Fear of the Unknown

This month, we discussed The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. During the socratic seminar, we discussed number 5, but I would like to analyze it further. The questions is as follows: What is the significance of the fact that no one can describe exactly what Hyde looks like? Most of us agreed that Hyde appears to be more dangerous and menacing because there is a mysterious and unidentifiable aspect to his character. However, we must ask ourselves - Why does the unknown create fear in us?

Think about what would be the effect on the reader if Hyde was definitively ugly or repulsive. By having a distinct appearance, Hyde would become easier to relate to or make a connection with. However, by being indescribable, Hyde becomes an ominous figure that creates a sense of suspense throughout the story. The fact that the reader cannot completely understand or picture Hyde is uncomfortable for the reader, which makes Hyde even more undesirable.

This technique is used in many suspense/horror movies. By keeping the audience ignorant of the "horror's" appearance, the suspense grows. In the movie Cloverfield, the "horror," an enormous, alien creature wrecks havoc on New York City, but the viewer does not get a clear picture of the creature until very late into the film. This increases the "scare factor" because of the "threat" of the unknown. There are so many instances where the unknown strikes fear into people. In religion, for example, the "unknown God" is very overwhelming for some. This mysterious God can be very frightening to some people. The fact is that humans want knowledge. When they cannot attain it, the result can be fear, just like it is in The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.

It's Relative

Superiority - defined as "greater in quality, quantity, etc." by the World English Dictionary. This word has floated throughout the history of mankind, leaving ugly, distinctive marks. There are countless examples of individuals, groups, etc. claiming to be superior over another. Yet, what exactly makes one superior to another? Is it beauty? Money? Success? Youth? What? The fact is that it is all of those things! However, the undeniable truth is that these things are all false powers in the sense of superiorty. Superiority is relative. This means that it only exists within the confines of those who believe it. What one may think is beautiful may be indescribably repulsive to another. The instant someone else disagrees with the "superior," the "superior" loses a fraction of power.

In Oscar Wilde's The Picture of Dorian Gray, Dorian becomes corrupted and bases his life on the importance of his youth. Desiring eternal youth, Dorian Gray ultimately dooms himself. While his youth may make him feel superior, it is actually relative. In this case, his youth can only carry him so far - his lack of moral character gradually destroys him. Basil, originally seeing Dorian as pure, notes his corruption, thus deteriorating his view of Dorian. The fact is, what makes you feel superior will always have consequences (large or small). We are all human...no one is above the other..."deep down under our skins, there is flesh and blood! For we're all brothers!" - How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying.

The idea of superiority being correlated with wickedness is common throughout not only literature, but all sorts of media. It is a theme that has been carried through the years and is present even today because it is universal. First, pick any Disney movie - The Lion King, for example. Of course there is a villain - Scar. Let me say first: What did the mother think was going to happen when she named her cubs Scar and Mufasa? Obviously, one was going to grow up to be evil (credit to Jenna Marbles for this thought). The reason Scar is so evil and meets his demise is that he believes he is superior to all others...coincidence? I think not! This corrupted thought clouds his vision, makes the audience hate him, and ultimately dethrones him. This cycle of superiority is quite common in all aspects of life. Sadly, in many instances, the "superior" individual or group does not fall from power as easily or quickly as in a Disney animated feature (example: men acting superior to women).

The Nonexistent Existence of the "Modern Woman"

The treatment of women changes from society to society and culture to culture, as well as time period to time period. Only until recently did the idea of equality between the sexes arise in the modern world. Especially in the current day United States, the power of women easily surpasses that of those 60 years ago in the same country and those in completely different cultures, like those in Middle Eastern nations. Before this "modern woman" there was and still exists today in multiple places the "subservient woman." This woman may be subordinate to God or society, but almost always is subordinate to man. Yet, I do not believe that man is completely responsible for this kind of woman. Of course it does not help that man endorses the "subservient woman," but the society and culture in which this woman exists is the most at blame. Society creates the "subservient woman," while man supports it, AND the women do not find the willpower  or resources to fight back. This vicious circle prevents any sort of progress towards the "modern woman" like the woman of American culture.

In Kate Chopin's The Awakening, the protagonist, Edna, serves as an example of the hopelessness of feminist progress during that time period. Edna's foil, Adele, serves as an example of that society's "subservient woman," one who is valued for her ability as a mother and wife. These spheres (mother and wife) were the only options for a "normal" woman of that time. Any idea of equality or even the persuing of other paths than motherhood and being a wife was scorned and attacked. Yet, even today in a society of "modern women," we have difficulty appreciating Edna's attempt to better herself because of the fact that she abandoned her children. The connection between mother and child has remained the same in most societies. Therefore, we must question: "Can the 'modern woman' truly exist if this connection exists in our society?"

If society says this connection between woman and child exists, then women of that society can not even hope for true equality. We see this even in our society in the form of scorn for unsuccessful mothers. There is a double standard between men and woman that exists because women have this connection with a child that the man cannot achieve since he cannot give birth. Then, due to conformity, this double standard will remain for the majority of people. The 'modern woman' cannot truly exist because, according to society, there will always be a connection between mother and child that links her to motherhood. While American society may boast its progressive women, there is no true way to compare women to men. Equality is relative and until society learns to view women and men in separately lights, women will unfortunately always be compared to men based on his standards, not hers.

This issue of gender roles, independence, and conformity is prevalent in modern media. For example, Lady Gaga's song "Scheisse" is a creative feminist anthem. While "scheisse" is a German word that can be directly translated into a derogatory term, Lady Gaga uses it as a translation of "persistent complications women face due to their 'place' next to men."

"I wish I could be strong without someone there...I wish I could be strong without the scheisse!"
"Love is objectified by what men say is right."

These two examples of lyrics from the song express the narrator-woman's desire to be able to act without being compared to man in a world where what is deemed "right" is based on man's standards.

The Figure 8 of Cultural Relativism

From the beginning of man, there has been war. According to the World English Dictionary, "war" is defined as "open armed conflict between two or more parties." The one word that jumps out at me in that definition is "conflict." By deductively reasoning that if man has war then man must have conflict, I present the question, "Why is there conflict between man?" Now, that may be quite a broad question to have a single answer and I understand that. Yet, I will attempt to answer it in one way that, in essence, may be found wrong in the eyes of another - and so the "figure 8" begins.

In response to the question presented, I will answer by saying, "Man engages in conflict due to the narrow view and stubbornness of those who cannot and will not understand the cultural differences between their culture and another." Many people in the world exhibit such characteristics as intolerance and stubbornness. These are the people who would obviously rebuke the theory of Cultural Relativism due to its call for liberal awareness and tolerance toward the practices of other cultures. Cultural Relativism states that there is no objective standard that can be used to judge one societal code better than another because there is no "universal truth" in ethics. However, in reading "The Challenge of Cultural Relativism" by James Rachels I have come to believe that while Cultural Relativism creates a an argument, it creates an argument for one point of view. By truly following Cultural Relativism, one would realize that Cultural Relativism may not be the only answer, if it is an answer at all. Essentially, Cultural Relativism creates a perpetually contradictory stream of thought, or what I call the "figure 8 effect."

I find Cultural Relativism appealing because of its contradictory nature. Instead of creating a concrete theory, Cultural Relativism allows me to form my own opinion, while following its fundamental purpose - looking at the world through respectful and tolerant eyes.

Cultural conflict finds its way into many different literary pieces. In Chinua Achebe's Things Fall Apart, there is an obvious conflict between the native culture of Okonkwo's people (in Africa) and the culture of the white Christian missionaries who integrate themselves into Okonkwo's society. Okonkwo's unwillingness to adapt or even understand the Christians and the Christians' unwillingness to accept and respect the native culture and religion lead to a deadly conflict that ultimately causes the death of Okonkwo. Had these two factions followed Cultural Relativism, even slightly, conflict could possibly be avoided. Yet, the many narrow-minded people in this culturally diverse world will continue to exist, meaning cultural conflict is inevitable; that is why there is conflict between man. If you don't agree with my response, I would like to let you know that I respect your opinion and believe that there is no one answer.

MEDIA CONNECTIONS: Both the idea of the "figure 8" and the idea of cultural conflict are prevalent in music today. Outasight's song "Figure 8" serves as a self-explanatory example for the former. The Black Eyed Peas' song "Where Is the Love?" illustrates cultural conflicts and a plea for their ending. Yet, these ideas, especially cultural conflict, are common concepts used not only in the music of today, but also music throughout history.

The Damsel's Need for a Pot of Hot Grits

Last month, I discussed "battle axe women" and their position in literature and society. Continuing with this theme, this month I will discuss the so-called "victim" or "damsel in distress" type of woman that is a popular characterization in some pieces of literature. This past month, we read Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë. The plot of Wuthering Heights surrounds the doomed love of Catherine and Heathcliff. Internal conflict arises in Heathcliff due to his unrequited love for Catherine, who, due to societal circumstances, chooses to not allow herself to follow her love for Heathcliff. The consequences of this choice unfold throughout the remainder of the novel, as Heathcliff destroys others and Catherine destroys herself.

Heathcliff's response to his doomed love is to act out in revenge. Offended by Catherine's choice to pursue and marry Edgar, Heathcliff plots to court Isabella, knowing Edgar vehemently disapproves. Through his relationship with Isabella, Heathcliff is able to hurt both Catherine and Edgar. Due to Heathcliff's choice to target Edgar and the resulting tension and conflict, Catherine falls ill. In my opinion, Catherine was playing "victim" in this situation. Instead of accepting her choice to marry Edgar (despite her love for Heathcliff), she wallows in self-pity. At the start of the novel, I had faith in Catherine since she appeared to be a passionate and strong-willed individual. Yet, her decline shows that she is, in fact, not a resolute individual, but a frail one.

Just as "battle-axe women" appear in today's society, so do "damsels in distress." Once again I find myself referencing Tyler Perry's Madea movies. Not only does Madea represent "battle-axe women," but she also teaches other women to follow her example. In Madea Goes to Jail, Madea finds herself preaching forgiveness. She states, "Everybody got a life. What you do with that life is up to you. Stop being the victim." Once again, in Madea's Family Reunion, Madea teaches a woman in an abusive relationship to not be a "victim," but to fight back (by throwing hot grits in the face of her physically abusive fiancé and fighting him off with a hot skillet).

Much to my disappointment, Catherine played "victim" in Wuthering Heights and as a result, destroyed herself. If only Catherine had known Madea, she would have had the courage to end the conflict between Edgar and Heathcliff that ultimately killed her. Yet, I believe it was Catherine's choice to stop fighting and because of that, the novel was not able to elicit any pity for Catherine from me. Maybe, Catherine did not have to be a "battle-axe woman, " but I wish she at least had the strength to better herself.

Song of the Month: "I Will Survive" by Gloria Gaynor

The Portrayal of the "Battle Axe Woman"

We did discuss Question 9 from the Beowulf Socratic Seminar points of discussion in class, but I would like to take this opportunity to discuss it further. Question 9 asks, "Discuss the position, role, and purpose of women. How do these viewpoints contribute to those our society has had or has regarding women's roles today?" In the "warrior" culture that Beowulf illustrates, women are portrayed in a juxtaposition of following roles: decorative accessory and promoter of peace and goodwill. While glory is given exclusively to the men of the society, women are meant to be nothing more than good hostesses, yet they are still believed to be symbols of peace. However, this portrayal of women in Beowulf only includes those who live in the "warrior" culture. Many analysts seems to forget one rather important female figure in Beowulf – the mother of Grendel.

Grendel's mother only appears for a brief time during the epic poem. Yet, her portrayal in this short period is enough to thoroughly convince anyone that she does not fit under the category of "promoter of peace and goodwill." So, how can we characterize Grendel's mother, one who differs so greatly from the other women in the epic? Simple. Grendel's mother is what we call a "battle axe woman." An alternate definition of the term "battle axe" is "a domineering, aggressive person...especially a woman." When Grendel's mother does get recognition from analysts, she is almost always shown as an antagonist of the poem. In the context with which the epic was written, I can agree with this. However, I believe by analyzing Beowulf in a new way we can unearth a sense of sympathy for this mother, who, in my opinion, does not differ from other mothers as greatly as one may think.

First, we need to ask ourselves, "Why did Grendel's mother fight Beowulf?" Although Beowulf  was written to glorify Beowulf and vilify Grendel's mother, we have the ability to question the intentions of Grendel's mother. Were her intentions evil or were they out of love for the one she lost – her son? I believe her intentions were reflective of the latter. She was merely following maternal instincts to avenge the death of her son. Unlike the pitiful women of the "warrior" society, Grendel's mother acted with aggression and hatred for the slayer of Grendel. The fact that she engaged Beowulf in fierce battle shows that she is a "battle axe woman." Therefore, it is incorrect to generalize all women in Beowulf as "promoters of peace and goodwill" when obviously there is at least one woman who acts as a forerunner for many women of today's society.

Many depictions of "battle axe women" appear in current day media. A famous example of a "battle axe woman" appears in the television show Everybody Loves Raymond in the character of Marie Barone. This controlling and overprotective mother acts as the matriarch of the Barone family.  Marie's domineering nature is a distinctive characteristic that defines her as a "battle axe woman." Yet, she is still a mother, acting only with the best intentions for her family. Another example of a "battle axe woman" is Tyler Perry's character, Madea, or Mabel Simmons. This native Louisianan is the epitome of the "mammy archetype, " a strong-willed southern woman who agressively defends her position as the head of her family. In many instances she is known to exert force when she feels disrespected. For example, in Tyler Perry's Madea's Big Happy Family, Madea crashes into a fast-food restaurant that lacks good customer service and hurdles the counter in order to show the cashier she is not a woman who is to be "messed with." See the following link for visual support: http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lm1nkpQh931qferjz.gif

Depending on how we analyze literature, we can formulate multiple different defendable interpretations. For me, Grendel's mother represents an early form of a characterization of women seen in today's society. "Battle axe women" may appear intimidating, but in many cases their intentions are honorable. Where would our world be without mothers like Grendel's?

Quote of the day: "Be the kind of woman that when your feet hit the floor each morning the Devil says, 'Oh crap. She's up.'" - Unknown

"Why Do We Even Have That Lever?"

This month in AP English we have sampled many different areas of English. From discussing literature to understanding the simple foundation of literary terminology, we have had a taste of everything. Upon receiving the notes for the second group of literary terms, I happened to take interest in a particular term: digression.

The concept of digression fascinated me in many ways. The term describes material that is unrelated to the subject of a work, so why does it even exist? Perusing the depths of my memory, I looked for examples of digression in the works of literature I have read. In many pieces, such as Hemingway's A Farewell to Arms and Rand's The Fountainhead, I found the unnecessary addition of information, usually involving the description of something. In The Fountainhead, Rand had a propensity to describe every detail of every building, object, etc. Although in some cases one could argue the importance of a particular description, I believe Rand's 700 page masterpiece could have easily been trimmed to a still very accomplished 500 paged feat. Digressions such as the ones in The Fountainhead seemed utterly superfluous, yet I decided to keep an open mind and searched for useful digressions outside of literature.

Always looking for useful literary connections to defend my love for Disney's The Emperor's New Groove, I searched for useful digressions in the movie. To my great excitement, I found just what I was looking for. In a scene where the movie's villainess, Yzma, and her dim-witted henchman, Kronk, travel to her "secret lab," the two encounter a wall with two levers on it. One lever would lead them to the lab, while the other would activate a trapdoor causing its victim to fall into crocodile-infested water. Naturally, Kronk pulls the wrong lever, causing Yzma to fall into the dangerous water. Why did the writers of the movie choose to include this digression when correct lever would continue the plot? I came to the realization that this rather humorous digression was used for comic relief. In the words of Yzma, my discovery was "brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, I tell you! Genius, I say!"

Encouraged by my discovery of a use for a digression, I have reformulated my opinion of the term. I still retain my former opinion that in many cases digressions are unnecessary to the entirety of a work. However, I believe in certain instances, digressions can be used for entertaining an audience, especially through comedic use. There is a fine line between useful and useless digressions. So, I challenge any current "digression happy" author who happens to read this blog to ask yourself, "Why do we even have that lever?"