A Room of One’s Own – Virginia Woolf Friday, Jan 30 2009 

At the time when the book was written, women have not yet even had a century of rights such as property ownership, colleges for women, etc.

A question that she poses is why is there no female Shakespeare yet? As women have enjoyed freedoms for “so long.”

Women haven’t been given the same educational opportunities.  Women have been creating in a different medium, in the home and with childcare.  There are only certain genres acceptable for women to write in at this time.   Think further, also women didn’t even act in Shakepeare’s time.  Did writing and acting mean you were a whore?  They sure thought so, the people were assuming you wanted to be with men all the time by taking a writing job.

Women mostly burned their writings before the 1770’s.  Inspired by Virginia Woolf was the feminist recovery project!

What does Virginia Woolf believe about women’s writing?  Do women write like a woman or blatantly like a feminist?  She believes women should write objectively (which I guess means like writing like a man).  “Anybody who writes with a chip on their shoulder… “

When she was at Cambridge, women were not allowed to walk on the grass. When she was scolded, she had an idea. In her frustration, she thought how can you live in an intellectual room when you are jolted out into your body because you are a woman?

Men are writing like men because of the women’s movement.  Men shouldn’t write like men, just like women shouldn’t write like women.  Men are building themselves up to put women down. Racism and sexist are dealing with self hate: it’s not ME I hate, it’s THEM. Men are writing self-consciously about the sex, and they are producing bad fiction!  They are not writing in objectivity or as an identity, they need to write as a soul.

The blame rests no more on on sex than another.  All who have brough about a state of sex conscious are to blame.  One must turn back to Shakespeare because Shakespeare was androgynous.

You have to be free of anger in life, in writing.

Virtual Rape? Friday, Jan 30 2009 

To explore the decision of whether or not Bungle committed rape, we have to first briefly explore the phenomenon of word and deed melting together, rape being a crime against the mind and/or body, and what the virtual body represent in MOO. In a virtual reality world, the characters on screen that are controlled by real people become a sort of embodiment of the mind and personality of the human. When they type a command or direct the character in some way with words, their virtual character follows suit. So the virtual character is intrinsically linked to and involved in the psyche of the person directing it. Even considering Laura Miller’s claim that rape is impossible on line because no one has bodies, I would still argue that the persona representing the body on line can be injured more (potentially) than a physical body.  Miller found an observation from a scholar stating ” participants [on line] are washed clean of the stigma of their ‘real selves’ and are free to invent ones to their tastes.”  In this way, a rape on line or in MOO is an invasion and a crime against our innermost reflection of ourselves.

Perusing over numerous definitions of “rape” online, ignoring specific and categorical definitions like “the unlawful compelling of a woman through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse,” I am using the definition saying rape is “any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.” Already having established that the virtual representations count as a person and emulate feelings and actions of a person, and considering that the actions transcribed by Bungle in the living room were forced sexual actions, I would say definitely that Bungle committed rape.

Update: a perfect support for my argument is the Myspace suicides where adolescents committed suicide after emotional trauma online (in a virtual social world.)

Vindication of the Rights of Women Monday, Jan 26 2009 

The author is important to study, here it is Mary Wollstonecraft.  Growing up in an abusive family, Mary took over the family at a young age.  She started a school, and she was well educated, and amazingly, mostly self-educated.   She decided to write for a living, and met up with Unitarian man in London who believed in woman’s rights. He was a radical in his time.  He supported her, as she wrote one of the first responses to a conservative piece by Edmund Burk.  Burke attacked the French Revolution in the Reflections on the French Revolution in 1789 (November).  Mary wrote a response in December entitled Vindication of the Rights of Men.  Mary says that “manly is a synonym for virtuous and rational.”

After publishing her signed arguments, she says it’s irrational to distinguish between classes of men.  She defends the creation of a republic, as opposed to a monarchy.  Two years later, in 1792, she published the Vindication of the Right of Woman.  Notice in this story, “men” is used as a plural whole, and “woman” is used as an individual, or is she just generalizing all women?  Does “woman” point to all women in one category?  Mary isolates woman in her text as a class of persons who have been treated the same.  So does using the word men mean a number of classes, or all human beings?  Using men means humanity, not just masculine.  Is referring to humankind as “man” sexist?  Or is it just a tradition? The feminist argument would say that as a subtext, it communicates that men are better, exemplary, etc.

Vindication of the Rights of Women is a very hard text on women! It speaks about sexism as systematic, or structural.  Society (as a system) through education and rewards trains women not to be virtuous, not to be rational, not to be manly. In the introduction on page 27, it says that women are degraded by mistaken notions of female excellence…artificial weakness give potential to tyrannize. What is this talking about?  Her understanding of democracy fits with ours.  She attacks kings on page 23 in book. “Every profession involving subordination is highly injurious to morality.”  Radical alert!  For example, a grading system induces immorality, plagiarism, cheating, etc.  Think of the army and gun rights, and how the Founding Fathers wanted us to have guns to oppose tyranny, or perhaps a president leaning towards monarchy.

In chapter two, we see the prevailing opinion.  She presents an argument that men are degrading because the education and instructions they are given are given to them for the sake of making them alluring sexually.  Major moment in text:  brilliant!  On page 41, after the small paragraph, speaking about standing armies…

“The great misfortune is this, that they both acquire manners before morals, and a knowledge of life before they have, from reflection, any acquaintance with the grand ideal outline of human nature. The consequence is natural; satisfied with common nature, they become a prey to prejudices, and taking all their opinions on credit, they blindly submit to authority”

This argues that soldiers are like women.  They too are educated in the same way as women.  If you educate men to behave in the same way as women, they will.  Or if you educate men to be as stupid as women, they will be.  Proof is in the soldiers.  Are women naturally inferior?  NO!  They are nurtured to be inferior.  Also, just like there are exceptional women, there are exceptional soldiers.

Excerpt: Let us examine this question. Rousseau declares that a woman should never, for a moment, feel herself independent, that she should be governed by fear to exercise her natural cunning, and made a coquetish slave in order to render her a more alluring object of desire, a sweeter companion to man, whenever he chooses to relax himself.

What nonsense! when will a great man arise with sufficient strength of mind to puff away the fumes which pride and sensuality have thus spread over the subject! If women are by nature inferior to men, their virtues must be the same in quality, if not in degree, or virtue is a relative idea; consequently, their conduct should be founded on the same principles, and have the same aim.

Rousseau, at this time, is totally about the rights of man.  This doesn’t include women in his men.  He has the notion that all men were created equal really means only men.  Mary is furious about this.  She avoids any comparison of the two sexes collectively.  She argues that women aggravate the situation!  Moving now to chapter three…

On page 59, Mary speaks about women being diluted by the sentiment through which men adore women.

Women, deluded by these sentiments, sometimes boast of their weakness, cunningly obtaining power by playing on the weakness of men; and they may well glory in their illicit sway.

Using sexual power, and not legitimate power to get to the top.  (Think Sex and the City).  Women are not using real power.  Women use fainting, crying, and other stereotypical womanly acts to win men over.  By weakness, men are attracted to women, they elevate women, and more. Mary attacks this notion and attacks men for doing this and women for playing into it.  Women, by this, have more power; but also less somehow.

Page 65 she speaks about trying to be beautiful:

Taught from their infancy that beauty is woman’s sceptre, the mind shapes itself to the body, and, roaming round its gilt cage, only seeks to adore its prison.

Let not men then in the pride of power, use the same arguments that tyrannic kings and venal ministers have used, and fallaciously assert that woman ought to be subjected because she has always been so.

^^”Woman” here is used as a class

The following is a very famous passage, instead of French Revolution:

It is time to effect a revolution in female manners—time to restore to them their lost dignity—and make them, as a part of the human species, labour by reforming themselves to reform the world. It is time to separate unchangeable morals from local manners.—If men be demi-gods—why let us serve them! And if the dignity of the female soul be as disputable as that of animals—if their reason does not afford sufficient light to direct their conduct whilst unerring instinct is denied—they are surely of all creatures the most miserable! and, bent beneath the iron hand of destiny, must submit to be a fair defect in creation. But to justify the ways of Providence respecting them, by pointing out some irrefragable reason for thus making such a large portion of mankind accountable and not accountable, would puzzle the subtilest casuist.

Feminism is insisting that women have not been given enough, it argues that women have been given to much and have taken advantage of their situation.  Mary believed in virtue, which could also be seen as oppressor, at least in the Victorian era.  What Mary actually means by virtue is rationalistic.  Professing love, to her, is the same as marriage, rejected traditional and lawful marriage.   She tried to commit suicide because if her word equaling marriage couldn’t hold, what was the epitome of her virtue?  If her word couldn’t hold in the world, what mattered?  She believed in absolute transparency and chastity.  She rejected most social norms and was very consistent.  Virtue means honesty to Mary. Virtue, outside of Mary in society, goes under a transformation in society.

“Every individual is in this respect is a world within …?”  Found on page 74.  She believes in people acting according to their individuality.

The Cinderella Fairytale in Les Miserables Friday, Jan 23 2009 

Focusing on not the main character of a story and rather a supporting role in a play, I see Cosette from Les Miserables (with the play plot, not the book) as a type or Cinderella fairy tale.  Her father leaves her mother, and then her mom is forced to send Cosette away because she ccosette-eyesan’t care for her.  Cosette ends up staying with the Thenardiers, a rowdy, corrupt, dirty family that owns a bar and makes Cosette do all the cleaning and dirty work; making them her step-family in relation to Cinderella.  Cosette  sings and dreams of her mother; and a “castle on a cloud,” just like the typical Cinderella tends to have a very active imagination.
Her fairy-godmother could be seen as Jean Valjean, who is the main character in Les Mis.  He knew and cared for Cosette’s mother, and when she died, Jean Valjean vows to find and care for Cosette.  So he provides a way out of the abusive life for Cosette.  Her prince charming comes in the character of Marius, who is an aristocrat that joined the revolution (this story takes place in France during their revolution).  He is able to finally completely lift Cosette out of the life her mother lived and she was headed toward  living, and provide riches, happiness, and yes, even love.
There are so many other tidbits in Les Mis that can parallel or represent aspects of Cinderella, such as the Thenardiers’ daughter Eponine (Cosettes’ “step-sister”?), who is in love with Marius and jealous of Cosette.
Cosette is in the perfect typical Cinderella place of being helpless, jaded, naive, and of course beautiful just as her mother.  Her prince is not only an idealist and passionate about his role in the revolition, but a very rich, society-man.  Ta-da, another Cinderella story!

Bloody Chamber by Angela Carter, and other discussions Wednesday, Jan 21 2009 

An idea is presented that a students perception by education can change in four years.  I am already seeing evidence of this, dramatically, after 3 years here at Miami.

Presenting a discussion on the Bloody Chamber and other stories, by Angela Carter

The courtship of Mr. Lyon seems very similar to Beauty and the Beast.   Beauty goes through more transformation in this version, she stays pure in Disney version.  This story is about what it means to be human. Is this similar to a parable?  It should be read with the thought:  There is something real that corresponds with each of the magical things in the story. The story distorts the real so we can see it.

The fairy tale is distorting reality so we can really see it, discuss it, and think about it.

What is Mr. Lyon?  Like any young man, he is coming of age and facing manhood.  Beauty is fascinated and revolted by Beast, especially his paws. As a gender discourse, are women horrified by masculinity?  Does the process of becoming a man include taming the beast in boys. The male potential for violence is horrifying, and men find this horrifying about themselves.  Something has to happen within the male psyche to help them come to terms with their violent potential.  With Mr. Lyon, it is redemption, being loved anyway despite his wildness.

Bloody Chamber explores our own potential for violence.

What potential for corruption is there in relation to females?  Do males only have a potential for violence?  Think of the blind piano tuner in the story who lives life in music, has a very ethereal existence, yet he is a male with potential violence.  How “male” is he really?  What are the symptoms or showcasings of masculinity?  We also see darkness in a rich man’s life, in the Bloody Chamber.  By giving the key to the girl, is this a symbol of a females potential to unlock violence in males?   Feminist view:  bloody chamber=uterus.  (Goodness sakes, I have to get used to these Woman’s Studies classes)  Room also sounds like womb.  The act of consummation on the honeymoon, she had visions on the honeymoon of “dozens on grooms impaling dozens of brides.”  So the act of consummation equals stabbing.  She has to be killed for taking agency to get in the room, unlock sexuality, and taking charge of herself and her sexuality.

If this is a parable about man and women coming into a relationship, what is the mother?

This might be a representation of ten minutes between a man and wife, but it’s more real than true reality.  Could this story be a representation of what every marriage has to go through?

Ashputtle, Weight, and the Cinderella Complex Monday, Jan 19 2009 

Reflections on the Cinderella Complex:

I wish she had included examples of how she thinks women were not trained to be independent. I agree with her in the fact that women are often looking for that savior in a man, but I take this to simply be the nature of some women. Growing up in this time period, at least in my youth, I felt on the same level as all boys in the push to be independent and self-serving, seeking a partner in a man and not a savior. I think everyone wants to be taken care of in some way, perhaps women more so, but nowadays I don’t think it’s trained.

I never even have really thought of women being dependent on men until I learned about the extreme societal oppression historically. The message in the article did strike a cord with me though, so I may be looking for a savior or looking to be saved more than I realize or will let myself believe. “Hanging on long enough….someday someone will come along to rescue you from the anxiety of authentic living.

An amputation on a woman could simply be the act of dumbing down. As a connection to sections Cinderella, where it says wounds are created with a wish, parts of women are amputated to fit. Women are constantly subjected to expectations. A country comparison: The first thing you ask here in US is what do you do? If you are a stay at home mom or dad, you have to say “I do nothing….” In France, when someone is asked what do you do, they would respond “I am a philosopher!” or something in like that. When the person asked for example actually was employed at Westinghouse, they would still respond “philosopher,” as they are not defined by their job.

There are also pressures on men that can’t be forgotten. Do men have secret anxieties, hidden fears and such like women, who are secretly scared to be independent, because they think they are faking?

A fairy tale is a form of cultural ideology that is inserted into life. It is evident in dolls, on TV, and in news papers. Ideology found in these places makes us wounded and forces us

QUIZ

Jeaneatte Winterson -WEIGHT

In the artistic retelling of stories or fairy tales, does art help counteract ideology? (system of wishes of expectation that are unconsciously insinuated)

What does the artistically re-telling, does art help, counteract ideology ?

Art, and in the sense of art re-telling a fairy tale, makes the previously held beliefs or systems more real to the reader. They fairy tale becomes more real because it is no longer being shaped or actively shaping society, but it is being fused with the re-telling authors’ confessions and vulnerability. Fairy tales are written in read in unrealistic fashions, not meant to be instruction books on life. But inevitably the content and expectations derived from characters and actions in the fairy tale actually do become life and society. With the help of art, the ideologies of fairy tales are taken down through a continuous effort by the author to by authentic about themselves with the audience. There is conscious effort to use the “power of storytelling for its mythic” qualities. I love her argument, or her hope that her voice in re-telling a fairy tale will be heard as true authenticity over the drone of news, gossip, and surface level cultural normality.

A Greater relevance. A changed bias. Self transformation. Even in slightly changing the plot to change ending. Stories are re-told to reflect as well as comment on or change society. Transforming self-effacement to self-assertion is occurring. Fairy tales parade themselves as being blanket applicable, but they are not! We have all been fooled!