Well, we were asked to annotate pages 18-26 of The Bloody Chamber for our homework and after having done this write a blog post on something that caught our interest in the aforementioned passage. Really there were two things that caught my interest the most so here they are:
The imagery of the of the corridor leading towards the torture chamber is really interesting as the passage foreshadows to the reader what the narrator might expect to find in her husband's locked "den". The "Venetian, tapestries" depict images of violence with, "naked swords" and "immolated horses" which the narrator recognizes as "the Rape of the Sabines". The combination and association of violence and sexuality is certainly one that can be recognized in the narrator's husbands sexual tastes, with rape potentially being a climax in sexual ambition for him. The fact that the narrator recognizes the tapestry suggests that she is not quite so naive as the reader (and perhaps even herself) has been lead to believe up untill this point. The purpose behind the tapestries is interesting too as it is to hide what the very tapestries themselves show. The narrator describes how the "heavy hangings on the wall muffled my footsteps" and the floor is "thickly carpeted". When I initially read The Bloody Chamber (not knowing there was going to be a torture chamber) this sent alarm bells ringing in my head as I recognized that the tapestries and the carpet serve to soundproof the corridor. The screams of the Marquis' victims would be audible were it not for the tapestries and carpets so their function ironically covers up in real life what it depicts in a corrupt fantasy. Pleasant stuff.
On a slightly more light hearted note- I think that the servants are definitely in on the whole torture chamber thing. They at least suspect if not know what the Marquis does to his wives. Evidence in the such as, "How careless I was; a maid, tending the logs, eyed me reproachfully as if I'd set a trap for her as I picked up the clinking bundle of keys" and "I knew by her bereft intonation that I had let them down again" certainly suggest that the servants are aware of the horrors that the keys connote. I think that the servants probably are the mechanism that the Marquis uses to spy on his wife and who keep him informed so that he can arrive back at the perfect time. One could argue that the "reproachful" look of the maid servant actually shows pity for the narrator in her naivety, yet also duty to inform the master which could be the "trap".
Just some ramblings, that's all till next lesson folks...
Monday 27 February 2012
Wednesday 15 February 2012
Mulvey's Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema
Well, I've just been trying to read up on this topic, and I must confess, it is quite difficult. I initially started at Mulvey's article itself. Big mistake. Then through a synthesis of wikipedia and someone else's blog I think I understand the basics of the theory. It is very strange though.
Essentially the premises of Mulvey's argument are as follows ( I think):
P1: The woman represents the male other as she has no phallus.
P2: The lack of phallus stirs up anxiety about castration in men when they see women.
P3. HOWEVER men do get sexually aroused when they see a woman (little paradox here)
P4: Mainstream Hollywood allows the audience the opportunity to partake in vouyerism via the male lead thus OBJECTIFYING WOMEN (V.BAD)
There are 3 perspectives from which the female lead can be objectifyed:
1) The male lead's reaction to the female lead
2) The audience towards the female lead
3)The male audience relating to the male lead, allowing the female lead to become the male audience attendee's own sex object.
In all this it is important to remember that the woman is the bearer of meaning and not the maker, although this is where tha paradox of phallocentricism kicks in as the meaning of the phallus is dependent on the existence of females. Males would not see and assert their superiority if there were no women as they would not see the lack of phallus as a weakness as it would not be an option.
'Tis all very strange, and as I'm sure you can tell by the lack of coherency in this blog I don't understand the theory fully. It does all rest on Freud's psychoanalysis as a backdrop which as we all know is a little strange to say the least. However, I do agree that far too often the only point of the female leads is their beauty (shown through the ridiculous number of female leads in Hollywood) and thus the point of their role is merely soft pornography for the male audience members.
This could be adressed 3 ways:
1) Banning men from the movies (just silly)
2) More 'character' female leads i.e. hiring women that can act and don't just have beautiful legs
3) Continue doing what Hollywood is doing at the moment and hire more beautiful men, Mulvey doesn't explore female objectification of men in her essay and as long as the objectification is equal I don't have quite the problem with it.
Anyhow just some thoughts on a very strange homework task. Hope everyone's having a nice half-term :)
Essentially the premises of Mulvey's argument are as follows ( I think):
P1: The woman represents the male other as she has no phallus.
P2: The lack of phallus stirs up anxiety about castration in men when they see women.
P3. HOWEVER men do get sexually aroused when they see a woman (little paradox here)
P4: Mainstream Hollywood allows the audience the opportunity to partake in vouyerism via the male lead thus OBJECTIFYING WOMEN (V.BAD)
There are 3 perspectives from which the female lead can be objectifyed:
1) The male lead's reaction to the female lead
2) The audience towards the female lead
3)The male audience relating to the male lead, allowing the female lead to become the male audience attendee's own sex object.
In all this it is important to remember that the woman is the bearer of meaning and not the maker, although this is where tha paradox of phallocentricism kicks in as the meaning of the phallus is dependent on the existence of females. Males would not see and assert their superiority if there were no women as they would not see the lack of phallus as a weakness as it would not be an option.
'Tis all very strange, and as I'm sure you can tell by the lack of coherency in this blog I don't understand the theory fully. It does all rest on Freud's psychoanalysis as a backdrop which as we all know is a little strange to say the least. However, I do agree that far too often the only point of the female leads is their beauty (shown through the ridiculous number of female leads in Hollywood) and thus the point of their role is merely soft pornography for the male audience members.
This could be adressed 3 ways:
1) Banning men from the movies (just silly)
2) More 'character' female leads i.e. hiring women that can act and don't just have beautiful legs
3) Continue doing what Hollywood is doing at the moment and hire more beautiful men, Mulvey doesn't explore female objectification of men in her essay and as long as the objectification is equal I don't have quite the problem with it.
Anyhow just some thoughts on a very strange homework task. Hope everyone's having a nice half-term :)
Wednesday 8 February 2012
Blue Beard in 314 words exactamondo!
The ugly aristocrat ‘Bluebeard’ wants a wife. All of the girls in the area know that all his other wives have disappeared and are scared (but lets face it the blue beard wasn’t a turn on either). He asks to marry one of his neighbour’s two daughters which is apparently ok with their Dad. Eventually, one cracks goes to the palace is wooed by a banquet and stupidly says, “Yes” to marriage. Silly girl. Then they get married and she has a happy life in his Chateau… Jokes.
Bluebeard goes away for a few days and gives his latest prey the keys to his castle, telling her to have fun. He also gives her another key and tells her it opens a mysterious room in the cellar that she must open. The wife enjoys his absence and even throws a few house parties, cheeky thing. HOWEVER, she really wants to know what’s in the room and ignores her sensible sister’s advice to stay away and goes down into the cellar. In the cellar she discovers that curiosity didn’t kill the cat but the other wives!!! In her horror she drops the key in the blood that covers the floor and can’t wash the blood off!
Anyhow, she decides to run away with her sis the next morning but Bluebeard returns unexpectedly (should have just left when she saw the bodies). Bluebeard sees that she knows his secret and is about to behead her when she persuades him to give her 15 minutes to say her prayers. The wife runs up to the highest turret in the tower and locks herself in with her sis. Bluebeard, going crazy with his sword, is about to break down the door, but the girls have managed to call their two brothers (with what? A mobile?). The brave boys kill Bluebeard. The wife inherits and they have a party.
Sunday 5 February 2012
Second Wave of Feminism
Sooooo, as some of you might know/ have a tiny weeny little incling, I am a feminist. So when Mr Francis said look second wave of feminism I was like 'Wooooooo' 'Yeahhhhh' (well a little bit more excited and less sarcastic then that looks in print). Angela Carter is a feminist and The Bloody Chamber is basically setting Fairytales in a Matriarchy in essensce. Role reversal. 'How would you like it?' fashion. And this is a good thing, let us not forget that even though the publication of The Bloody Chamber may have come in 1979, towards the end of the big second wave of feminism, 33 years later we still live in a patriarchy. Great.
This post could just turn into me having a big moan, but we've been told to look for images of the second wave of feminism so I've been racking my brains to see what I can come up with...
 |
| The Society for Cutting Up Men |
 |
| Andy Warhol after being shot by Valerie Solanas |
 |
| I'm not personally a fan but... |
 |
| Equal Pay Campaign! |
Changelings
Well, seeing as we have been asked to blog on an aspect of fairytales that interests us, I've decided to blog about Changelings as they combine two key things in fairy tales- fairies and children.
Fairytales are meant to convey moral messages to their readerships. They are essentially a collection of folklore tales amalgamated from a variety of different sources across Europe. A lot of the now famous tales were very dark when they were composed as they were told mainly to adults, not children. It was only in the Victorian era that fairytales were deemed to be more appropriate for a child audience and their content was tuned down. Interestingly, the sexual nature of fairy tales was reduced, an example of this is in Rapunzel when the witch notices the Prince's visits because Rapunzel's clothes have become tighter (she's pregnant!!) not because Rapunzel remarks that the witch weighs more than the witch.
I think that we now teach fairytales to a child audience, albeit usually via the media of Disney, because in the 21st Century adults cannot suspend their disbelief to the same extent that a child who believes in fairies can. It also provides a great medium for conveying morals to children, learning through storytelling. However, going back in time many people were very superstitious. Back in medieval times it would not be uncommon for people to believe in witches, fairies or ogres- partially because of the lack of travel that people did, they never fully explored their worlds.
How does this all lead me on to Changelings? Well children are a recurrent theme in fairytales, they often play the lead roles and a lot of the strife that occurs in the stories results from children leaving home. Back in t'olden days people would try and explain the disapperances of children as being the work of the fairies. In some circumstances the fairies would take the children without replacing them, this might be used to explain a child disappearance. In other circumstances, the fairies would switch the children with fairy children- hence changelings. Changelings helped to explain things that medical science at the time couldn't, many parents who had children with disabilities both physical and mental believed that their original child had been switched. Unfortunately, the rejection that is also associated with changelings would mean that some parents wouldn't acknowledge the child and would leave it outside untill it died. :(. I'm not sure whether the concept of changelings is derived from people hearing fairytales or vice versa but either way it is a sad, albeit mystical explanation for the feeling of or actually losing a child. Examples in literature of changelings are huge, one famous example is that when Titannia and Oberon are fighting over a human child (which Titannia has presumably switched) in A Midsummer Night's Dream.
I also mentioned that my dad often played a song about fairies taking children last lesson. I knew it was a poem put to music but couldn't remember who wrote the poem, what it was called and who put it to music. The poem/ song is called "The Stolen Child" and was written by W.B. Yeats in 1889 (ok- famous poet, should have known him really). It is based on Irish legend and folklore. The poem was put to music by The Waterboys and here is the video below, enjoy!
Fairytales are meant to convey moral messages to their readerships. They are essentially a collection of folklore tales amalgamated from a variety of different sources across Europe. A lot of the now famous tales were very dark when they were composed as they were told mainly to adults, not children. It was only in the Victorian era that fairytales were deemed to be more appropriate for a child audience and their content was tuned down. Interestingly, the sexual nature of fairy tales was reduced, an example of this is in Rapunzel when the witch notices the Prince's visits because Rapunzel's clothes have become tighter (she's pregnant!!) not because Rapunzel remarks that the witch weighs more than the witch.
I think that we now teach fairytales to a child audience, albeit usually via the media of Disney, because in the 21st Century adults cannot suspend their disbelief to the same extent that a child who believes in fairies can. It also provides a great medium for conveying morals to children, learning through storytelling. However, going back in time many people were very superstitious. Back in medieval times it would not be uncommon for people to believe in witches, fairies or ogres- partially because of the lack of travel that people did, they never fully explored their worlds.
How does this all lead me on to Changelings? Well children are a recurrent theme in fairytales, they often play the lead roles and a lot of the strife that occurs in the stories results from children leaving home. Back in t'olden days people would try and explain the disapperances of children as being the work of the fairies. In some circumstances the fairies would take the children without replacing them, this might be used to explain a child disappearance. In other circumstances, the fairies would switch the children with fairy children- hence changelings. Changelings helped to explain things that medical science at the time couldn't, many parents who had children with disabilities both physical and mental believed that their original child had been switched. Unfortunately, the rejection that is also associated with changelings would mean that some parents wouldn't acknowledge the child and would leave it outside untill it died. :(. I'm not sure whether the concept of changelings is derived from people hearing fairytales or vice versa but either way it is a sad, albeit mystical explanation for the feeling of or actually losing a child. Examples in literature of changelings are huge, one famous example is that when Titannia and Oberon are fighting over a human child (which Titannia has presumably switched) in A Midsummer Night's Dream.
I also mentioned that my dad often played a song about fairies taking children last lesson. I knew it was a poem put to music but couldn't remember who wrote the poem, what it was called and who put it to music. The poem/ song is called "The Stolen Child" and was written by W.B. Yeats in 1889 (ok- famous poet, should have known him really). It is based on Irish legend and folklore. The poem was put to music by The Waterboys and here is the video below, enjoy!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)