Psychoanalysis, Feminism and Shakespeare...Final Comments on Critical Theory and the Academy

As a former liberal humanist--swiftly converted to a struggling novice literary theorist through the rigors of critical theory and the academy, I became particularly charmed with the world of psychoanalysis and feminism and how these theories can be applied to examine a text. However, once I had selected my text on which to write my critical essay, I was immediately startled by the connections between psychoanalysis and feminism and was even taken by surprise realizing that my use of feminist theory and a bit of New Historicism arose sort of spontaneously out of research and analysis. All of a sudden I was taken back by how both of these theories can be applied to a text and how they specifically relate to the culture in which the text was written. So many fascinating ideas and thoughts began running through my mind, my only regret being that even the time allotted for me to write the essay did not allow enough preparation for me to fully get all of my ideas down on paper. As Helena would I would both remark, "Tis partly my own fault"...anyway...
First of all, what interested me most about this class was specifically the relationship between literary theory and the political and ideological turmoil of the 20th century, or any time period for that matter. The way in which ideology is experienced by our culture and how it is tied up in very intimately personal ways was fascinating to me and was first was introduced during our discussion of Marxism...which was an area of interest to me when psychoanalysis was introduced. This ideological and political aspect tied up in culture can also be applied to human relationships and the human personality, as well as the social order. The motives of human society are what intrigued me and was what I wanted to focus on for my critical essay. For the text I chose A Midsummer Night's Dream (because I happen to love the play) and first focused myself on interpreting sexuality and social order through the representation of the two leading female characters (Hermia and Helena). I referred Freud and discussed how every human being undergoes a repression of the 'pleasure principle' by the 'reality principle' and how this repression affects whole societies, particularly the patriarchal hierarchy. From there I discussed how women are often associated with animal imagery and are in many ways tamed through the process of establishing harmony and unity...at the end of the play the patriarchy is not overthrown, the fearful element of oppression is taken out of the equation, and the joyous turn of events seems only temporary...through my progression in writing this paper I also discussed how Athens is a male-oriented oedipalized world and how Hermia has a terrible dream which signifies several things about the social order as well as her inner emotions and motivations...All of a sudden I was finding connections between psychoanalysis and feminism and I did not even realize it! The fact that I can discuss both of these theories in my paper and think critically about them points to how much I have learned in this class and how I can relate these theories to one another, even fusing them together to examine this play and Renaissance culture--which I want to say a few words about now. It seemed to me that Shakespeare's female characters undergo constant suffering in terms of being restrained and tamed in order to fit within the patriarchal structure...and seemed as though passivity and dependency on others are played out as traditional roles for women of the time period and fits into the accepted norms concerning romantic passion and desire...the women even justify cruelty of men by lowering themselves to men--reflecting a typical psychology of love during the Renaissance, in which a man was to woo a woman and the woman was to maintain a timid role...leading to the destruction of the female self. After writing about this in my paper I later realized that I was making use of a tiny bit of New Historicism in that I was focused on patriarchal structures and their perpetuation! All of these thoughts and ideas seemed so exciting and fascinating for me to think and write about...I only wish I could spend more time developing these thoughts and further combining these theories and seeing where I end up...
Just to wrap up a bit at the end of this post, I would like to thank a few people for helping me get through this difficult experience. I will definitely admit that I was close to tears leaving this class several occasions, seemingly having had all of what I had previously known about literature, authorship, etc. completely turned upside down. I also have to thank Terry Eagleton for writing The Significance of Theory and Literary Theory An Introduction because throughout the course I read through these books and they greatly helped me sort through my confusion. *Also, the participation of others in the discussions of the class greatly helped me understand the topics and helped inspire me to muster the courage to participate in class, even though I still felt confused at times. Thank you!!

Spivak, Salman Rushdie, and Postcolonialism

I have been interested in the theory of postcolonialism for a while, yet I don't think I really was fully aware of this, considering I am a novice concerning the whole literary theory realm. A favorite writer of mine and a person that has perpetually interested me is Salman Rushdie. Having been born in Pakistan and having been educated in England, he represents a sort of hybridization of different cultures. He views himself as a sort of uprooted person of various intermingling cultures that celebrates his impurity and various transformations. His intensely involved and highly controversial novel, The Satanic Verses definitely reflects his celebration of intermingling and the transformation that comes of new and unexpected combinations of human beings, cultures, ideas, politics, etc. It also fears what the Postcolonial critic, (such as Spivak for example would have something to say about), which is the sense of 'absolutism' and purity concerning race that postcolonial critics are seeking to dismantle concerning the Western canon of literature. Rushdie also has many interesting thoughts one being that "newness" only enters the world through intermingling, and that the "hotchpotch" of society must be embraced. The postcolonial critic would definitely argue vociferously that those who oppose the inclusion of literary works of other cultures as part of the human condition are contributing to the loss and weakening of their own cultures. I agree with Rushdie that we all have emigrated, and that there is no absolute universal origin that can be imposed upon literature. The idea that change is caused by fusion and conjoining is so fascinating to me as well as the 'cultural polyvalency' that postcolonial critics attempt to develop and examine...

Breaking News!

Drop what you're doing and pay close attention, because one of Hollywood's hottest young starlets is now reportedly romancing 30 yr. old Ryan Reynolds...This past Easter weekend Scarlett Johansson was spotted wining and dining the hunk at all of the trendiest Hollywood hot spots appearing to get very cozy and looking very lovey dovey...Photos have been splashed all over entertainment programs and the internet, causing the inevitable media frenzy...(read more at the bosh.com for all your entertainment and gossip news needs)
I have one question concerning the coverage and attention directed towards this "juicy" story...What would Cixous or any other feminist critic have to say about our sick obsession with young Hollywood actresses and their romantic interests? It seems as though paparazzi stalk these young women at every turn, capturing every move, bad hair day, or miss-matched outfit. However, before I get to Cixous I will speak to how this story would be viewed from the feminist perspective...First of all, a feminist would point out that the focus of our society is extremely skewed. Our media coverage is not aimed at highlighting the achievements of women in the arts, athletics, or any other fields, rather it is focused on their appearance, romantic interests, and dating lives. Women in the media are glorified and presented as hot, sexy bombshells and that's about it...they are presented with as much depth as a shallow puddle. Cixous points out that subordination of the feminine to the masculine order is basically the condition for the functioning of our social machine. Cixous would probably note that the media portrays women in this fashion because in a way, it enables men to control and have power over women. By continually depicting women as sexual objects, women become nothing more than that...and the media reinforces this so heavily that these women become overexposed, half-crazy beings at a loss for all dignity (think bald headed Britney Spears bashing an SUV with an umbrella). Cixous points out that ideological apparatus is extremely effective in reinforcing the power of masculine domination. She also points out that phallocentrism is the enemy of everyone, and that it is time to invent the other history. We invent the condition in which there is only one dominant sex through the abasement of women. By focusing on the appearance and sexuality of women, they become passive and this further reinforces the hierarchy...

I loved Ken Rufo's virtual lecture on Jean Baudrillard. Even though I was intimidated by its length for a moment, once I began reading I found it to be challenging, but worded in such a way that it really helped me to understand the different concepts he was referring to. The examples he gave were great and I actually felt confident after reading it. The concepts of Baudrillard's that Rufo referred to helped me to link different theories we have studied in class by finding some similarities between them. Rufo explained how for Marx the commodity is structured very much like the sign, and how money equates to a pure value of exchange, Baudrillard also suggests that Sausure's semiotics and Marx's critique of capital are very similar. This reminded me of when we were studying Saussure and structuralism in class and Marie stated how money, like the seasons of the year, are a representation and help create a model of a system. Rufo explains that Marxism is just another model and such a simulation ends up inadvertently feeding the idea of production that Marx fought so vigorously against. (I really wonder what Marx would have said in response to a statement like this!) Rufo explains that Baudrillard argues that Marx got it backwards! He also argues that psychoanalysis did not discover the unconscious, but really makes use of it as an expository device...All of these grand statements seemed very bold and gave me the impression that Baudrillard is very interested in teasing out different possibilities and rethinking theories. At the end of the post Rufo listed some interesting things about Baudrillard, one being that he was a professional photographer. I found this very interesting because photographers look for ways to capture reality, their photographs are simulations and reproductions of real people, places, and things. Baudrillard wrote extensively about the pervasiveness of simulations, which made me wonder a bit about his thoughts on photography and film, considering Derrida's vigorous reaction against the capturing and distribution of one's image...