dealt with in the same way. They are forced to use trickery to convince her to leave the car. No one is willing to stand up against Sweetie and give her the real-world lessons that she obviously needs as a wake up call. Yet for some God forsaken reason, they trust her to stay at Kay's home alone for an extended period of time. Not a single character in this film looks at the situation and takes charge. Instead they let it remain a "family matter," despite the obvious fact that this method is not working.
At that, Sweetie is constantly saying things like, "I'm not going back," which- although not directly stated- is an implication that she has been sent somewhere to deal with her mental state in the past. So my question is, if it is has been determined that she is not of sound mind, why doesn't anyone care enough to send her back where she came from? It is only after she terrorizes Kay, Louis, and the entire family, that they attempt to take admit her to an institution.
I know that there is an implication of resolution at the end of this film, but I was completely dissatisfied. Even as Kay tried to breath life back into her sister, there was no point in which anyone took control of their own life. Professor Moglen claims that Kay came to an acceptance of her other in the way she dealt with Sweetie's death, but in my opinion she made no improvements on herself. Just because she regained her desire to bone does not mean that she grew a backbone.
