Prue, My Heart is Broken, and feminism

Prue is treated as less than a mistress by Gordon - he lives with Prue when his wife leaves him, and freely messes around with other females although he is living with Prue. Despite this terrible treatment, Prue ostensibly doesn’t get offended by Gordon’s behavior, but shows her friends that “she doesn’t take herself too seriously” and lives in a likable and light-hearted manner. This side of Prue reveals a subtle contradiction to another side of her that resulted in strange behavior at the end of the story, where she is depicted as completely indifferent to her stealing. “…she doesn’t seem to be under a compulsion. She just takes something, …(and) forgets about it.” Such lukewarm representation of Prue’s personality is totally different from that delivered previously in the story.

Stealing, especially the one taken place without existence of the stolen thing’s owner, should give a sense of dominance to the stealer over the owner. In Prue’s case, the absence of Gordon is due to his improper affair that certainly gives a sense of inferiority to Prue, if not she is his wife. The affair also reflects social oppression and disregard on women. But paradoxically, Prue is rather implicitly despising Gordon’s personality and mental maturity by stealing his things when he is not at home. Thus, Prue’s odd behavior represents a nontrivial rebellion of a socially oppressed woman to the discriminatory society.

 Jeannie experiences a society in which most members have a similar perspective towards gender. Mrs. Thompson, although she herself is a woman, has a fixed idea about how women should act and think. She rebukes Jeannine for her erroneous behavior, and argues that she must not have gone out with such a showy appearance. What’s worse, Mr. Sherman tells Vern, Jeannie’s husband, that “…she’d invented the whole story,” Furthermore, people’s perspective on Vern’s attitude toward his wife is completely different from their perspective on Jeannie’s attitude. Jeannie is demanded to be obedient and restrained – there is common acceptance of a notion that Jeannie is raped because of her lack of self-govern. But when it comes to Vern, his care for Jeannie is considered as undeserved. To Jeannie, Mrs. Thompson says “… He sure is loyal to you,” a notion that emphasizes the value of Gordon’s additional –not fundamental- consideration for his wife. The fact that he gives up two jobs for his wife’s security is highly valued, while the rape is almost wholly attributed to Jeannie.

Going through the society’s disregard toward women, Jeannie also participates in having such tendency. At the end of the conversation, Jeannie accepts that she provided reasons for the rape, and excuses herself by nonsensical words, “If he’d liked me, I wouldn’t have minded… I wouldn’t have gone wandering up the road, making all this fuss.” So Jeannie’s self-respect, or her heart, is horribly broken by discriminative viewpoint of society and her own perspective which feebly concurred with that of society.

Two protagonists from two different stories form an interesting contrast. Prue and Jeannie are similar in the point that both of them ultimately acquiesce in the unreasonable prejudice of the society against women. Mrs. Thompson’s request that Jeannie not say the criminal’s name is found to be not for Jeannie’s psychological health or security – the demand implied that who raped her is not important, since she triggered the rape herself and any men could have conducted the crime. Instead, Mrs. Thompson worries about the men; “…it might have been anyone else, because you had them all on the boil. …let’s hope they can get their minds back on the job.” This extreme discrimination cleverly criticizes the reality. Jeannie does not disagree with such notion, but feels resentment for some unknown reason and ends up crying. Prue’s case is pretty the same; she steals small things for some unknown reason. But interestingly, the narrator somewhat justifies Prue’s behavior: “Prue doesn’t have to be at the shop until ten… she’s not responsible for approving the plans.” Such expression cancels the wrongness of Prue’s odd action – since Gordon misbehaves, Prue doesn’t have to keep from misbehaving. So this nuance successfully indicates the iniquity of gender prejudice.
 

 

 

 

References
1. the bodies of the book <Prue> and <My Heart is Broken>
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_literary_criticism
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second-wave_feminism
4. https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/722/11/

What Optimism means to Anton Chekhov: The Student

 At my first glance, Anton Chekhov’s <The Student> was merely a sole enlightenment of a clerical student through one short experience. Ivan’s narrative voice that concluded an epiphany from his own interpretation of the situation seemed a lot hasty to me. Highly pessimistic was the historical event that Ivan told the widows in that Peter could not keep his belief against a bad, dreary reality, and a religious theme of the story continually distracted me with no background in such a field.

 But foremost the story is short, and while inspiring complex thoughts to its readers, <The Student> has a clear and concise composition. These features enabled me to ponder over an only subject on which the story focuses: the development of Ivan’s viewpoint on his world.

 Ivan, at the beginning, “did not want to go home.” He hated the “desperate poverty and hunger” of his life, and the future that would not bring about any change. The expression “…the same darkness, the same feeling of oppression” reflects that Ivan had an absolutely pessimistic perspective. However, after he witnessed the widows impressed by the story of Peter, he grasped that truth and beauty of human life had continued without break to this day. Then Ivan sweetly expected contentment in life with youth, health, and vigor. As I thought earlier, it might be considered impetuous that Ivan immediately brought a revelation from his personal interpretation of an experience. Nonetheless, the point is not the validity of his realization, but that he started to consider lofty values of his world. No one would know the true meaning of Vasilisa’s tears, yet Ivan discovered an evident relation between the past and the present by appreciating her reaction. Maybe it was Ivan, rather than Vasilisa, who really quivered when he touched one end.

 True, nothing changed in Ivan’s bad, dreary life. A cruel wind was still blowing, his finger numb, and he to see his mother, barefoot, cleaning the teapot. Therefore some might think that this part lucidly reveals the author’s dark viewpoint. But for Chekhov, it was an effort to convey his optimism to readers. The progressive world view of Anton Chekhov is obvious in his quote: “I say ’…see how bad and dreary your lives are!’ The important thing [is that] they (readers) will most certainly create another and better life for themselves.” Also, at least one thing changed: Ivan’s attitude towards his reality. It could be cold to-morrow, but the matter is how he faces his life with such challenging obstacles. “Everything is in the mind.” The story got even more sanguine when he gradually found his life to be rapturous, wonderful, and full of noble values.

 In the story, Ivan told the widows an event that represents bitterness of an unescapable hardship in reality. But in fact, the real listeners of his story are us the readers. We, if not weep, appreciate the story and contemplate the theme. Then, how exactly should we do so? I strongly believe that Chekhov wanted us to undergo a process similar to that of Ivan’s perspective change. For much of his life Chekhov suffered from the debilitating disease of tuberculosis, and eventually died from it. But he managed to achieve an enormous amount – a large number of short stories, a scientific treatise on prison conditions, and the plays for which he is best known. Thus, Anton Chekhov himself was an epitome of such an eventual progressive viewpoint. And he asks us through his short story – that wouldn’t we quiver if he touches one end.

Tales of the Unexpected - Responsibility

A human tends to shrink from its responsibility. Especially, when one has the right of choice, and when the result of the decision would bring huge burden on her, evasion of responsibility comes more alluring. This tendency could be easily found in children’s behavior. For example, one day, I played chess with my youngest brother James, betting a duty to do the dishes. The middle brother John watched 7-year-old James having a battle of wits with me. When the situation reached to the final stage, I noticed that James fortunately got a chance to win the game. ‘You’ve got a big chance!’ I cried. But James seemed to not understand how to finish it. Suddenly, John started to urge him to move his pawn to 5B. Having no any better thought, poor James pretended to think a little bit, and asked John again and again if he is certain. ‘I’ll guarantee it.’ Finally, James reluctantly moved his pawn saying, ‘All right, then. You swore.’ And of course, John’s tactic was of nonsense. Smiling a bit, I checkmated the king and ended up the game. James, excessively enraged, shouted out to John. ‘You guaranteed! You said you’ll guarantee!’ John rapidly ran out of the room. Likewise, when one has a right of decision, shifting a responsibility on to another’s shoulder is captivating; one is thereby making a kind of substitute of her responsibility. If the suggestion makes him win, that’s good for him; if not, he can switch the burden on the suggester.

By <Taste>, Roald Dahl focuses on capturing this human instinct – shirking one’s responsibility. He is also delivering several other sides of human nature by other characters. But those are somewhat typical in his short stories of <Tales of the unexpected>. In <Taste>, what’s noticeable is the daughter’s revelation of human nature to ‘reluctantly’ hide behind a suggester to whom the whole responsibility of the result will be ascribed, when she has a right to make a decision that will hugely influence her own life. At first, when Mike suggests his daughter to bet her marriage with Richard Pratt, she requires his father to guarantee the good result. “What if I lose?” “I keep telling you, you can’t lose. I’ll guarantee it.” (I.13 3) But it is obvious that no one could authentically guarantee it. So by asking for his guarantee meaninglessly again and again, the daughter tries to assure that the responsibility of the result is shifted on him. However, Mike, who uses every word to persuade her, in fact does not have the right of choice; a practical right of decision is of his daughter - betting her marriage with Richard Pratt is the same as betting her future life. Therefore, the daughter’s behavior makes an ironic situation that one who makes decision is different from one who takes responsibility. The point is that, if she loses the bet, her father certainly cannot take any responsibility. And even though she notices that fact, she reveals weak human nature of recklessly shirking one’s own responsibility in front of an unguaranteed future.

-         For the last time, she hesitated. Then she gave a helpless little shrug of the shoulders and said, “Oh, all right, then…” (I.13 8-9)

This passive attitude towards her decision reveals her weak nature more clearly. By doing so, she is verifying that she is never confident about her choice, and she will not take responsibility of the result.

When the large wet ‘keyhole’ (I.13 27) seems to activate well, that is, when Richard Pratt seems to guess the wine thing right, the daughter reassures his father’s guarantee. “Come on, Daddy. Turn it round and let’s have a peek. I want my two houses.” (I.18 23-4) However, it seems that she lost in her bet. The worst situation occurs now. The daughter could not do anything except keeping recalling that she shifted her responsibility to her father. But that is merely crying over split milk. She, facing irresistible burden to take on, expresses her helplessness through inflamed anger. “But, Daddy, you don’t mean to say he’s guessed it right!” (I.19 1-2) This reveals the weakest mechanism of human nature: anxiety expressed in rage.

And the ‘keyhole’ was a fake.

The Picture of Dorian Gray - Morality and the Art

 At first glance, Oscar Wilde’s “The Picture of Dorian Gray” might appear as a novel written to express his aesthetic persuasion that blind pursuit of beauty brings a catastrophic outcome. After all, when the readers finish the book, they notice that Basil Hallward pays for his sin of unconditional seek of aestheticism by losing his life – as he pursues an absolute beauty, he does not consider the morality of the object of his portrait. In this regard, it seems that Wilde argues the absolute necessity of consideration of morality on an art work, through the novel. However, one might find the plot quite nonsensical, since Basil – who onlooked Dorian Gray’s excessive hedonism - does not seem as a sinner who deserve the punishment, but rather seems as merely an innocent victim of Dorian’s brutality. Moreover, according to Wilde’s several writings in his lifetime, he usually kept a perspective insisting that morality is simply among the materials which an artist may use to pursue aestheticism. That is, works of art are legitimate objects of aesthetic judgment, but not of other judgment such as that of moral. In all probability Wilde intentionally formed a paradox between his opinion expressed through the novel and that through other writings. Therefore, it is perhaps more accurate to assume that he made up the unsettled view to persuade his contemporary artists that an artist must realize his full potential by performing art for art’s sake, but not restrict his creativity by pursuing sake of virtues other than beauty. Performing art for specific values, such as moral enlightenment, makes the artist’s freedom of expression get into a rut, thereby distorting the original artistic inspiration. If an artist focuses on chasing aestheticism, adequate consideration of other values including morality would take place subsequently, an order that makes an efficient delivery of what he or she tries to say through the work. Therefore, Wilde says, whatever values the audience would perceive from a work of art, its artist has to eliminate self-censorship by focusing only on developing its aesthetic value for her smooth artistic expression. In this sense, ‘The Picture of Dorian Gray’ is merely a book including Oscar Wilde’s paradoxical argument to reinforce his genuine persuasion about appropriate attitude of an artist when performing art.

The Picture of Dorian Gray - Influences of Lord Henry: Egotism

When one feels jealous of other as a matter of love, one would behave either way: struggling to come between those two who love each other, or giving up his or her personal affection toward the person whom he or she has loved. However, taking each way could not give much influence to them. The former way, as a momentary expression of jealousy, would end without any significant change in the affection between them, but with recognition of the nature of a person’s feeling and with maturation of oneself. The latter one would apparently be vain. But Lord Henry, although being jealous of Sibyl Vane, gives so considerable an effect on Dorian Gray that this influences even the whole plot of the novel.  

In my perspective, the author implies that Lord Henry is jealous of Sibyl. Of course it is intermittently mentioned that Lord Henry regards Dorian as merely an object of his experiment on sources and desirable pursuits of one’s passion. “…pulse and passion of youth were in him(Dorian)... It was delightful to watch him. With his beautiful face, and his beautiful soul, he was a thing to wonder at. It was no matter how (it) all…was destined to end.” However, even such parts are intentionally distorted to imply a notion that Lord Henry does not sincerely consider him as a mere object, but explains the world in a cynical way to benefit and reinforce the relationship between him and Dorian; Lord Henry says that Dorian’s love-related experiences would be a great study that would reveal secrets about one’s individualism, and that he hopes Dorian to ‘make this girl wife… and suddenly become fascinated by someone else.’ Basil responses to him saying: “You(Lord Henry) don’t mean a single word of all that… If Dorian Gray’s life were spoiled, no one would be sorrier than yourself.”

Based on his affection toward Dorian, although he acts in a very restrained manner, he reveals all his astonishment when he hears that Dorian and Sibyl are engaged. In this part, his responses to Dorian are obviously atypical of him. Giving doubts as he asks whether ‘did you(Dorian) mention the word marriage,’ Lord Henry starts to say things that would give a significant effect on Dorian’s philosophy and would ultimately cause a huge change on his life.

He murmurs: “Women are a decorative sex.” Just after Dorian explains his experience and moments of love with Sibyl Vane, Lord Henry instills his thoughts and consideration about women into Dorian. He says that ‘They(women) worship us, and are always bothering us to do something for them.’ Then he claims, “women, …inspires us with the desire to do masterpieces, and always prevent us from carrying out them.” Those notions of Lord Henry eventually evoke Dorian’s confirmation of his objectification of women; later, Dorian says “I want to place her on a pedestal of gold, and to see the world worship the woman who is mine.” This mention demonstrates his egotistical philosophy of women as ornaments and his male-centered focus.

“Pleasure is the only thing worth having a theory about.” Lord Henry attributes all his ‘wrong, fascinating, poisonous, delightful’ theories to Nature. “It belongs to Nature… believe me, no civilized man ever regrets a pleasure…” Due to Lord Henry’s insisting on Dorian to become one with individualism, namely, self-centered thoughts, Dorian at last focuses only on his pleasure, his comfort, his love, and his life – the absolute ‘unconscious egotism.’

After Sibyl Vane suicides, Dorian Gray regards the death of his lover as a ‘wonderful ending to a wonderful play.’ In front of Lord Henry, he describes the affair to be a ‘tragedy in which he took a great part, but by which he has not been wounded.’ Blinded with jealousy, using his eloquent conversation skills, Lord Henry takes a main role to dye Dorian Gray’s philosophy and individuality with an excessive egotism.

The Picture of Dorian Gray - Chapter 1

Sangwoo Kim

 The journal starts with detailed, sensational depictions of the studio. Using several specific names of flowers, including lilac and laburnum, the author expresses sensual descriptions of the place so perfectly that the readers are about to mistake themselves for smelling real odor of such air and seeing that splendor scent, thus forming an appropriate atmosphere to unfold his characters’ dialogues.

 Lord Henry urges Basil Hallward, an artist friend of his, to exhibit his portrait of a beautiful young man. However, Basil keeps refusing his persuasion, saying that he has put too much of himself into the picture. Henry talks about common attitude of artists toward reputation, the relationship of beautiful appearance and internal intellect, and some cynical explanation of romance in his martial life: the conversation reveals the main characters’ personal values and perspective to the world so naturally by changing its themes. At the part of the conversation about fatality of physical and intellectual distinction, most readers might clap their hands and cry out senses of sympathy. Especially, artistic philosophy of Basil invoked a great appreciation on me, for I am sincerely fond of art activities: Basil says, ‘every portrait painted with feeling is a portrait of the artist, not of the model – the sitter is merely the accident, the occasion.’(I.5 16-7) The notion that a picture filled enthusiastically would betray the secret of the painter’s own soul made me deliberate over a definition of a sincere art. Moreover, not as a student who determined to take art minor at university, but as an ordinary person who has both public and private lives, I was made to ponder upon true aspect of secrecy and desirable attitude I should have toward it.

 After the conversation finishes with a butler’s indication of where Dorian Gray is – into the studio, Basil halts Lord Henry, who just tries to get from the garden to the studio room in order to meet Gray, by saying ‘Don’t spoil him. Don’t try to influence him. Your influence would be bad.’(I.14 5-6) Such expression, extraordinarily, left me a sense of attachment.