Merrick as the “Abject” Other in “The Elephant Man”

Theorist Julia Kristeva has argued her notion of the “abject” as the sense of revulsion that we experience upon encountering something that is at once repulsive, but is also an inescapable part of ourselves as human beings. This repulsive “object” can be anything from bodily fluids to a dead body to the concept of evil, or “deviant,” human behavior. In David Lynch’s 1980 film, “The Elephant Man,” the character of John Merrick is posited as this abject other. Merrick’s extreme physical deformities make him seem “not human,” yet his one perfectly formed arm and his unaffected genitals clearly establish him as a man. Merrick is “abjected” in that other characters in the movie are repulsed by the fact that Merrick is undeniably human, along with the fact that the undetermined source of his deformity is something that could affect any newborn child.
Upscale society’s “acceptance” of Merrick is proven to be nothing short of a farce in that they present him with gifts such as a vanity kit, when it is his very appearance that excludes him from society altogether. A key difference between Bernard Pomerance’s play, “The Elephant Man,” and Lynch’s film is the scene where Mrs. Kendal disrobes for Merrick, who has no experience with women. Of course, Dr. Treves steps into the room and is appalled by Mrs. Kendal’s gesture. This is a telling moment in the narrative because, while Treves seems to sympathize with Merrick, he clearly does not see Merrick as a man. Instead, Treves is shocked, both by Mrs. Kendal’s “unladylike” behavior and by the fact that Merrick has been viewed by a woman as a potentially sexual being. In Pomerance’s play it is clear that Mrs. Kendal is the only character who sees beyond physical “illusions” and perceives Merrick as a man. For Treves, Ross, and the remainder of society, Merrick cannot transcend his abject state. In both the play and the film, Merrick’s realization of this failure on society’s part to accept him as human, coupled with his rapidly declining health, results in his final act of self-assertion: suicide.

“A Clockwork Orange” and Foucault’s Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison

Some compelling parallels can be drawn between the infamous “aversion therapy” scene in Stanley Kubrick’s “A Clockwork Orange” and Michel Foucault’s highly influential book, Discipline and Punish. Foucault discusses the fact that, prior to our modern-day prison system, public torture and execution was the prevailing form of punishment for criminals. Foucault goes on to say that an unintended consequence of this form of punishment revealed itself in the fact that crowds would inadvertently “identify” with the tortured individual and that mobs would break out in protest against the monarchy that was meting out punishment. In this sense, the tortured criminal becomes a victim, if not an outright martyr, and the monarchy is posited as an even worse criminal in the inhumanity that it shows towards its deviants.
This idea plays itself out in Kubrick’s film. While Alex is guilty of unspeakably inhumane acts, the aversion therapy that he undergoes (albeit willingly) makes him a sympathetic character. Alex volunteers to be a guinea pig, but it is clear that he gets more than he bargained for when his free will is taken from him. The medical and political audience that witnesses Alex’s torture is criminalized in that they inhumanely observe Alex’s suffering, and they are “panoptic” in the sense that their main objective is the transformation of Alex into a harmless, self-governing member of society. The idea of Alex as a sympathetic character is reinforced when one of his former victims, as well as his former gang members, beat and torture him because they know that he is unable to defend himself. In this sense, it is a triumph when Alex is restored to his “normal” raping and murdering self. One of the film’s messages is that the removal of free will is even more of a crime than rape and murder. Foucault, on the other hand, demonstrates how “real” society has chosen to remove the free will of criminals through imprisonment and a highly regimented schedule within the prison system. Through this analytical lens, “A Clockwork Orange” is a corrupted, social fantasy/nightmare where individuals like Alex are celebrated; as opposed to Foucault’s analysis, which demonstrates how our society deals with individuals like Alex in the most “humane” way they can.

Group Report: “The Elephant Man”

“The Elephant Man” group, consisting of Dylan, Catherine, Tiffany, and myself, worked very well with each other. Each of us brought great ideas to the table of knowledge and we worked together to weed out any proposals that seemed extraneous to our presentation. Dylan brought an incredible body of knowledge in regards to critical theory to our group and we benefited greatly from it. We decided early on, as a group, to compare scenes from “The Elephant Man” to another movie that was closely related ideologically (but not too closely related), and we decided on Catherine’s astute recommendation of “A Clockwork Orange.” We met as a group four times (three times before class and once at Catherine’s house) and all four of us brainstormed various critical approaches to both films and we chose key scenes from each movie that we would show to the class, allowing them to make their own connections and to establish their own critical evaluations. In our group, there was a complete absence of ego and we respected each other’s opinions and ideas completely. I would say that, in terms of my own individual contribution, my reading of the play version of “The Elephant Man,” by Bernard Pomerance, helped to shed some light upon the film adaptation. For example, in the play, Merrick’s character is much more aware and critical of the individuals who are supposedly “helping” him. This is in stark contrast to the movie, where Merrick is depicted as passive and completely trusting and grateful to his “guardians.” Our presentation was the direct result of a group effort and I feel that we were all eager to contribute and that we all found it to be a rewarding experience.

Bella Swan as “The Angel in the House”

note: the following analysis is based exclusively on the first Twilight novel. I have not yet read the rest of the series and any rebuttals to my argument are more than welcome.

In Stephenie Meyer’s wildly popular Twilight series, the female protagonist, Bella Swan, is posed as yet another “Angel in the House,” as the concept is illustrated by Sandra Gilbert and Susan Gubar. From a superficial standpoint, Bella appears to be a strong, individualistic heroine who asserts her will and tries to hold her own in the world of vampires and werewolves. However, Bella actually represents many of the traits of an “Angel in the House.” In Twilight, there is a direct correlation drawn between a vampire’s insatiable desire for blood and the human sex drive. Bella’s rejection of a human boyfriend, her desire to hide her involvement with the supernatural world from her family and friends, and her biological exclusion from the vampire world posits her as an isolated “other.” In this sense, Bella is entirely “pure.” She is untainted by the human desire for sex and the vampire’s desire for blood. With Edward, Bella is made entirely passive, contrary to whatever delusions of control or trust that she chooses to hold on to. Edward loves to watch Bella sleep (the most passive state) and he makes it clear to her that she is physically powerless against him. Even Bella’s language is deficient in the world of vampires that she inhabits, since they can communicate at speeds that she is incapable of. Bella is reliant completely upon her vampire protectors. She is also posited as virtuous in that she chooses to sacrifice her own life to save Edward, her parents, and her vampire friends when James begins to hunt her down. Even in this selfless act, however, Bella proves to be duped by James and needs Edward to save her from certain death. It is unsettling to think that Bella Swan would be a role model for anyone. The fact that some women (and some men) feel such a strong attraction to Edward Cullen seems to parallel a desire to be made completely passive and ineffectual.

Judith Butler and Shamanism is Maxine Hong Kingston’s The Woman Warrior

In Maxine Hong Kingston’s The Woman Warrior, it is relatively easy to draw a comparison between Butler’s theory of gender as performance and the female protagonist in the section of the novel entitled “White Tigers.” However, a parallel also exists in the “Shaman” section of Kingston’s novel. The story of the mother, Brave Orchid, who trains to become a doctor in China, is enhanced when viewed through the lens of shamanism. Shaman are seen as mediators between the material world and the spiritual realm, healing individuals and the community from the inside (the spirit) out (the physical being). In the “Shaman” section, Brave Orchid serves as a shaman to her community of female student doctors when she rallies them together in order to defeat the “Sitting Ghost.” As a shaman, Brave Orchid’s own encounter with the Sitting Ghost is described in terms of a physical showdown; however, when the other young women are brought in, the vanquishing of the Sitting Ghost is more of a ritual; the other women do not actually see the ghost as Brave Orchid did. In this particular example, it is interesting that this sort of spirituality is juxtaposed with the more scientific, modern study of medicine. Brave Orchid helps her community of women doctors to overcome and vanquish their superstitious fear of a monster that haunts the dormitory by night. In this sense, Brave Orchid helps them to move beyond old world beliefs and to enter a more modern world of science and rationality. Brave Orchid is a mediator that effectively changes, or “heals,” her fellow doctors from the inside out. She asserts, “Run, Ghost, run from this school. Only good medical people belong here. Go back, dark creature, to your native country. Go home. Go home.” “Go home,” sang the women (Kingston 75).
Here, Kingston has constructed another “woman warrior.” While there are male and female shaman, warriors are traditionally identified as male. Thus the role of “attacker” that Brave Orchid assumes operates as a way to subvert social norms that dictate “female” behavior. Brave Orchid, as a warrior/shaman, is a powerful, complex, and assertive role, a role that displaces the “no name women” in the text.
Kingston, Maxine Hong. The Woman Warrior. New York: Vintage, 1989. Print.

“Veselija” Foreshadows the Triumph of Capitalism

In Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle, the opening scene of the Lithuanian “veselija” comprises virtually all of the key elements of the text as a whole. The traditional concept of the veselija, as it was performed in the Lithuanian homeland, can be related to the Socialist aspects of The Jungle. The fact that “everyone contributes” and that “no one goes hungry” posits that everything is done for the collective good, an important tenet of Socialism. However, it is clear from the start of the novel that the more insidious aspects of Capitalism have already infiltrated the tradition of the veselija, placing importance on the individual's needs and the exploitation of opportunities like free food and drink at the wedding. The fact that many of the guests at the veselija do not contribute (because they cannot afford to, which is a direct result of the influence of the Capitalistic environment) reveals that their very traditions and “identities” have already been compromised. Of course, this sort of greed and exploitation is depicted as being a reality in Lithuania, as well; however, there is a vast gulf between the illusion of prosperity that is projected by the U.S. and the reality that this illusion is carried on the backs of millions of struggling and overworked individuals.
Unfortunately, the Socialist message delivered at the end of The Jungle is not quite convincing, especially to modern day readers. More importantly, it seems unrealistic to think that the traditional values that were a part of the veselija could be restored when they have already been so thoroughly corrupted from within by the Capitalist system.

Homosexuality as Political Identity

Homosexuals as a collective are set apart by the fact that they include “everybody.” As demonstrated in Anzaldua's Borderlands/La Frontera, individuals are comprised of a multiplicity of identitiesThere are gay, or “queer,” individuals of every race, gender, social class, religion, etc. Homosexuality represents such a multiplicity of identities, it seems like nonsense to reduce a person down to their sexual orientation. This is especially true when “sexual orientation” is a fluid concept in and of itself. Of course, this same idea of multiplicity can be applied to virtually any collective. Is it really possible to reduce someone down to their race (a term as fluid as sexuality), social class, religion, or anything else at all?
All of these identities carry weighty political implications as well. To "come out of the closet” is to assume a politicized identity. Opponents love to reference the “gay lifestyle,” but what is this supposed gay lifestyle exactly? Is a gay man who gets up in the morning, goes to work, comes home to do chores, watch TV, and goes` to bed living the “gay lifestyle?” Echoing Judith Butler’s article, “Imitation and Gender Subordination,” does it make any sense to say that a queer individual is “more queer” when they’re at Gay Pride than when they’re at Wal-Mart? It is true that we can “perform” our identity more overtly in certain spaces while downplaying it in others. Nevertheless, the fact that gay/lesbian/queer identified individuals encompass so many identities (Mother, Father, Son, Daughter, Black, Iranian, “White,” Jewish, Man, Woman, Transgendered, Activist, Humanitarian, Politician, Citizen, etc.) emphasizes the injustice of persecuting or marginalizing any individual simply because of their sexuality. No matter what stance a person takes on the issue of homosexuality, there’s no denying that discrimination against someone for one portion of who they are is discrimination against the individual as a whole.