Gender in Literature

     One major theme that I found most interesting in many of the texts, was the extreme suppression and the blatant stereotyping of female figures throughout Electra, Coming of Age in Mississippi, Light in August, and Othello. Each of these texts is set in very different times, but all have a common, typically patriarchal society. In Electra, we see the story of a daughter who feels very compassionately about the wrongness of her father's death. Electra wishes to avenge her father by killing her mother and the man trying to take her father's place. Everyone who hears of Electra's thoughts on this matter simply say that she is a flighty, dramatic woman who cannot control her emotions. However, when Electra's brother finally steps up to do the deed that he was intended for, he is viewed as a hero.
     This way of equal acts being viewed differently when performed by different genders is also evidenced in Light in August. When strangers first encounter Lena Grove, they do two things: first, they notice her enlarged belly, then look for wedding band. Many people treat Lena differently when they learn that she is in fact not married, and is having a child out of wedlock. However, it is common knowledge that many of the men in the town of Jefferson go to "visit" with prostitutes in the town, yet everyone just seems to look the other way. This is completely unfair to Lena, who is forced to wear her Scarlett letter (if you will) on her stomach, yet the men get to hide theirs in the shadows.
     Even in Coming of Age in Mississippi, Anne Moody is a pioneer for the entire African American race as a whole, yet people tend to think even less of her because she is, not only black, but a black female. Many people from Essie's home thought that she was crazy when she started to simply went to college to further her education and become more involved in the Civil Rights Movement. Her mother was scared to death to do anything but work in white families' homes--that was where she believed black women belonged. When Essie began to mature and grow into a womanlier figure, it only posed more problems for her. Her stepfather began to make passes at her and stare at her for far too long. The fact that Essie was a female did nothing but make her battles and struggles in the Civil Rights Movement even more difficult for her.
     In Othello, we see the role of women even more demeaned by the male figures in the story. In the beginning of the play, Othello is madly in love with Desdemona and would do anything for her. However, as the story goes on, Othello begins to view her as his own property and treats her like she is just a bother to him. In reality, Desdemona truly had all of the power because it was Iago that used her as his weapon against Othello. The thought that a man can truly not resist a woman is one that is often times over looked. If Desdemona had used her "powers" that she has a woman, she might have overcome Iago's attempts to ruin her marriage. However, because she was so suppressed by all of the men surrounding her, she couldn't realize her full potential.
     By looking at these works of literature from the earliest civilizations and comparing them to ones that were written not so long ago, we can see that the matter of gender equality is still an issue today. While women's powers in society get stronger everyday, we still face problems like men seeing us as inferior. I like to think that women just have subtler techniques that we prefer to keep tucked up our sleeves.

Lena Grove

     In Light in August, Lena Grove is the only character who has to wear her flaw out in the open for everyone to see and judge every single day. She is very obviously pregnant, and it is very easy for everyone in the town to look down and see that she has no wedding band. In the time period that the story is set in, it is extremely disgraceful to have sexual relations with a man and not be his wife. Not only has Lena been sexually active, but she has also become pregnant because of her actions. Now she is walking blindly in search of a man who has no intentions of taking care of her and has been running from her since the day he found out she was expecting a child. Lena's stubbornness and ability to be oblivious to the looks and stares directed towards her help her to cope with her struggle. However, her actions seem a bit odd and peculiar and makes the reader wonder what Faulkner hasn't yet told us about her past. No woman in her right mind would walk from Alabama to Mississippi when she was around eight months pregnant. It is not safe, and it does not make any sense. It leads me to wonder if Lena is perhaps slightly mentally handicapped in some way. This handicap only makes Lena's struggle in individual versus the society more difficult for her. However, the obliviousness helps her in coping with and handling her permanent label as an outcast.

A Rose for Emily

     William Faulkner molds "A Rose for Emily" into a Southern Gothic piece of work as he slowly reveals and describes the gruesome character of Emily herself. Emily is very mysterious, which is cleverly exhibited through the eyes of the narrator. The narrator and the rest of the town are always watching Emily and her home to try and figure out just what exactly goes on inside of there. All they ever really know is what they observe and assume to be true. Emily house reeks of some unknown smell that is speculated to be the smell of some rotting, dead animal carcass, but yet again, no one knows for sure. Upon finally learning just how Emily murdered her lover and then kept his body on her bed so she could still lie with him after death, is like a slap in the face from the hand of grotesqueness itself. Yet there is still this heir of mystery about her, even after her death. The entire town thought that she had "evidently" shut off the entire second floor of her home; but after her funeral, they find the skeleton and they "...noticed that in the second pillow was the indentation of a head. One of us lifted something from it, and leaving forward, that faint and invisible dust dry and acrid in the nostrils, we saw a long strand of iron-grey hair. (p. 5). Even the mere fact that they waited until "...Miss Emily was decent in the ground before they..." broke into her private room implies that they still felt a bit of fear and uneasiness towards her (p. 5).
     Faulkner is clearly making Emily symbolic to the traditional way of life in the story. In the beginning he even refers to Emily and her home as a "fallen monument" (p. 1). Emily doesn't believe that she has to pay any taxes because of a deal that she and Colonel Sartoris made years ago. The new men that have been running the town since Colonel Sartoris's death ten years previously have many troubles and stand offs with Miss Emily when trying to get her to pay her taxes. Because she is somewhat of a "monument" in the town, the men finally let it go. This bit of bowing down to the historical and traditional character could be viewed as a sign of respect, but I think it was more out of fear and utter exasperation. One thing is certain though, Miss Emily was tough and didn't back down from anyone--man or woman.
     There are a few instances where racial and gender issues are illuminated by Faulkner. He constantly tells how the Negro man "...going in and out with the market basket" (p. 5). No matter how terrible and frightening Miss Emily was, that house servant never stopped working for her and being faithful to her. The men of the town don't show him any respect and refer to him as "...that nigger of hers" (p. 2). However, this black man is clearly putting up with a lot more than any of them ever have from Miss Emily, so he seems to be much more diligent and brave than they are. The women in the town even go as far as to blame the stench coming from the house on him when they say "...just as if a man-any man-could keep a kitchen properly" (p. 2). Here, the women are not referring to his race at all, but merely that any man would not be capable of maintaining a clean kitchen and home like a woman could.

Gothic vs. Southern Gothic

     Gothic literature is a very unique style of writing. All Gothic works can be characterized by very specific elements that they include. Examples of a few of these unique elements are horror elements, supernatural events , ghosts, villains, mysterious castles, and crumbling ruins. As these stories began to evolve, authors started to introduce more psychological aspects, like in Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, where Robert Louis Stevenson intricately describes the horrors associated with a split personality disorder. Gothic literature also often illuminates some of the distrust and darker sides that are often associated with the Catholic faith. (Buzzle.com)
     Southern Gothic is often referred to as a sub-genre of its parent, Gothic literature. Much like Gothic literature, the Southern Gothic includes supernatural, ironic, and unusual events to help shape and mold the base of its story line. However, unlike the traditional Gothic writings, Southern Gothic novels focus more on highlighting social issues like racism and white supremacy but in a much more subtle way. They would use scenarios such as a damsel in distress or a heroic knight and twist them into a grotesque or deeply flawed character. This allowed the authors to have more of a range of what they could and could not say because they were then highlighting trouble Southern sociological issues, but not in a very blatant and obvious way. (Wikipedia.com)
     Eudora Welty's "The Petrified Man" is classified as a Southern Gothic short story because of her portrayal of the women's changing roles in society. Leota, who is married and works to support her bum of a husband, demonstrates an inversion of the typically accepted male and female roles. Mrs. Fletcher is more of a representation of the traditional woman. She is unhappily married, pregnant, and doesn't like kids, yet she remains in her marriage because that is what is socially expected of her. Mrs. Pike represents a more positive image of a modern woman. She is the sole source of economic power in her marriage, and she also has this strange type of intuition that she possesses. It is clear that the other women in the story are a bit jealous of her.
     In Flannery O'Connor's story "Greenleaf" we also see evidence for it being considered a Southern Gothic work. For example, Mrs. May who proclaims herself as a devout Christian is actually a hypocritical, pathetic snob. Basically someone we might refer to as a "Sunday Christian". Mr Greenleaf, one of the men in the story, is actually lazy, uneducated, and seems very shifty all of the time. This is completely opposite of how Southern gentlemen are usually portrayed in Romantic literature. Yet, Mr. Greenleaf is paired with one of the most positive characters in the story, Mrs. Greenleaf. Mrs. Greenleaf is very strong in her Christian faith and treats it as a daily ritual and spiritual faith telling, which is how all Christians try to portray themselves.

Women vs. Men

     I think the reason that Marlow tells Kurtz's fiance that his dying words were her name is because of the stigma that has always been placed on women. Most men, especially in previous centuries, believe that women are much more fragile than men and should be protected from the harshness of the world. Marlow was going along with this stereotype when he lied to Kurtz's fiance about Kurtz's dying mantra and his own relationship with Kurtz. Conrad only helps to enhance this preconceived thought by the way that he presents Kurtz's fiance. He describes her entrance as merely "...a pale head, floating towards..." Marlow in the sitting room. Conrad continues on to make her seem so gullible and uninformed--he makes it impossible for Marlow to have ever told the truth to this frail, mourning woman. The mere fact that Conrad does not even reveal her name to the reader slaps her in the face with the inferiority that men always chain to women. As Kurtz's fiance continues to speak, she reveals that she knew Kurtz better than anyone else on this earth--or so she thinks. Everything that she is telling Marlow about Kurtz is in complete contradiction with what Kurtz had surely morphed into while he was out in the darkness. Because of society's thoughts of women being unable to handle the realities of the world outside of their own, Marlow simply lets her believe that Kurtz had continued on as a fine and upstanding gentleman. When Kurtz fiance proclaims that "[m]en looked up to him,--his goodness shone in every act" it is impossible not to think that she sounds like a complete imbecile when we think back on what Kurtz had truly become. He had turned into a monster who slaughter humans and animals alike for merely the chance to obtain more ivory and money for himself. He was simply a greedy man. Why should Marlow ruin that blissful dream that she still had of him in her mind?
     This idea of women not being able to handle the same trials and upsets as men can, is very similar to the treatment that was exhibited in Electra. This is a recurring theme throughout all works of literature from earlier times. All men believed that women could never be equal to men in both physical and emotional aspects. Yet women were still considered to be the only present force that could turn a house into a home; which is ironically still very important to men. If women were treated more equally in the past and also today, they might be more willing to provide the nurture and care that men still so desperately need. In my mind, that is more power than men will ever have in their lifetime.

Heart of Darkness

     I think one of the major factors that contributes to Heart of Darkness being a psychological novel is the way that Conrad so distinctively describes every aspect of what is being seen or told in Marlow's story. Marlow clearly saw and went through some very unpleasant situations while he was working and residing in the Congo, and Conrad does not skimp on the details whatsoever. In looking at the way that he describes the natives that he sees in the "grove of death," we can feel a real sense of uneasiness and sympathy for the individuals who have crawled there to die. Conrad does not just say that the black figures were very skinny and bony. Instead he says that the bones and joints in the figures looked similar to "knots in a rope." Also the way that he describes the eyes of the figure who is closest to him makes the reader feel as if they were actually sitting there watching this man die. You can literally see "...kind of blind, white flicker in the depths of the orbs, which died out slowly." Because Conrad uses such descriptive and distinct language, it causes the reader to form very vivid mental images, which in turns starts to produce many other thoughts and feelings inside of us. For example, it makes you start to wonder what you would do in a situation like the one that is described in the novel. Would you try and help all of the figures who are slowly starving to death in the shade or would you simply just leave them be and let them slowly die in peace? Would you try and rebel against the authorities in charge who are ultimately murdering the natives or would you eventually form the same mindset that these mysterious black figures are in fact the criminals and enemies on this unknown piece of land? This is exactly what is meant by the term "psychological novel." When you read Heart of Darkness, it is impossible to not feel completely consumed and immersed in the text and begin to think such profound thoughts about yourself.
     Marlow was clearly different from the other white men that he encountered in the Congo. He did observe what was going on in this isolated world, and yet he also seems to know that it is wrong. He doesn't seem to agree with the colonization of these people and their homeland. He clearly felt uncomfortable with the things that he saw while he was there. He seems especially tormented and haunted by it all--if he weren't I don't think he would be telling this story in such a vivid account, especially when he is not even sure if the others are still awake listening to him. He is telling the story for more therapeutic reasons rather than just to pass the time. The way that Marlow portrays the colonizers makes them seem completely unjust and arrogant. Especially with the way he describes their clothing and the things found in their personal huts. The accountant complains because he has to listen to the groans of a sick man, while out in the darkness of the wilderness, multitudes of natives huddle together in the shade to die quietly and peacefully. Conrad and Marlow both are portraying the colonization of this area in a very negative manner, and I don't blame them in the least.

Villain or Hero?

     The most current villain that I can think of would The Capitol in the recent book series The Hunger Games. That probably makes no sense to most people, but The Capitol is basically the new, dictator type of government in America about 50 years from now. It is run mainly by President Snow, but there are also many little minions and soldiers that he sends out from The Capitol to do his dirty work. I think the immense mystery factor is what makes The Capitol so frightening and ominous. The people living in the Twelve Districts are forced to watch video messages from The Capitol and are only told exactly what The Capitol wants them to know. Often times, workers from The Capitol will arrive on hover crafts, abduct a certain citizen, and then disappear with them never to be seen again. Many people are killed for the smallest crimes, so everyone is constantly scared to death to step out of line. The Capitol also holds The Hunger Games every year, where two children from each District must be given up to compete to the death. While most of the Districts greatly oppose and loathe this practice, The Capitol views it as a way of maintaining order and preventing another uprising like they had so many years ago.
     The Capitol is comparable to Shakespeare's Iago in that it has not very clear motives for the things that it does. Losing children in the annual Hunger Games completely disrupts the lives of the District for the entire year, until they have to turn around and do it all over again. Iago is very similar in that he is constantly disrupting the lives of all the people around him; and right when they're about to get over it or let it go, Iago chides them and gets them worked up all over again. While The Capitol claims that they continue the Hunger Games to maintain order, that is very questionable because they have many other ways of maintaining order throughout the Districts. Similarly, Iago claims that he is only stirring up trouble because of his love for Othello, but we all know that there are many other ways of showing your love towards another person.
     The thing that makes both of these villains so interesting is that you never really know what to expect from them. While it is extremely suspenseful and frightening for the people involved in the story, it's a bit exciting for the reader to wonder what in the world this person is going to come up with next. I think it is safe to say that Iago is truly evil. He was simply jealous and seeking revenge for not being named lieutenant by Othello. He is evil in the sense that there was absolutely no justifiable reason for the things that he did to multiple people's lives. I do think that Iago is brave, but only in the sense that it took a lot of nerve to try and mess with that many people's lives--especially people who have so much power over him, like Othello. I do think Othello is slightly to blame for a small part of the chaos, simply because he was so quick to believe Iago rather than question his wife, Desdemona. But there is no way to look past the completely poisonous thoughts that Iago was feeding Othello. It's no wonder that Othello became completely wrapped up and consumed by the seeds of hatred that Iago was planting in his mind.

Modern or Medieval?

I definitely believe that human beings are much more civilized today than they were in earlier civilizations. Yes, there may still be murders and types of segregation today, but the repercussions for these acts are much different than what they were in previous times. For example, in Electra, Orestes murders his mother and stepfather to avenge his father's death. Back then this was viewed as simply justice; today, Orestes would have been locked away in prison probably for life. This is very similar to the ruling system that was set up in Mesopotamia, commonly known as "an eye for an eye". If some kind of wrong doing or crime was committed, everyone believed that you could simply set it right by doing an equal act in return. In today's society this would be viewed as extremely barbaric and unacceptable. 139 One major thing that would definitely not be tolerated today are the proud and public lynchings of African Americans today. There might be mild instances of racial segregation today, but the violence that was exhibited and displayed during the times that Coming of Age in Mississippi was set in would not be tolerated, and further more praised, today like it was so many years ago.
In saying that our society today is more "modern" than previous societies, I think we are absolutely correct. By simply looking at the different ways that things like punishments and disciplinary actions that are taken today. However, there is definitely evidence to argue that we are still stuck in somewhat medieval ideas. In society as a whole, women's rights and privileges have most definitely advanced and improved, but there are still many instances where women are treated differently and unfairly simply because of the fact that they are a female. While we have seen great strides 300 for women equality, for example the achievements made by Hillary Clinton, Oprah Winfrey, and Nancy Pelosi, there are still methods and examples of the male population viewing the females as insufficient. For example, often times women are given more consideration for certain schools or jobs simply because institutions think that females need some kind of extra help to balance things out between the males. Being a very strong, independent, and intelligent female myself, this is extremely insulting to me. Why do people think that women need or should have extra points simply to get us on the same level as men? This is completely parallel with the ideas and thinkings exhibited in Electra. The entire cast didn't believe that Electra was in well enough standings to avenge her father's death; however, Orestes was simply because he was a male. The fact that Electra was written so long ago and we still mildly suffer from the same problems shows how long it takes mankind to truly change and evolve.
In The Epic of Gilgamesh, there are many heroic and mythological stories of violence and death. While these may seem completely irrelevant to society today, they actually somewhat coincide with many happenings occurring today. Gilgamesh faces many battles and struggles, as do all of us every day in our culture. We face battles against starvation, terrorism, cancer, racism, and so on; to me, all of these things listed are just as great, if not even worse, enemies than what Gilgamesh continued to face.
I think there are many arguments to support the statement that we are definitely more modernized than earlier civilizations. The enemies we face, the punishments we receive, and the actions that are tolerated are all completely different to the ways these things were in all of our readings. While we do see small remnants of some of the foundations of these issues, they are definitely not as prominent or accepted as they once were. I think future generations will be extremely proud of the strides that we have made toward complete and utter equality and fairness.

Electra

     I think one of the resonating reasons for the longevity of the play, Electra, is its criticisms and possible questionings about the inequality that has been forever present between males and females. Throughout the play we are constantly told of Electra's overly passionate feelings of seeking revenge for her deceased father, yet she never is allowed to act on them. Everyone else around her just views her as irrational and almost maniacal; but in contrast, the minute that it is mentioned that Orestes should avenge his father, everyone is happy and pleased about it. How is this equal or fair at all? Agamemnon's death would have been avenged and set right either way, what difference did it make whether he was avenged by his daughter or son? I think Sophocles had a very analytical mind and didn't maybe understand fully what he was doing. For instance, in one view it could be said that he was making a mockery of women and female power in general. Playing up Electra's emotions and feelings is one way that Sophocles tried to make her appear inferior or even incompetent. But looking at the situations in today's light, we see her more of an oppressed female who is not being treated equally at all. Her goals and intentions were exactly the same as Orestes, yet she was seen as a fool for even thinking that she could possibly carry out her mission on her own.
     I think this play was very important especially during its own times because it did shed light on a subject that many people had probably never thought about or considered. Why were women's only jobs to be home makers and care takers of babies? Where did this thought of women being inferior ever begin? Yes, men might be physically more able in some certain aspects, but women have much more sinister and thought out plans for their goals. Even today, though many barriers and oppressions have been broken, women are still viewed as being the lesser of the two races. I think this is why we continue to read and study very early works, such as Electra. There was, and probably always will be, a need for women to fight to be considered equally as capable as the men in our lives. The fact that Sophocles, maybe didn't realize it, but did shed light on the fact that women are not treated the same as men, is proof for the fact that Sophocles saw the vast difference of rights shared between the males and females during his time.

Coming of Age in Mississippi

     Anne Moody clearly had an outstanding talent for using literature to portray her life stories and share them with the world. In her writings Moody does not seem to write for pity on herself, she simply tells the stories exactly how they happened. Granted the stories are absolutely terrible and disgusting accounts of how truly horrid the white race could actually portray itself, but she doesn't go out of her way to make them look any more terrible than they truly were. I think that is a very important aspect of Moody's writings. Many people today are still somewhat racist and stereotypical of the African American population; often times African Americans are still portrayed in somewhat negative manners and are even still treated differently. Some people criticize the black communities and say that they only want help from other people, aren't hard workers, and just want everyone else to do their work for them. As it is so clearly shown in Moody's story--they are the exact opposite of all of those things.
     The early stories of working for white women are crucial parts to developing Moody's stance and stories. The tales of being white women's maids and cooks show just how truly lazy and incompetent white women were in those days. This helps to explain partly why whites had such an aversion towards black people moving up and working in the same jobs and titles and they held because then who would do all of their cooking, cleaning, and plain old dirty work?
     The ways in which Anne's relationship with her family shifts is very interesting to me. It was clear that Anne was never really very attached to her family in the first place, but she always had a lot of care for them and always fought to protect them at any cost. For example, she would leave home during the summers to go work in New Orleans or Baton Rouge and wouldn't even think twice about it. When she was a away from home it was like she completely detached from her family. But when she was still home with them she was very adamant about keeping strong for them and always going out of her way to watch out for them. For instance, she would make Adline and Junior eat their biscuits on the way to school so that they wouldn't be made fun of during lunch break, and she was also very watchful over her mother especially when it came to her relationships.
     We really see a change in this once Anne becomes very involved with the Movement in Mississippi. Even though her mother writes her many letters pleading her not to participate in the demonstrations, she does so anyway. When she begins thinking that she will probably here about a murder in Centreville soon and that it will likely be one of her family members, she just says it so matter-of-factly. Almost like she's just come to terms with it and has just accepted it for what it is. I think this is also a way of showing her truly loyalty and devotion to the Civil Rights Movement.
     Without people like Anne Moody, Medgar Evers, and Martin Luther King, Jr. I cannot imagine what my life would be like today. Some of my very best friends are African Americans, but I don't even think of it that way. It's almost like I'm one of the children in the beginning of the story--I don't see the color of their or my skin. To know that I share the same race as so many of those awful people is extremely disheartening to me. What's even more upsetting is that some of those same racist thoughts and opinions still exist today. Like Anne Moody said "..I wonder.." if things will ever truly and finally be set straight between all races.