Two Symbolic Scenes from The Bell Jar

I found the metaphor and imagery used in two scenes in Sylvia Plath's, "The Bell Jar", especially striking. These were the scene where Esther takes a bath after her night out with Doreen and Lenny and the scene where Esther breaks her leg skiing.

In the first scenario, Plath carefully chooses words to evoke an image of a prenatal stage of development that Esther seems to be trying to return to. First of all, she is entirely removed from the hustle and bustle of the city. Then, there is all the talk of being hot and warm and immersing oneself in the bath. The emphasis on purity also draws out the image of a baby. Finally, at the end of her bath, she even says she felt "pure and sweet as a new baby", born out of the bath water.

I think that Plath highlights Esther's desire to be cleansed and pure to show that the scene with Lenny and Doreen wasn't some coming of age moment but a catalyst for regression. Esther also wants to forget what she saw rather than it sparking a revelation or some sort of progressive change within her. Her fixation on purity especially makes me think of a child because she wants to un-see what happened between Lenny and Doreen and regain her innocence.

The second scene is when Esther goes skiing with Buddy. First, like in marriage, Buddy has no prior experience skiing, save him watching others participating. Yet he still acts as an authority and confidently tells Esther what to do. He tells Esther to hang on to the tow rope but gives her an out saying that she should only go half way. Unfortunately for Esther, once moving with the rope, she is unable to let go and peel off from the rope. The tow rope is like her relationship with Buddy, it seemed like a good idea at first --non-binding and all-- but, then, once attached to him, she was unable to free herself. At the end of the rope, Esther finds herself at the top of the ski run. She is faced with a choice, but not a very good one. Her options are:

A) take the plunge and go down the mountain. This option seems to be the logical and generally socially acceptable choice. Here she obeys Buddy.
B) some how get back down another way, like taking off her skis and walking. This option is a bit more frowned upon and awkward.

Option A corresponds to marrying Buddy while option B is her breaking it off with Buddy.

In the end, Esther chooses to ski down the slope but at a physical cost, she breaks her leg. This is parallel to Esther's loss of a career, poetry, and condemnation to serve Buddy should she marry him. Finally, her leg is put in a cast. The cast symbolizes the stagnation of marriage, dependence on Buddy's care, and inhibited mobility caused by marriage.

I really liked both of these scenes because it's fun to figure stuff like that out. The second scene reminded me a bit of the "bank scene" from Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison from last semester too, because it was a very blunt moment of allegory in a novel where the symbolism is often very nuanced.

Attempted reaction to Catcher...

Throughout reading J. D. Salinger's Catcher in the Rye, I found myself with little to say during discussions. Usually, my books from Mr. Mitchell's class are totally marked up and I have a bunch of pages flagged as super significant scenes or topics to write about for papers but for Catcher I rarely wrote anything and have two pages marked. Maybe writing about writing about Catcher will help me figure out exactly how to react to the novel.

I liked the book. Readings were interesting and not taxing to read, especially compared to Portrait. I liked that there was a clear story line and well developed characters. I also liked all the characters or at least the depictions of them. They were interesting people to read about, from Maurice to Mr. Antolini to Ackley to Sally. Holden was funny, too. I definitely found myself laughing along with him throughout the novel but still, day by day the book didn't elicit a significant response from me.

I think one reason I wasn't head over heels for the book, was because I wasn't head over heels for Holden. I definitely liked Holden, but I don't feel oppressed in the same ways as he does and I actually enjoy many of the social customs he despises. Then again, I liked his biting sarcasm because I tend to have a pretty sarcastic sense of humor too. I related in a lot of ways to Holden but he wasn't my favorite protagonist I've ever read about and this book is ALL Holden, from page one until the end, it's just his experiences and opinions. If I had been more emotionally invested in him, I probably would have become more immersed in the book and become more willing to debate about him with my peers.

Especially when I have a whole class of wonderfully smart individuals, I tend to prefer to read novels I wouldn't get as much out of on my own. Portrait, Mumbo Jumbo, Ragtime, Mrs. Dalloway, Invisible Man etc. come to mind however, I think I could read Catcher on my own with great success. The book goes lighter on obscure metaphors and allegories than other books we read and those are the kind of things I like to point out in class and discuss. It's fun to pick a symbol or idea out of a book and realize that many people that read the book completely miss the point you've just discovered. I didn't have as many literary revelations in Catcher as I did in Portrait.

Also, not going to lie, I was SO sad when Holden and Jane didn't get together. I was SO ready for an adorable love story because they seemed super cute and then it didn't happen. Not even close. I was extremely disappointed to say the least. I understand why that wasn't the right move for Salinger but I was still sad.

Anyways, in the end, it was a good book. There were a couple of discussions (although I was sick for a lot of them) and scenes that stood out to me but it wasn't my favorite book ever. It was fun and the versions of the reflective and critical papers I'm doing are cool but Holden's attitude didn't always speak to me, maybe I'm just too nerdy and academically motivated for him... I still wish that Jane would have been more central.

The Fantasticks

The long weekend before Agora days, I was in New York City with my mom. On Sunday night, I went to an off-Broadway performance of The Fantasticks. It's extremely relevant to this class so I thought I'd write a bit about it.

The Fantasticks is one of the quintessential examples of a coming of age story. First of all, it's short and doesn't need an intricate set or a lot of people so for a long time it was THE show for high schools to do. The plot and characters of the story are suited for a teenage cast as well. The main characters are a boy, Matt, who is about nineteen years old and a girl, Luisa, who is sixteen. There is a narrator, who doubles as "El Gallo" (who I'll talk about in a bit), Luisa's father, Matt's father, two old stunt men, and a mute character who is basically just a part of the set and does "special effects".

The Narrator opens the show with a song about looking back and remembering sweet, happy times of youth and then the story begins. Matt and Luisa are two starry-eyed teens, anxious to do incredible, daring things, like going on adventures and falling madly in love, so they can be like the characters in books they read and be altogether better than normal. Both spend their days reading and dreaming. Oh, and Matt and Luisa are also neighbors, however they are separated by the wall (played by the mute character) that their fathers' built between their two houses because they are "feuding". It turns out that the two fathers are the best of friends and just trying to create intrigue for their children so they will fall in love. Interestingly enough, it works. The kids do fall in love, or so they think, as they sneak around behind their fathers' backs to see each other.

Now a problem arises: how to end the feud? The fathers cook up a plan and call the resident badass/bandit, El Gallo, to assist them. Their plan is to have El Gallo and his stunt men "attack" and try to "kidnap" Luisa but allow Matt to save her. Then, the fathers' will be brought together by the joy of having both kids home safely. It works. After an absolutely wild "kidnap" scene, Matt is victorious and Matt, Luisa, and the two fathers are all happy. However, as they four stand together in their picturesque tableau, dreaming of their future, the mood is tainted by the ominous message the narrator closes the act with. He asks of the audience, how long will their happiness last.

(Coming of age aspects included: falling in love, Matt protecting Luisa. Naivete still present though. More like a children's story than real life and Matt and Luisa have dreamlike expectations for the future.)

Intermission.

In the second act, the starry-eyed lovers become star-crossed lovers. The fathers fight leading to them revealing that the rape scene was staged. Matt and Luisa subsequently fight. The song "The Plum is too Ripe" repeats the line "from scenic to cynic" which aptly describes their situation. All the fighting leads Matt to choose to go see the wild dangerous world and leaves Luisa disillusioned alone at home. Luisa's silence and depression is interrupted when she, smitten with the danger and opportunity the suave El Gallo represents, convinces him to take her to see the beautiful, sparkling world. However, what she see disturbs her but El Gallo gives her a mask that makes the horrors of the world bearable. In her fantasy will El Gallo, he takes her to a variety of places and everywhere she sees this boy being abused (it's Matt but she won't acknowledge it) but her mask makes the abuse less horrific.

Soon, she's ready to be done with the world but she can't and is stuck on the ride with El Gallo. When she finally returns home, she is further disillusioned when she gives El Gallo her mother's necklace as a pledge of her affection and he runs away with it.

At the same time, Matt is returning from his journey, beaten and battered, and reprises the up beat "I Can See It", adapting it into a contrasting movement revealing all the trials he's had. He sees Luisa, crying after her encounter with El Gallo and goes to her. They are cold to each other at first but once they talk for a while, they realize that they want to be together. This time, however, with some sense of the world and a more realistic view on the future. The families joyfully reunite and the Narrator reprises the opening song but not with nostalgia and fancifulness, but with more wisdom.

(In this act, the children lose their innocence and although it is painful, it is necessary for them to lose naivete to be successful in the world.)

Curtain.

Another aspect of the play worth noting is that both stunt men are really old and experienced and  serve as the funny men for the show. Also, one of the stunt men specializes in death scenes, heavily satirizing violent and awkward deaths and old age.

villanelle!

So, after reading Stephen's villanelle, I decided to take a crack at it. It was a really weird way to write poetry for me because usually when I write, I have a phrase or a stanza that materializes and if I can't get it out of my head, I write it down and finish off the poem. My first attempt was rather weak. Initially, I found the rules restricting and had difficulty defining lines that I would be willing to incessantly repeat. I finished the poem but it was... not good. Frustrated with my failure, I decided to go for round two with the villain. My second poem was far better. After getting the feel for the form from the first try, I was able to use the rhyme scheme and line arrangement to stimulate creativity and ingenuity rather than limit it.

Finally, I wanted to write something I'd be willing to share on the blog. So the subsequent round three was a villanelle about the book. Not the aptest use of this style but interesting none the less...

He could not escape the flames
touch, taste, sight, sound, smell
devoured by guilt and shame.

Why couldn't they remember his name
he could hear the pounding of his own knell
he could not escape the flame.

Innocence falls away non servum desire untame
orgiastic riots of the mind he could not quell
devoured by guilt and shame.

Art stirred within him and their came
a change words rhythmic colored vibrant pastel
he could not escape the flame.

The aim became to gain fame and claim
access to heaven not hell
devoured by guilt and shame.

He tried to do good but all the same
the artist fell
under the prophetic name
devoured by guilt and shame.

Father Stephen

I really don't think Stephen would make a bad priest and if he were going to make it anywhere, the Jesuit order is a good place for him. For the following reasons:

Stephen likes hierarchy and order and the structure of the Catholic church provides just that for him. There are clearly separated levels of power and carefully defined rights of passage to climb the ladder of the clergy. He doesn't have to awkwardly puzzle over which priests are his superiors in social situations. He will also have someone always giving him directions which seems, up to this point, a comfort for him.

The Jesuits are a highly intellectual order. The theological, methodological, and philosophical debates under discussion by the other Jesuit fathers would be right up Stephen's alley.

Along the same lines, there are books and books of rules about how a priest is to comport himself. No more sneaking around trying desperately to be unnoticed to avoid a social faux pas of sorts. Stephen wouldn't have to worry so much about figuring out where the straight and proper path is because it would be already clearly drawn for him.

The mysterious, semi-secret power of being a priest also seems to allure Stephen to the priesthood. Maybe it's perverting the purpose of a priest a bit but he loves the idea that he gets to know, read, learn, think, and do things normal people can't. Most of all, he is extremely attracted to the prospect of hearing the confessions, particularly of girls. This probably stems from the fact that Stephen wondered a lot when he was little and people explained very little social and sexual escapades to him.

In the end, Stephen rejects the idea, his intrigue stunted by the general anonymity and monotony of the vocation. For me, this just perpetuates the Satanic narrative that periodically pops its head up in this novel. In this case it sheds its subtlety and becomes rather blatant. Stephen rejects the priesthood, even with his special gift of piety, to search for a less common purpose, just as Satan will not serve God and pridefully searches for minions of his own. Faith and piety are surprisingly different from each other and Stephen's situation exemplifies the distinction that Joyce is trying to make.

Voices in his head

We've brought up how malleable and imprint-able Stephen can seem at times so I decided to write a blog post about these influences and their implications.

The earliest influences we see in Stephen's life seem to be his mother, his father, and Dante. These are all pretty understandable influences for a young boy to be under. These are the people he knows best and that know him best. His mother is a big part of his conscientiousness while Dante and his father serve as moral guides. I'd say that these influences are not grounds to call Stephen impressionable. Naive maybe but not impressionable.

Soon after, we see Stephen's peers and teachers creep into being influences. Most memorably, his attempts to go unnoticed to fit in with his peers, then when the priest dubs him as a sneaky slacker, and finally when his peers convince him to go to rector. We discussed in class whether he acts for others or for himself. Stephen even notes his influence-ability on page 88, listing the demands of the people in his life.

God also becomes an influence in Stephen's life. God is basically a punisher in Stephen's mind. Stephen is very scared of the repercussions of defying God and subsequently adopts a strict regimen of self mortification. Later, God is such a big influence in Stephen's life he considers being a priest. Even after he's stepped away from his religious upbringing to pursue art, God plays a huge role in Stephen's thinking and understanding of the world.

Some interesting things about Stephen's relationships with his influences are:

1. Love is almost completely nonexistent between Stephen and his influences, save for with the women. I'd say that Stephen loves his mother. He listens to Dante and his father and teachers and peers and God but when he's sick in the beginning of the novel, he writes a letter to his mother. He wants her comforting most of all. He is also emotional affected by a number of women throughout the course of the novel. Although it is hard to say if this is actually love, there is definitely more of an emotional attachment to these women. They even inspire his art.

Maybe this is a comment on the gender roles he's observed. I feel like this is reflected in the fact that when he starts his first poem he does so by following the rules he's observed from Byron. Which moves toward my next interesting thing, that being how influencable Stephen does seem.

2. In spite of Stephen's intense desire to be unique, I found him surprisingly impressionable. I think why it was so surprising to me is because he was so mature in other ways but he was still to naive to start living his own life. That's totally understandable when you think about how young he is for the first bit of the novel. Little kids don't really know how life works so they watch other people's lives and imitate. It's totally normal. But having these little kid actions next to his big thoughts is a little disorienting. I'm sure it happens a lot. Everywhere in life you will find the small or weak or unsure submitting to the bigger, stronger, or more popular. However it's odd to have the young big thinker being so easily manipulated by the desire to fit in.

PS. Since I'm finishing this post so far after I started I thought I'd add the idea that Stephen's possible vocation is yet another voice in his head calling to him and telling him what to do.

Starting at the Beginning

The yesterday in class Mr. Mitchell asked us to contemplate what it means, in general, in our society, personally etc., to "come of age". I started my writing with law.

Legally, an individual is no longer a minor after their eighteenth birthday. At that point they can be tried as an adult, sign up to serve in the military, buy cigarettes, and gamble however you still can't rent a car, drink alcohol or even get into bars. It's kind of like a holding period, easing you into adulthood; turning you into a pseudo-adult before you're full fledged. So then maybe 21, is where we should put the marker, but you still can't rent cars from many companies AND if you go to college, you're still in school. This definition quickly gets squishy.

Science is equally unsatisfying. Biologically, we think about starting to become an adult in the teenage years, in the midst of the changes that come with puberty. However, your body continues to change throughout life, never exactly reaching the point where your body is completely "of age".

Socially, popular rights of passage include getting a driver's license, thereby increasing independence, experimentation with drugs and alcohol, and loss of virginity.

However, in class, maybe by virtue of being academically-minded people, we honed in on education as a way of measuring coming-of-age-ness. I would say that as college started becoming more accessible and higher education a normal phenomenon, the process of coming of age in America has become far more convoluted. In a certain time, most kids graduated from high school, got a job, got married, and moved out. It's different now. Now, especially for students like us, college is not abstract it's very real and even expected for some of us. This continuation of schooling prolongs the coming of age process for a great number of years. People can be in grad school for an obscenely long time.

The question soon becomes, "is school a more or less valid way to 'come of age'?" In a way it seems like the more educated person should come more of age, seeing that they spend years and years pondering introspective questions in the safety of schools. However, the case can also made one becomes an adult when they go out into the world and get a job. Also, the degrees that students receive could be considered milestones in aging or immaturely needed pats on the back to motivate students.

It's an interesting debate at whether education facilitates coming of age or is an institution to postpone it but at Uni, it is in many of our futures. Some people didn't like that our discussion was primarily focused on higher education but in a class that is so current and introspective, it only makes sense that we come back to our personal definition of what it is to come of age.