The home in Beloved is basically it's own character. This was something discussed in our literary analysis that I found very interesting. It takes on it's own moods and seems to have different dispositions throughout the novel although only the seasons change the setting. I think that the home reflects physically what it's tenants are feeling and what the ghost is doing. The novel opens with "124 was spiteful. Full of baby's venom..." (4). The house is spiteful because the ghost inside is spiteful. In the beginning it might not be possible to understand why it is this way, but by the end, I tried to interpret it. The ghost (and in turn the house) may be spiteful for obvious reasons, because Sethe murdered her. I think it is a lot more then that, however. The people living inside are fugitive slaves, they are people that have had their identity and their freedom taken from them. Spiteful doesn't even seem like a strong enough word to describe how they might be feeling. Sethe and Denver, especially Sethe, are trying to find some sense of normalcy, and because that is failing, they are spiteful. While things seem to be moving from day to day, there is no happiness for either of the women.

I also think that the lack of color in the house is an obvious representation of the lack of happiness and comfort in the lives of Sethe, Denver, and Baby Suggs. It may also be a representation of emotion, or of emotional realization. When red comes up, it is because it is referencing murder, which for Sethe was an extreme emotional display. After she commits this, her world turns gray and colorless. Sethe tries to push down everything she can for the sake of holding herself and whats left of her family together. Baby Suggs was so used to doing this that it wasn't until she was on her death bed that she realized the lack of color, and then couldn't get enough of it. It almost was like she had forgotten what color was, because she would pick one color and then memorize it before moving on to the next.

Beloved

Beloved is a truly striking and so far extremely disturbing portrait of the life of a runaway slave. It may be a stretch to say there are many aspects of this book that strike me as being uncanny, since it is impossible to relate the lives of the characters in this novel. But for myself there have been a few instances that I would consider uncanny. For example, the ghost of the dead baby haunting the house is truly uncanny, because although it is strange and is not something that directly happens to a lot of people, the idea of hauntings and possession are recurring throughout history, and for me is is by far the creepiest thing I can imagine. In the part where Sethe brings Beloved and Denver into the clearing, something very creepy happens while Sethe is calling on her mother in laws ghost to help her feel better. "The fingers touching the back of her neck were stronger now...Sethe was actually more surprised then frightened that she was being strangled...tumbling forward from her seat on the rock, she clawed at the hands that were not there." (113) The idea of something (or someone) touching you that is not really there is scary and weird. I think that a lot of people have felt a feeling similar, though, that something is there or watching you that really isn't. That is why I think that the haunting is uncanny. In this novel, the memories of the people who were at Sweet Home, mainly of Sethe and Paul D, are basically a character of their own. They affect the lives of these characters every day, and no matter what they do, they are constantly haunted by their pasts. Paul D recounts, "But wasn't no way I'd ever be Paul D again, living or dead. Schoolteacher changed me. I was something else and that something was less than a chicken sitting in the sun on a tub." (86) I think that I am going to concentrate on this in my analysis of this novel, how the past is a main character in the book, and how no matter how hard the characters may try and forget and move on, their memories and experience forever change who they are and what they can become. For Denver, it seems that the lack of knowing what happened to her mother plays more of a role in her life then her own memories. When she remembers what her mother did to her sister, her disposition changes, and it seems like she can barely handle the thought of what happened. I also think that Beloved is the incarnate of the past, she is a representation of what Sethe did and although I am not sure what role she is to ultimately play, I think that she will tear the family apart just like Sethe's past is something that has so completely torn her apart she cannot grow and move on.

Final Project Proposal

For my final project, I would like to analyze The Monk and Wuthering Heights from a feminist prospective. Th Monk is written from a chauvinistic point of view, in my opinion, whereas Wuthering Heights has more feminist qualities about it. While both sides may be argued for both books, there are more obvious feminist qualities in Wuthering Heights. Catherine says in the novel, ".. the thing that irks me the most is this shattered prison. I'm tired, tired of being enclosed here. I'm wearying to escape into that glorious world, and to be always there, not seeing it dimly through tears, and yearning for it through the walls of an aching heart; but really with it, and in it ..." (WH). I read the novel from the standpoint of it being about a woman who has to overcome the societal pressures to become "a lady." The Monk, however, has many examples of men exerting their powers over women. When women speak, it is rarely as important as when Lorenzo or Ambrosio are speaking. It is referred to as "prattling" on one occasion. It is important to take the context of both novels into consideration when writing this paper and I plan to do this as well.

Interview~

My blog must make me look like I'm obsessed with sex! The issues of sexual relationships in this novel are worth analyzing and discussing. Relationships are unconventional, confusing, and at times, freaky. There seems to be a lot of homoerotic energy taking place between Louis and Lestat. Vampires, by their nature, have hightened senses and that is crucial when describing their relationship. Louis may strongly disagree with Lestat, and he verges on hating him. And yet, he does not want to leave him and their relationship definately seems to transcend the expected relationship between two men who are not gay. Being a vampire means not being human, and this complicates relationships and sexuality. I think Lestat is probably prone to homosexuality and that is why he is so ruthless with his female victims, yet he gains an intimate relationship with the young man. And this victim seems particularly interested in Lestat and what he is doing.

The heterosexual "lover's" relationship in the novel is also very convoluted and messy and confusing. It does not fit into any of our society's normal relationship types. It is between an adult man and a six year old girl. At times their closeness is almost gross. The passage on page 183 is particulary weird, as it describes physical intimacy between the two. "Her head inclined to me now, so like the attitude of the vampire bending to kiss that i sharank back from her; but her lips only gently pressed my own, finding a part there to suck the breath and let it flow back into me as my arms enclosed her..." Louis and Claudia are certainly in love, but the fact that they are not human makes their love different and challenging. While the author may be making a social comment on how we exploit young women, the relationship also serves the purpose of making us question why it is our society only has the relationships it does, and why this is disturbing.
Love and sexual relationships in Interview are complicated and somewhat disturbing in their nature.

Vampires and Sex

Sex has been a prevailing drive for all human cultures throughout the history of the world. It is a central theme to people's lives because without it, the human race cannot evolve and procreate. It is obvious, then, why sex is a central theme too many literary works as well as other forms of expression. Vampires are a symbol of sex. They are erogenous and sensual, as well as terrifying and repulsive. This is where their uncanniness comes from. Sex is, according to many psychologists, one of our central drives, so it makes sense that we would be drawn to and familiar with the sexiness of the vampire. They are also made up, fictitious creatures that have dealings with dark mysterious happenings that we don't understand. Vampires live off of the human's lifeforce, their blood. Blood is what causes us to feel passionate feelings and warm and hot...(sorry, this is a little explicit!! =]) Vampires suck this out of their victims. This, symbolically speaking, is incredibly erogenous. Sex is the exchanging of physical feelings into emotional expression (sometimes) and is essential to pleasure. Vampires symbolize pleasure, they live on despite the fact that they murder innocent people.
I believe this is the major reason why Vampires have evolved to what they are in today's pop culture. People used to find power and domincance as the main symbol for sex. Now, the idea of good and bad vampires, that these murderers can also be chivolrous knights-in-shining-armor...that is what is sexy to us now.
As far as Dracula goes, while he is not described as the sexiest man alive, he is said to have powers to persuade and to hypnotize other beings into doing what he wants. This is sexual. The woman are repulsive, their voices almost drive John Harker mad, but they are still described as beautiful and powerful, and all he wanted was to kiss them. The scene where the fair one almost sucks his blood was extremely sexual in it's undertones. Harker almost needed her to be close to him, to taste him...he wanted her!! And obviously the way that Dracula himself lures his victims, choosing the woman he wants, denotes strong sexual drives.
Vampires and their sexual ways of doing whatever they choose and deriving pleasure from the drinking of human blood are the reason why they have persisted through the decades as a pop culture icon.

Love in Wuthering Heights

From the title of my blog, I assume that the reader is thinking "Oh wow, really original" and I don't blame the reader for thinking that. I think that while it is one of the more obvious themes, it is crucial to the development of the novel and it’s characters. The author, considering what I have read about her background, may have been confused herself about what love is and what powers it holds over people’s lives. In most of the marriages in the book, love is not only not discussed, but is barely even touched on. I want to blog about this because considering this novel is a romance, it is not really romantic at all, at least in the normative way. While Catherine is in the throws of passionate emotions after not seeing Heathcliff for a long time, she gushes, “I wish I could hold you until we were both dead! I shouldn’t care what you suffered. I care nothing for your sufferings!” (157). This does not sound like the words of someone who really cares for her lover. I think that they are really the only people that have shared love and it is turned into something that rips apart the lives of all involved, and is not the beautiful, enjoyable emotion it should be. Love means pain and suffering, especially for Heathcliff and Catherine, and it brings them their demise. It makes me wonder why Emily Bronte is so critical of love. It always ends up bad for the characters if they love, even Isabella who convinced herself to run away with Heathcliff turned from any likeness for him into total hatred.

transgendering

Transgendering in Matthew Lewis’ The Monk

While reading the novel, I couldn’t help but notice the many instances of sexism and misogyny throughout the story. When reading the essay by Brewer, there are examples provided that agree with my feelings, as well as some that point to the opposite. Brewer’s examples, however, of Lewis’ elevating the female sex, are questionable in themselves. One example of this that I disagree with is his assessment of Matilda’s “empowerment.” In my opinion, the fact that in order for her to have any kind of say in anything, she had to disguise herself as a man. Although this is due to the time period the novel is set in, I don’t not think that this empowers her as a character at all. Yes, she does gain Ambrosio, which is, after all, what she was after the whole time. But she could only get this by being a man. The novel makes women out to be not only weaker physically, which usually can’t be argued, but inherently emotionally and sexually weaker. Exploiting one’s sexual desires is reserved for men only. Because of her assertive, “masculine” traits, Matilda “represents sexual instability.” Any time a women is assertive and aggressive, she faces strong adversity. That is, the women in the novel are not really allowed to go after what they want, and if they do, there are punished harshly. This is true of Agnes and Matilda. Agnes feels horrible after getting sexually involved with Raymond. I just don’t think that this is a good way to express sexuality and especially feminine sexuality. Lorenzo and Raymond get to be as open about who they want, while the women are supposed to be quiet and are shunned for speaking, and especially acting, out their desires. Brewer says Transgendering “can be liberating for women…freeing them from the stifling restrictions of religious or social belief-systems.” (193) While this may have been necessary for the women of that society to transgender into the role of a male, if Lewis was trying to elevate the feminine gender, he might have gone about it a different way. On page 194 of the essay, brewer points to several examples of Lewis’ sexism. I picked up on many of these while reading the novel and was saddened that for an author that is definitely trying to make a statement about society, his misuse of the feminine role detracts from his overall point. What makes this novel so difficult is that for every example there is a counter-example, and even as I am writing this, I can think of many ways to dispute even my own argument. Overall, however, I do think that Lewis shared many of the sexist ideals shared by his society, and I wish that women would have been showed in a better light. Reading this novel from a feminist point of view is extremely difficult, yet entirely fascinating. My last point on this matter is that in the end, the only way that the women were accomplished and happy was by assuming domestic roles. This is pointing to an attitude that is prevalent even among our society now, that in order for a women to have true happiness and a complete life, they must be married to a man that takes care of them.

Just a test.