Love Poems?

The poetry of Anne Sexton is considered by some to be love poetry. I'm not quite sure how I feel about labeling the poems as love poems. While themes of love are prevalent in her work, the fairy tale endings of romantic love poetry just are not present. The author's individual experiences are certainly pointedly included in the work. 

In Sexton's work, it seems as if the author is connecting her poetry to her own life experience. Sexton's poem "Briar Rose" especially stood out to me. It seems that the princess got her prince in the end, but the experience and the end result were not what she was expecting. The insomnia experienced by the princess can be explained by many things, but her father may be the primary reason. She says, "It's not the prince at all, but my father; drunkenly bent over my bed, circling the abyss like a shark, my father thick upon me; like some sleeping jellyfish." (Sexton 112) As an author with a history of sexual abuse, this part of her version of the tale of sleeping beauty makes sense. While the princess in "Briar Rose" may wake up and get her prince like the princess in "Sleeping Beauty," this princess certainly does not emerge from her experiences undamaged.

I also really connected with Sexton's poem about Rumpelstiltskin. The fairy tale was always one of my favorites growing up. I really enjoy seeing fairy tales from my childhood told from different perspectives. Instead of seeing Rumpelstiltskin as an actual small man, she sees him as a doppelganger. This hidden part of an individual can often be the dark side of someone. In her introduction to the poem, Sexton writes:


"I am your dwarf.
I am the enemy within.
I am the boss of your dreams.
No. I am not the law in your mind,
the grandfather of watchfulness.
I am the law of your members,
the kindred of blackness and impulse.
See. Your hand shakes.
It is not palsy or booze.
It is your Doppelganger
trying to get out.
Beware . . . Beware . . ."

We all must be afraid of the dark side of us coming out to play. Part of growing up is learning how to manage this darker side.

Telling the fairy tale from a different perspective enables Sexton to show this darker side of the story. Fractured fairy tales in general give a new perspective to the traditional fairy tale. Emma Donoghue is another writer who gives a unique perspective to old fairy tales. Her book Kissing The Witch takes the original fairy tales, focuses them on a random object from the story, and then tells the story from the perspective of usually the typical "villain." 


These different perspectives also give a different side of the usual love story. The princess may get her princess, but is she always happy? Not necessarily. She may be truly damaged by her experience. Or she could not be the real princess at all, but a talented imposter.


Let's learn more princess lessons from The Second City Network:

These two princesses have even more life lessons for young girls.

Gender Roles in Stephen King's The Shining

Stephen King's The Shining provides an interesting study of gender roles. The husband and wife, Jack and Wendy, each exhibit different problems with their own gender. Jack fails at being a traditional man, while Wendy shows us both a weak and strong woman. Danny's unique gift makes him an interesting character to look at as well.

Jack Torrance is a failed writer and schoolteacher. His alcoholism creates situations in which he ultimately will always fail. He has published works in the past, but since he began drinking heavily has failed to finish anything. His writer's block is keeping anything from being produced. His alcohol abuse led to him physically injuring a student, which ultimate led to his termination from the teaching position at a prep school. He failed at teaching students, as the student he injured was angry at him for the way he handled a school situation.

Jack also fails as a provider and a father. When he loses his job, Jack loses his way to provide for his family. Because he loses the teaching job, he is forced to move his family from their comfortable home and eventually into the hotel. Early in the story it is revealed that Jack has broken Danny's arm in the past. This abuse of his son occurs while under the influence, but alcohol is no excuse for injuring a child. Both of these failures, as well as his failures as schoolteacher reflect poorly on Jack as a man. His failures make him feel the need to constantly prove his manhood.

Wendy Torrance begins the story as a complex character. While she does not have the strength to leave her abusive husband, she stays as a way to protect her son. Her strength begins to show when she is actually in the hotel. She manages to knock Jack out and drag him into the freezer, locking him in. However, when she is being attacked, she hides behind the door and screams her lungs off, not actually using the knife she is holding. Not quite effective. Wendy, while having her weak moments, overall is a strong character, determined to get her and her son out of the hotel alive.

Danny's "shine" makes him extremely difficult for the hotel to manipulate. His special talents made him mature faster than most children his age. He loses his innocence too early for a normal child. His "shine" also makes it hard for him to interact with children his own age. He ends up spending a lot of time with his mother, especially after the move to Colorado.

All of the main characters in Stephen King's The Shining are gender messes. They aren't quite sure where they fit into their gender role or whether they should even subscribe to their assigned gender role. Wendy floats between being a strong mother and a weak woman. Jack fails entirely at being a "man" and gives himself over to alcoholism and the influence of the hotel.

And now I end with this:

All you need to know about The Shining in 30 seconds. With bunnies.

Poe's The Black Cat

Questions of morality, sanity and remorse echo throughout all of Edgar Allan Poe's work. The narrator in "The Tell-Tale Heart" and the narrator in "The Black Cat" demonstrate this struggle with morality and sanity.

How do we even know if we are sane? Are we sane if we aren't on any medication? In this day and age, maybe that is the key: being the only one not medicated to the gills. Or are we sane if we can acknowledge our own insane moments? Some say that the insane are the ones who always think they are truly sane. Sanity is a hard thing to get a concrete definition on. Every human has had moments of insanity, from being absolutely enraged and losing their mind to split second thoughts that cross the line. But who decides that line?

In the case of the narrator from "The Tell-Tale Heart," he truly thinks he is sane. He notes multiple times the care he takes when planning to kill the old man: "True! --nervous --very, very dreadfully nervous I had been and am; but why will you say that I am mad? The disease had sharpened my senses --not destroyed --not dulled them. Above all was the sense of hearing acute. I heard all things in the heaven and in the earth. I heard many things in hell. How, then, am I mad? Hearken! and observe how healthily --how calmly I can tell you the whole story." He insists on his sanity, and that while the disease did sharpen all of his senses, it did not make him insane. 

His main evidence that he is not sane is his planning and his calm attitude after the fact. Yes. The narrator does plan extensively for the moment when he will rid himself of the man's evil eye: "Now this is the point. You fancy me mad. Madmen know nothing. But you should have seen me. You should have seen how wisely I proceeded --with what caution --with what foresight --with what dissimulation I went to work! I was never kinder to the old man than during the whole week before I killed him." He continues to claim that he is not mad, and that his planning proves it. A madman would simply run in and commit the act, probably in a fit of rage. 

And yet, in the end, that is how the old man died. The narrator is in the room, with the lamp on the evil vulture eye, when he hears the old man's heart beating. The sound of this steady pounding is what drives him to the fit of rage, for "the beating grew louder, louder! I thought the heart must burst. And now a new anxiety seized me --the sound would be heard by a neighbour!" Upon this realization, he leaps into the room and kills the old man.

The narrator's second piece of evidence to his sanity is his calmness after the murder. He hides the body in what appears to be a perfect hiding place, dismembered in the floors of the room where the old man died. Yet again, it is the heart of the man who destroys his sanity. While the police are sitting in the very room where the murder took place, the narrator hears the heartbeat again. Convinced the police can hear the growing noise, he turns himself in, revealing the hiding place of the body.

The narrator of "The Black Cat" is driven mad both by the love he has for his animal and rampant alcoholism. He and the cat were close companions for years, and yet one day the cat begins to ignore him - at least the narrator thinks he is. The man's alcoholism makes him believe that the cat is now ignoring him. In a fit of drunken rage, he slices out the cat's eye, leaving just the socket. Slowly the cat heals, but the narrator can tell that their relationship will never be the same.

After the narrator cuts out the cat's eye, the cat heals, but runs in terror every time the man approaches. With enough of his old soul left, the man first grieves the loss of his friend. Then his grief gives way to irritation until the perversity of his new soul eclipses his old one. He then hangs his cat, "with the bitterest remorse at my heart; - hung it because I knew that it had loved me, and because I felt it had given me no reason of offence."

Clearly the man has no remorse for killing his cat. But is he truly himself? The alcohol in his system and his dependence on it transformed him into an entirely different person. So is he insane? Or is he someone else? The questions of insanity in both of these pieces are still relevant today. How do we know who we are or what our mental state is? What does being insane even mean?

Stories of Survival

Endurance at night.

When reading the story of the sinking of the whaleship Essex, I was instantly reminded of a story I read in middle school. Endurance: Shackleton's Incredible Voyage, a book by Alfred Lansing, tells the story of the entire expedition, from its beginnings in England to the loss of the ship. Sir Ernest Shackleton, the leader of the voyage, was an adventurer on one of his many trips to the antarctic. The race to get to the South Pole was in full swing when the Endurance cast off from England in 1914. 6 crew members navigated the Endurance to South American where they met the rest of the crew and began to prepare for the expedition to Antarctica.

The stranded Endurance.

In January of 1915, the Endurance became frozen in the pack ice surrounding the ship. The crew drifted with the pack throughout the winter, hoping that with spring, the ice would melt and the ship would be freed. Unfortunately, the pressure of the ice surrounding the ship damaged the hull significantly. On October 24, 1915, when the ice melted, water began pouring in to the ship. The crew removed all three small boats, the sled dogs, and the equipment and began to camp on the ice floes surrounding the ship. On November 21, 1915, Shackleton announced that the ship was going down, and the crew was stranded with the three small boats on a large, flat ice floe.

Moving one of the lifeboats.

After two months of camping on the floe, separated from Paulet Island by impassable pack ice, Shackleton decided to move camp to a larger floe, creating what is known as Patience Camp. The men had to use the sled dogs to drag 3 of the small boats, which was no small feat, across the ice onto the new floe. Shackleton and his men trusted the ice to flow in a direction leading them closer to a safe landing spot. Shackleton decided to risk the voyage across the ice when on April 9, 1916 their ice floe broke in half. After 5 days in the open water, they landed their small boats on Elephant Island. They had not stood on solid land in 497 days.

The crew by the Endurance.

Elephant Island was an inhospitable place. Shackleton ended up taking the strongest of the lifeboats on a dangerous journey to South Georgia. He chose 5 men to accompany him on the trip, leaving the rest of the crew behind on Elephant Island. The James Caird launched April 24, 1916, and landed on South Georgia on May 8, 1916. Shackleton and two of the men crossed South Georgia using only 50 feet of rope and a carpenter's adze, in order to reach the whaling station at Stromness. Immediately upon reaching the whaling station, he sent a ship to retrieve his men from the other side of the island and set to work trying to rescue the men on Elephant Island. Shackleton's first three attempts were blocked by the pack ice surrounding the island. Eventually he appealed to the Chilean government who loaned him the tugboat Yelcho. On August 30, 1916, the Yelcho reached Elephant Island. and all 27 men were evactuated.

The launching of the James Caird.

Shackleton

Shackleton's men endured more than most people can even imagine. The bitter cold led to frostbite. Some men on Elephant Island had toes, fingers, even feet amputated, while on the island. The sled dogs who started the expedition with the men ended up becoming food for the men throughout the journey, despite the crew becoming very attached to them. Sometimes they ended up going days without finding a new source of food. The only incoming food they had was penguins, seals, and the occasional sea leopard. The blubber of these animals was saved and used to fuel lamps as well as cook. While on Elephant Island, the men converted the two lifeboats left behind into a makeshift hut, living there for four months until they were rescued.

The crew by the hut on Elephant Island.

The crew of the Essex faced similar challenges. The lack of food and water supplies, combined with the harsh weather created a living environment that was almost unlivable: "Their physical torments had  reached a terrible crescendo.  It was almost as if they were being poisoned by the combined effects of thirst and hunger.  A glutinous and bitter saliva collected in their mouths that was "intolerable beyond expression."  Their hair falling out in clumps.  Their skin was so burned and covered with sores that a splash of seawater felt like acid burning on their flesh.  Strangest of all, as their eyes sunk into their skulls and their cheekbones projected, they all began to look alike, their identities obliterated by dehydration and starvation" (Philbrick 133).

It is not easy to imagine how any of these men survived. Was it on the part of the skill of their captains, whether it was Shackleton or Pollard and Chase? Or were they merely extremely lucky? Perhaps we will never know. In the case of Shackleton, I think his incredible skill at navigation and survival in harsh weather as well as his previous experience in the Antarctic helped the entire crew immensely. Captain Pollard and first mate Chase did not seem to be nearly as in control of such an impossible situation as Shackleton.

As a survivor of a situation with harsh odds, I find both of these survival stories fascinating. When I was seven, I was diagnosed with large cell lymphoma. My original diagnosis was Ewing's Sarcoma, a cancer that is nearly impossible to beat even with amputation, chemotherapy, and radiation. The cancer relapses frequently, making it almost impossible for the patient to get healthy. While I was in surgery getting a central line put in, lab technicians noticed the cells they were observing changing in a way that did not indicate Ewing's. I was rediagnosed with large cell lymphoma, a type of cancer only requiring a short round of chemo. I ended up on staying in the hospital for four months before my cancer was gone. Was it luck or the skill of my doctors that cured my cancer? An answer to my mom's prayers? Some combination of both perhaps. Beating the odds makes you appreciate life even more than you did before, because it can be gone in a second, whether it be cancer or a giant sperm whale that ends the journey.

An Emerson Quote for Every Occasion

Monday: To believe your own thought, to believe that what is true for you in your private heart, is true for all men, -- that is genius. Speak your latent conviction and it shall be the universal sense; for always the inmost becomes the outmost,  -- and our first thought is rendered back to us by the trumpets of the Last Judgment. Familiar as the voice of the mind is to each, the highest merit we ascribe to Moses, Plato, and Milton, is that they set at naught books and traditions, and spoke not what men wrote but what they thought. A man should learn to detect and watch that gleam of light which flashes across his mind from within, more than that lustre of the firmament of bards and sages. Yet he dismisses without notice his own thought, because it is his." (pg 80 of the packet)

Tuesday: "There is a time in every man's education when eh arrives at the conviction that envy is ignorance; that imitation is suicide; that he must take himself for better, for worse, as his portion; that though the wide universe is full of good, no kernel of nourishing corn can come to him but through his toil bestowed on that plot of ground which is given to him to till. The power which resides in him is new in nature, and none but he knows what that is which he can do, nor does he know until he has tried." (pg 80 of the packet)

Wednesday: "Whoso would be a man must be a nonconformist. He who would gather immortal palms must not be hindered by the name of goodness, but must explore if it be goodness. Nothing is at last sacret but the integrity of our own mind. Absolve you to yourself, and you shall have the suffrage of the world." (pg 81)

Thursday: "Virtues are in the popular estimate rather the exception than the rule. There is the man and his virtues. Men do what is called a good action, as some piece of courage or charity, much as they would pay a fine in expiation of daily non-appearance on parade. Their works are done as an apology or extenuation of their living in the world, -- as invalids and the insane pay a high board. Their virtues are penances. I do not wish to expiate, but to live. My life is not an apology, but a life. It is for itself and not for a spectacle. I much prefer that it should be of a lower strain, so it be genuine and equal, than that it should be glittering and unsteady. I wish it to be sound and sweet, and not to need diet and bleeding. My life should be unique; it should be an alms, a battle, a conquest, a medicine. I ask primary evidence that you are a man, and refuse this appeal from the man to his actions. I know that for myself it makes no difference whether I do or forbear those actions which are reckoned excellent. I cannot consent to pay for a privilege where I have intrinsic right. Few and mean as my gifts may be, I actually am, and do not need for my own assurance or the assurance of my fellows for any secondary testimony." (pg 81)

Friday: "The man must be so much that he must make all circumstances indifferent, -- put all means into the shade. This all great men are and do. Every true man is a cause, a country, and an age; requires infinite spaces and numbers and time fully to accomplish his thought; -- and posterity seem to follow his steps as a procession. A man Caesar is born, and for ages after, we have a Roman Empire. Christ is born, and millions of minds so grow and cleave to his genius, that he is confounded with virtue and the possible of man. An institution is the lengthened shadow of one man; as, the Reformation, of Luther; Quakerism, of Fox; Methodism, of Wesley; Abolition, of Clarkson. Scipio, Milton called 'the height of Rome;' and all history resolves itself very easily into the biography of a few stout and earnest persons." (pg 83)

Saturday: "Man is timid and apologetic. He is no longer upright. He dares not say 'I think,' 'I am,' but quotes some saint or sage. He is ashamed before the blade of grass or the blowing rose. These roses under my window make no reference to former roses or to better ones; they are for what they are; they exist with God to-day. There is no time to them. There is simply the rose; it is perfect in every moment of its existence. Before a leaf-bud has burst, its whole life acts; in the full-blown flower, there is no more; in the leafless root, there is no less. Its nature is satisfied, and it satisfies nature, in all moments alike. There is no time to it. But man postpones or remembers; he does not live in the present, but with reverted eye laments the past, or, heedless of the riches that surround him, stands on tiptoe to foresee the future. He cannot be happy and strong until he too lives with nature in the present, above time." (pg 84)

Sunday: "Insist on yourself; never imitate. Your own gift you can present every moment with the cumulative force of a whole life's cultivation; but of the adopted talent of another, you only have an extemporaneous, half possession. That which each can do best, none but his Maker can teach him. No man yet knows what it is, nor can, till that person has exhibited it. Where is the master who could have taught Shakspeare? Where is the master who could have instructed Franklin, or Washington, or Bacon, or Newton. Every great man is an unique. The Scipionism of Scipio is prescisely that part he could not borrow. If any body will tell me whom the great man imitates in the original crisis when he performs a great act, I will tell him who else than himself can teach him. Shakspeare will never be made by the study of Shakspeare. Do that which is assigned thee, and thou canst not hope too much or dare too much. There is at this moment, there is for me an utterance bare and grand as that of the colossal chisel of Phidias, or trowel of the Egyptians, of the pen of Moses, or Dante, but different from all these. Now possibly will the soul all rich, all eloquent, with thousand-cloven tongue, deign to repeat itself; but if I can hear what these patriarchs say, surely I can reply to them in the same pitch of voice; for the ear and the tongue are two organs of one nature. Dwell up there in the simple and noble regions of thy life, obey thy heart, and thou shalt reproduce the Foreworld again." (pg 87)

The Conquest Narrative

The story of Cortes and the conquest of the New World has been retold in literature, as well as in popular film. Bernal Diaz Del Castillo's "The True History of the Conquest of New Spain" tells the story of Cortes, the Spanish Captain General, and his determination to capture the new world for himself. The DreamWorks movie "The Road to El Dorado" tells the story of Miguel and Tulio, two stowaways on ships making their way to the new world under the control of Cortes. While the stories differ in many ways, they also show similarities.

In both versions of the story, the Aztecs and the conquistadors are equally fascinated with each other. Diaz mentions resemblance between the Cortes and the Aztec leader, stating, "On account of this resemblance we in the camp called them 'our Cortes' and 'the other Cortes'" (Diaz 43). Later in his telling of the conquest, he describes the conquistadors entrance into the city of mexico: "Wide as though [the road] was, it was so crowded with people that there was hardly room for them all. Some were going to Mexico and others coming away, besides those who had come out to see us, and we could hardly get through the crowds that were there. For the towers and the cues were full, and they came in canoes from all parts of the lake. No wonder since they had never seen horses or men lie us before! With such wonderful sights to gaze on we did not know what to say, or if this was real that we saw before our eyes.  On the land side, there were great cities, and on the lake many more" (Diaz 45). The conquistadors found themselves fascinated with the Aztec culture, even though they were determined to claim the land for their own.

The Aztec people thought that Cortes was an Aztec god returning to earth (Ashworth). Upon accidentally discovering the city of gold, Miguel and Tulio, the main characters of "The Road to El Dorado" realize that the inhabitants of the city think that they are gods returning to earth. Whether or not Cortes knew of the natives thoughts, I do not know. Miguel and Tulio used the knowledge to their advantage, gaining wealth, power, and respect.

In both versions of the story, the greed for gold and personal gain motivate the conquistadors to adventure to the new world. They also desired to claim the new land for their own. The new world was seen as virgin territory, needing to be claimed by man and tamed. This need to conquer virgin land and territory often translated into sexual terms. The Spanish often discussed the new world in female terms. In political cartoons and other illustrations, the new world was illustrated as a naked native woman, ready to be taken by the conquistadors.

Even in the children's film version of the story, the native woman character Chel is portrayed as a highly sexual woman, using her feminine wiles to coerce Miguel and Tulio into taking her with them back to Spain. She uses her body and her femininity to her advantage, even seducing one of the men, who falls in love with her.

Throughout history, the conquest of land has been connected to the conquest of the body. Both gain power for the conquerer. Both minimize the importance and intelligence of the thing that has been conquered. The new world was seen as savage, wild, untamed, and needing to be claimed by a man, just like a virgin native woman.

Let's Blow This Out of Proportion a Little More, Shall We?

The main quote that struck me from my notes on our discussion on Cotton Mather's On Witchcraft is "anything that we didn't have a scientific explanation for, we blow it out of proportion entirely" (Class Notes 1/5). This has been the reason for the development of all religious thought in human history. Anything that there is no earthly explanation for according to the knowledge of the time, must be explained by supernatural or godly forces. All unexplainable things need a reason. Fear of the unknown motivates the intelligent in the society to create explanations for the things they, and others around them, fear.

Unexplainable positive things in life are attributed to God or a god, while negative things in life are explained by the devil or by a vindictive god. Humanity has problem taking credit or taking the blame for things that happen in life. While the belief that God has a hand in every part of daily life, this belief also provides an excuse not to take responsibility for one's actions and the results of actions. 


I thank Jacqlyn for giving me the idea of thinking of Tudor England. The "sweating sickness" was a violent fever that spread quickly throughout England in the warm weather months. The illness was similar to the plague, malaria, and scarlet fever. No one at the time knew the cause of the illness, why certain people did not contract it, or how to treat or prevent the disease. King Henry VIII, a king unsteady on his throne and without a male heir to leave the kingdom to, was terrified of dying early. He frantically tries any pill, elixer, or potion promised to keep the sickness away from him. He took to running from any city, after being told that the sickness manifested in the slums. Henry even left his lover, Anne Boleyn, after she became ill. While she fought off the illness at the family castle of Hever, he ran far away into the country with Catherine of Aragon, his legal wife and their daughter Mary. This absolute terror at the unknown was fueled by the deadly precision of the disease and Henry's fear of dying with no heir to the throne.

While in Henry VIII's time, disease was unknown and therefore terrifying, medical science today has come a long way, making it easier for us as humans to understand why disease happens and how to prevent it. Now other things are unknown and terrifying. Homosexuality is a hot button issue in today's society, one that particularly affects my life. One of the main arguments from anti-gay people is that gay people either choose to be gay, or are recruiting others to be gay. Instead of being an illness like the sweating sickness, the "gay" is the new unknown disease to be afraid of. Clearly because gay relationships are not able to reproduce, they aren't natural.

In my time being out as a lesbian, I've heard some of the most ridiculous things being cited as causes for homosexuality. From molestation as a child or rape as an adult to watching the cartoon Spongebob Squarepants, anti-gay media will use anything as the scapegoat for why people are gay. The television show Spongebob was almost taken off the air, because Spongebob holds hand with his male best friend Patrick, blows bubbles, and skips while attempting to catch jellyfish, the undersea version of butterflies. Why is it not ok that Spongebob does these things? And how on earth could watching a cartoon sponge skip make a child experience attractions to members of the same sex? It just doesn't make any sense to me. I don't think that any human being would choose to be gay if they had the option. I didn't wake up one day in seventh grade and decide "Hmm.. I think I'm going to like girls. Yeah, that sounds like a great idea. I really want my classmates to pick on me, refuse to talk to me, and bully me. Sounds like a blast!" No. It just doesn't work that way.


If it did, I think it would look something like this:

There might be some Lady Gaga lightning bolts in there as well. Gotta update for the new generation, don't ya know.

Oh and we also all get toasters if we convert someone. It goes up to a blender when we get to three converted!