In Terese Mailhot’s poetic Heart Berries, a book dedicated to her mother, she talks about her relationships with men, and the bad as much as the good. Alongside the main story of her chaotic relationship with her husband Casey, she describes these other “transgressions”. At the heart of it all, her father’s abusive relationship seems to be the precursor to the disarray of her future relationships with men. Mailhot, like Heart Berry Boy O’dimin, must “give her life to this,” or dedicate her life in prose form through memoir (Mailhot 13). It’s no coincidence she dedicates it to her mother, Wahzinak. There is a parallel between the story of O’dimin and the bear and Terese and her mother, a woman who’s sleep is compared to “a bear’s hibernation” (38). By telling her stories, Terese is doing what her poetic mother didn’t: refusing to “keep her secrets from weak people” (13). Just like O’dimin, by “giving her life”, Mailhot can “unearth medicine” (13). In other words, there is catharsis in releasing traumatic stories, but it is never easy, as she says: “therapy is fucking hard” (132). Before we know about her relationship with her abusive father, we get negative snippets of other men in her life. She tells how one “silenced [her] by charity,” how one took her child Isadore, and how men objectify her (3). She even says that “men were born to hurt my mother in the flesh and the text,” referring to Paul Simon’s maltreatment of her mother’s story (38). After revealing her father’s sexual abuse, it is easy to see how Terese doesn’t trust Casey, another male transgression. In concluding an interview with Trevor Noah, she says how she hopes this book can serve to empower other women and maybe influence women to tell their tales. As she writes in Heart Berries, “I can hear my aunt’s voice, telling me that if my security depends on a man’s words or actions, I’ve lost sight of my power” (73). In other words, it is important for women to tell their stories to other women. Terese tried to tell her mother about the abuse, but her mother dismissed it. Her silenced, forgotten story damaged her the most, but she carried this pain with her until she reconciled with it through memoir. Works Cited Comedy Central. “Terese Marie Mailhot - Sharing an Indigenous Voice in ‘Heart Berries’ -Extended Interview.” 07 March 2018. http://www.cc.com/video-clips/549p2i/the-daily-
show-with-trevor-noah-terese-marie-mailhot---sharing-an-indigenous-voice-in-- heart-berries----extended-interview Mailhot, Terese Marie. Heart Berries. Counterpoint, 2018. Art by Zu Dominiak. https://zucomics.com/
1 Comment
Using an extreme example to implement change Kate Walbert’s novel about trauma is also a feminist novel interlaced with sexist language and politics. In today’s politically-correct-conscious world where gender equality is fought for, the novel’s events, set in the 80’s, seem distant. On the other hand, with recent attention to the #MeToo movement and famous court cases about sexual harassment, the characters’ words and actions ask readers to reflect on these gender issues of inequality. In effect, it suggests that maybe we haven’t come as far as we’d like, drawing attention to sexism in language, as in the phrase “boys will be boys”. Jo lives in a male-dominated world at Hawthorne. Even the dorms that are unpopular with the boys are “relegated to the girls,” hinting at women’s lower status (Walbert 23). When Master calls Charlotte the smart girl in class and tells the boys she is going to be their boss one day, everyone laughs, “the idea absurd” (64). It is a joke because men are presumed to have more power and control than women, at least at Hawthorne. This is echoed when O’Connell dismisses Jo’s report of Master’s misconduct, just as Jo’s impression that “surely everyone knows and retreats” proves Hawthorne is completely under masculine control (93). Furthermore, the “row after row after row after row of men” show that this is the standard, has been the standard, and will likely remain the standard unless something changes (112). What does it mean to say that “boys will be boys”? First, it dismisses masculine behavior. Although this phrase is not explicitly stated in the novel, it is implied by characters’ actions and words. Jo notices how the girls just laugh when they have to pick up their undergarments after the boys throw them out into the trees. She also describes Master as “speaking in the language of boys, a language different than our own” (64). Master even tells his male students to “Arise and conquer!” (64). He tells them this because, according to him, men are supposed to be in charge. His playful, dismissive tone and the girls’ laughter say it all: boys will be boys. However, this excuse dismisses the issue of gender inequality, creating a double standard. It tells us that it is ok to do these things because men and women, like their language, are different, and so it is acceptable for men to say or do harmful things to women under the guise of the status quo. In effect/Second, the phrase “boys will be boys” places blame on women. If men are above women or their behavior is allowed to be excused, then blame automatically shifts. This is glimpsed when Jo responds to the investigator, “What was I wearing? I could not tell you,” as if perhaps Jo’s appearance was partly to blame for Master’s actions. Like Master says, why do women feel the need to apologize, “as if everything is your fault” (76)? A recent ad by Gillette incorporates this motto, asking viewers to address toxic masculinity. Surprisingly, the negative responses to that video have outnumbered the positive ones. The video appears to address an unfair and harmful double standard in which both men and women are victims. A lot of the negative feedback seems to stem from the assumption that the ad vilifies men or that feminists are attacking masculinity. However, true feminists seek equality. We should not be quick to place blame on men but rather point out unjust behavior. The video’s goal is to target toxic masculinity when and where it occurs, not to assume that all masculinity is toxic. By portraying the environment of 1970’s Hawthorne as clearly imbalanced, Walbert draws attention to our own gendered world. However, we cannot say that “those were different times!” or “boys will be boys” because these phrases perpetuate and energize the double standard (146). Through Jo’s case of sexual abuse being investigated, attention is called to different aspects of gender politics, from the everyday attitudes of gender inequality all the way up to criminal acts and rape. Just as the Gillette video and its responses show, extreme measures must often be taken to implement change. Works Cited Faulkner, Kristi. “How ‘Boys Will Be Boys’ Is Being Challenged For The Better.” Forbes, 17
Jan. 2019, www.forbes.com/sites/kristifaulkner/2019/01/17/how-boys-will-be- boys-is-being-challenged-for-the-better/#3ced04628272 Walbert, Kate. His Favorites. Scribner, 2018. R.O. Kwon’s The Incendiaries and Kamila Shamsie’s Home Fire both illustrate the explosive power of extremist groups and cults, particularly those drawing upon religious ideologies. However, the authors also complicate the notion of these radical organizations by giving readers an inside perspective and showing that these so-called terrorists are victims in their own way, notably Phoebe in The Incendiaries and Parvaiz in Home Fire. Although these characters lead very different lives, neither one is religious. Rather, different motivators drive them to join each group, especially the loss of a parent. In Phoebe’s case, grief over the death of her mother leads to her joining John Leal’s group, and Parvaiz follows Farooq to learn more about his dead father. First, Phoebe finds comfort in John Leal’s Jejah group confessions. They mimic therapy sessions, allowing her to talk about her mother’s accident. This aspect is an important factor in her decision to join the group because, prior to joining, she did not have any other reason to talk about her role in causing her mother’s death. She even references this to Will when she says, “Will, I don’t think you’ve even tried to understand” (Kwon 166). Her drinking habits and poor grades are a further sign of this guilt. Similarly, Parvaiz decides to follow Farooq to learn more about his dead father. In Parvaiz’s case, he barely knew anything about his father, which enticed him even more towards the truth (or lies told by a recruiter). Farooq paints Abu Parvaiz as a hero and romanticizes his visions of justice enough that Parvaiz, idealizing the situation and perhaps seeing it as an adventure, wants to follow him in hopes of finding out more about his father. Despite the torture with chains at Farooq’s place, Parvaiz eventually requests it again so he can be in the place of his father. This reveals his desperation, which Farooq takes advantage of. Although the loss of a parent is the main motivator for Phoebe and Parvaiz, other characters play a role in their decisions. For instance, Will is a self-centered character, despite his obsession with Phoebe. He rapes Phoebe, which is the final push into Jejah and moving in with John Leal. The loss of her mother also means the loss of piano practice and its inherent discipline. John Leal suggests (or perhaps requires) she take up swimming, which helps her fill the void. The Jejah group also has a piano that she occasionally plays, giving her more reason to stay. For Parvaiz, the women in his family are embarrassed by Parvaiz’s father and want to keep his escapades secret. His sisters leave him out of the decision to move out of their house, so he feels betrayed by the women in his life. They are the final push towards his decision. Farooq’s version of the Quran in which inferior women are the property of men is exactly what he wants to hear, even if he isn’t completely convinced. In conclusion, these reasons show how both Phoebe and Parvaiz are seduced into their extremist groups. Isma even describes it as “a kind of secret affair, his first time in love. In a way it, it was” (Shamsie 251). Leaders or recruiters often use these tactics to prey on vulnerable targets. An article on reasons for joining terrorist organizations lists economic opportunities, religious reasons, and personal grievances as top factors. By portraying Phoebe and Parvaiz as non-religious victims, Kwon and Shamsie break down the stereotype of religious terrorists. The effect is to remind us that we are all human with human emotions, suggesting that good and evil, heroes and villains are not as black and white as we may think. Works Cited Abdile, Mahdi. “Why do People Join Terrorist Organizations?” European Institute of Peace. http://eip.org/en/news-events/why-do-people-join-terrorist-organisations
Kwon, R. O. The Incendiaries. Riverhead Books, 2018. Shamsie, Kamila. Home Fire. Riverhead Books, 2017. As coming-of-age stories about young girls, The House on Mango Street and Another Brooklyn share multiple similarities. First, both are tales of poverty and class, incorporating the theme of being thankful for what you have. For instance, Esperanza and Angela are ashamed of the house they live in, claiming to live somewhere else. Second, both place heavy emphasis on feminine sexuality and teen exploration of feminine gender roles, as girls in both novels wear heels that come with attached gender signals they aren’t prepared for. (Cisneros discusses this unwanted baggage in an NPR interview here). These two themes work together to highlight the broader theme of female independence through rebellion. It is Another Brooklyn's epigraph that points to this theme with its blooming peach tree reference, symbolizing independence and the fruits of labor. In her introduction, Sandra Cisneros gives us some background for her book and reflects on her dream of a silent house and lack of a desire to marry, both silent rebellions of gender roles. Esperanza also starts her “own quiet war,” rebelling in her own ways (Cisneros, 89). She wants a house of her own instead of living with her father until marriage, and she is unwilling to wait for the “ball and chain” like Marin, who dreams of escaping poverty by marrying a man (88). The angry trees Esperanza looks to are also symbolic of independence, “four who grew despite concrete” (75). The concrete is mainly symbolic of poverty, but it also refers to her male-dominant world. In their own ways, Cisneros and her character Esperanza search for independence, showing that being a wife and a mother are not the only roles for women. Why does Esperanza choose this rebellious path? She describes multiple women who are full of regret and always looking out the window at lost opportunities, similar to Susan in Red Clocks. Esperanza’s mother regrets how shame led to missed opportunities. Sally and Minerva married into abusive relationships. Mamacita, who can’t speak English, depends on her husband. By seeing other women’s lives limited by men and poverty, she decides to choose a different path for herself, away from Mango Street. Similarly, August in Another Brooklyn stares out the window, trapped by her father’s protection, just as Sylvia’s father attempts to drive away her friends and boyfriend. August rebels by making friends with three other girls, and together they explore their sexuality, with and without boys. Her boyfriend Jerome becomes her secret lover, yet she denies him sexual intercourse. Together, the girls are independent and form a strong bond against the male gaze and August’s mother’s warning of women. She also chooses not to follow kosher guidelines, eating bacon and pork. Sylvia first rebels by essentially blackmailing her father into letting her keep her “ghetto” friends. Later, she goes against her father and her friends by hooking up with Jerome and becomes pregnant at fifteen. Both novels reflect on what I like to think of as the traditional pillars of patriarchy, that women are objectified, isolated, and need protection. The high heels the girls wear in both stories carry dangers with them, reflecting this objectification. (Objectification theory, equating women's worth solely to their appearance, has even been researched by scholars). When Sylvia dates Jerome, she is isolated from her girlfriends, and Sally is isolated from the world by her abusive husband. Esperanza’s father seeks to protect her with his traditional paternal views of marriage similar to Sylvia’s father. (In a related blog, Susanna Krizo discusses the relationship of patriarchal isolation and protection here, dissecting the myth that only men can protect women from men.) When Cisneros describes her fears, particularly of regret and of independence, they seem to be gendered fears. Do boys and men face these same fears in the same way girls and women do? This question is partly answered when Esperanza claims that “the boys and the girls live in separate worlds” (8). No, boys are raised to be more independent, although this is slowly changing in today’s world. Overall, these novels ask readers to reflect on the consequences of gaining independence through rebellion, as well as the consequences of remaining dependent. Underneath it all, they ask why independence is a gendered issue at all. Works Cited: Cisneros, Sandra. The House on Mango Street. Random House, 2009. Art by Rankin Willard. https://rankinwillard.com/artwork At first, I admit it was hard to see a clear picture of this novel just from the first half, but a clear theme started to emerge. As described from the back cover, at least five characters struggle with identity, images, vanity, and stereotypes. Three separate characters claim to have problems with mirrors, symbolizing their struggle with their own dual identities: Boy, Snow, and Bird. Boy is conflicted with the concept of vanity, never sure whether to accept or reject beauty thanks to her father/mother. Both Bird and Snow struggle with two different racial ideals. Frank/Frances becomes the fourth character to grapple with identity when she changes her gender, and Louis Chen looks up to American boxing heroes, as his classmates see him only as an Asian stereotype. The first “aha” moment was Boy’s flashback of her mother/father’s abuse and attempt to scar her because a boy called her beautiful. This dual struggle with identity explains why Boy is always cautiously glancing in mirrors. The second moment was the reveal of Frances, at which I was completely shocked and blown away. This in part explained Boy’s name, since the idea came from someone who switched genders and appears to criminalize vanity/beauty/femininity. I went back to look for clues or hints to the reveal and considered it well hidden as I couldn’t find any clear-cut foreshadowing. Not only do images trick us into the male abuser stereotype, but the newly found Frances makes Boy change her mind about seeing her abuser, packing the whole family up to go see Bird’s and Snow’s grandmother. The two main stories of this novel, Boy’s abusive past with her father/mother and Boy’s own daughters, aren’t fully appreciated and analyzed until the end, where Boy becomes the “wicked stepmother” the description calls Boy. However, I disagree with this seemingly radical claim. Compared to her own father/mother, Boy’s abandonment of Snow pales in comparison to the abuse she endured as a child from the rat killer. Additionally, Olivia’s abandonment of Clara tells a similar story. I also saw a parallel between Red Clocks and Boy, Snow, Bird. In both novels, looks are important for women more so than men, to the extent that women must be blonde Barbie dolls to get a job in the latter. Motherhood is also unraveled, showing the real ups and downs women experience and struggle with. Both Susan (Red Clocks) and Boy see motherhood as stressful and unwelcome. Oyeyemi tells a tale of the images other people want to see, and her writing is interlaced with fairy tale language as she plays with the fairy tale genre. For instance, Boy describes her own past like a fairy tale short of “once upon a time.” Oyeyemi paradoxically suggests that images hold power while simultaneously asking how much power do they actually hold? The Thanksgiving dinner argument proposes the same conflict: when Clara asks her parents if anything besides looks matters (such as hard work), Olivia and Gerald defend their worship of whiteness, claiming that, in Vivian’s case, race determines salary. While Boy chooses to decline to worship whiteness, Olivia and the rest take advantage of this imbalance. Ironically, both parties choose their path for a greater good. Ultimately, Oyeyemi leaves readers to decide how much power images hold. One aspect in Red Clocks that quickly caught my attention was the chapter titles. Void of numbers, they simply refer to the main characters by their roles instead of their names. In particular, the biographer and the mender are non-gendered titles. Starting the book off with the biographer, I perceived this effect as downplaying the importance of gender. It also makes readers instantly think about gender roles. A classic example: when you think of a nurse, what gender generally comes to mind? By referring to Ro as the biographer, Zumas allows readers to dip their toes into one of the prominent themes of the book. For example, even though Didier loves to cook, he usually insists on his wife cooking and cleaning. Alongside the theme of gender roles, tradition vs. non-tradition is also explored. Didier and Susan’s relationship is traditional compared to Ro’s intent to be a single mother, which is parodied through the ECNT act. The book’s dystopian political system is one that values extreme traditional beliefs, leaving readers to contemplate the consequences of such a society. A third theme that is most evident in the biographer’s story is science vs. socialization. Why does she desperately want to become a mother? This question is left to the readers to decide. I assumed it was mostly society since she is jealous of Susan. However, I have heard women say that the desire for motherhood is like a biological switch that gets turned on later in life, which may still be due to culture. For further reading, this article calls the phenomenon the “biological urge,” yet claims there is no evidence to support the claim that the desire to have a child is instinctual. It does, however, mention the “fulfillment assumption,” which is the idea that having a child leads to happiness in life. I personally believe this parental itch comes from cultural norms more than anything else. The fifth woman’s story, Eivør Mínervudottír, is inserted for at least two purposes. First, these entries compare and contrast older traditions with modern day traditions, calling into question gender roles. These extremely brief entries give insight into what are framed as antique, traditional views, yet are still common for these contemporary women. In the nineteenth century, women were for marriage, children, and domestic life. Second, they reflect different characters’ perspectives and situations. For instance, the polar explorer’s entrapment by ice symbolizes the biographer’s failed attempts to become a mother. Finally, Zumas plays with satire through dramatic irony. For instance, the daughter, Mattie, appears to have a strong parental instinct towards the beached whales, even though she does not feel the same for her own unborn child. This is taken to the extreme when she tries to save the whales, but aborts her own baby. In effect, this allows us to reconsider these extremist stances. Overall, these five very different women all challenge society’s traditional answers to Zumas’ question, “What is a woman for?” Ro’s intention on single motherhood, Gin’s sexuality and single livelihood, Mattie’s abortion, Eivør’s taking on a man’s role, and Susan’s emotions and desires all deal with motherhood yet make a similar statement: being a mother isn’t the only role for a woman. Illustration by Brooke Smart.
http://www.brooke-smart.com |