Saturday, March 17, 2012
LIT103A - Paper #3
Darlene McCoy
Michael Ursell
LIT103A
14 March 2012
Early Feminist Extraordinaire, Aphra Behn
According to Paradise Lost, John Milton’s “epic to end all epics,” women have been made of men for all time. Eve, only through Adam, has the ability to understand and communicate with God. In Milton’s time, virtually no female authors existed in high literature – there were no women to speak up for their gender, for their ability to think was so belittled that women did not even feel the need to write, and even if they decided to, common folk would not read their work over a man’s. Thus, very few female authors existed. However, with time, authors of the feminine genius sorts, such as Aphra Behn, have been inducted into the traditional British canon. Modern times, arguably less prejudiced, allow her text to be read and examined. Her play, The Rover or The Banished Cavaliers, can be read as an early feminist text, especially when contrasted with the inequality of genders present in Paradise Lost. In Paradise Lost, Adam holds power over Eve. In The Rover, Hellena, a heroine of the comedy, holds power over Willmore, a lead man interested in courting her. Adam and Eve are as they are in their Biblical setting – they are the mother and father of all creation. Willmore is a rover; Hellena a gipsy.
In Paradise Lost, Adam’s first speech guides Eve before she says a word of her own, “But let us ever praise him, and extol / His bounty, following our delightful task / To prune these growing plants, and tend these flow’rs, / Which were it toilsome, yet with thee were sweet” (4.436-39). She replies, “O thou for whom / And from whom I was formed flesh of thy flesh, / And without whom am to no end, my guide / And head, what thou hast said is just and right.” (4.440-443). Adam’s correction of Eve before she speaks implies that she must be guided by him before she can speak. This creates a hierarchy in the text: first came God, then man, and then woman. This hierarchy places woman below man – therefore making men and women unequal in Paradise Lost. Eve’s first words are words of agreement with Adam. She does not question anything he says; she has no agency. Furthermore, Eve’s words are written by a man who assumes her voice, which further takes away from her already nonexistent agency. However, Milton’s apparent prejudice against women in his creation of Eve’s lines is not the only factor working to create gender inequality.
In Paradise Lost’s depiction of Adam and Eve, the narrative speaker, not Eve, proclaims that God placed true authority in men, and then notes the inequality between a man and a woman: “Whence true authority in men; though both / Not equal, as their sex not equal seemed; /” (4.295-6) Adam and valor formed for contemplation (4.297); Eve and sweet attractive grace formed for softness (4.298). A valorous man is a man who can roar into battle and demonstrate his prowess, one who takes action, and in doing so, personifies courage, a characteristic worthy of praise and recognition. This attribute, and Adam, formed in order to behold the world attentively and with careful thought. Eve, on the other hand, formed with sweet attractive grace, pleasing qualities, for the reason of being soft – tender, weak, yielding – not contemplative like her counterpart, Adam. These words, used by the narrative speaker, who is genderless, demonstrates without Eve’s pro-hierarchy biased dialogue that women are not supposed to think; for they were not made to that purpose. They are instead, simply to be decoration the world of men. They are to be recognized only for their pleasing feminine qualities, not their thoughts or actions. However, this is not the last level of the text in which one may find gender inequality. Adam’s power reaches further than the voice of the narrative speaker.
The epic form works to promote the gender inequality of Paradise Lost. An epic is a form that hails from the classical tradition. Paradise Lost is written in one meter and imitates noble deeds, as an epic does. However, traditional epic is written in heroic verse, and Milton wrote Paradise Lost in blank verse. The singularity of the meter implies that only one meter will do to describe all of space and time; there is no other way to form it. All other meters – such as heroic verse, are “barbarous” in comparison to Milton’s blank verse. Heroic verse is characteristic of classic epics, written by the Greeks and Romans, and if it is not displeasing to read or listen to, as it might not have been for Milton, considering he was a fan of poets that used heroic verse, why would he find it “barbarous” and unfit for his epic? The Greeks and Romans believed in more than one god – making them “barbarous.” Milton could not write his epic in heroic verse, knowing that it hailed from brutes who believed in pagan gods. For Milton, there is only the Christian God, and therefore only one form for his epic.
Classic epics are written about men of noble deeds, such as Odysseus. Milton is aware of this sentiment, and addresses it in the first lines of Paradise Lost, by evoking a Muse in order to “justify the ways of God to men.” (1.26). By ordering the Muse to sing of his tale that debunks pagan beliefs, he takes command of her, as a Muse is generally personified as a woman, and uses her ability to create beautiful poetry to do his bidding. Since Paradise Lost is such a literary success, it would seem that the Muse sang for him, and since the Muse has no personified retaliation in the tale of everything that ever was and will be, it can be assumed that her retaliation is not hidden, but nonexistent, because the Muse’s gender is female, and women are not supposed to question their male betters. This abusive use of the Muse, contained in the form of Paradise Lost, a tale of noble deeds, further points to the inequality of gender present in the text.
However, not all literature was as heavily prejudiced against women. The power relations between Willmore the rover and Hellena the gipsy can be read as a text to combat the inherit gender inequalities present in Paradise Lost. A rover, in the context of Aphra Behn’s play, is an exiled Englishman – a cavalier. These men were royalists in the English Civil War who supported King Charles I and his son, Charles II. When Parliament took power, they became suave pirates and saucy rogues in order to survive the onslaught of Puritan values. A gipsy – a cunning, deceitful, fortune-telling woman, was like a rover in the sense that a gipsy has no affiliation with any nation. Hellena and Willmore’s status puts them on an even playing field – for both a rover and a gipsy are of wit and cunning – their only difference is gender.
Hellena and Willmore meet during Carnival times and he begins to attempt to court her by “giving his heart” to her. After some time progression in the play, Hellena dresses in “antic different” garb, making her hard to recognize. Willmore and his friends soon enter the scene, and Willmore begins boasting about his experiences with another woman, exclaiming, “By Heaven, Cupid’s quiver has not half so many darts as her eyes! – Oh, such a bona roba! to sleep in her arms is lying in fresco, all perfumed air about me.” (191). Hellena secretly internalizes his words. Later in the play, Willmore, enticed by his friends, begins to think about Hellena again. She appears on the scene, reveals her face to him, and then accuses Willmore of seeing another woman. He defends himself, saying that the house he exited was of a man-friend. Hellena then uses Willmore’s own words against him: “And wasn’t your man friend, that had more darts in’s eyes, than Cupid carries in’s whole budget of arrows? Ah such a bona roba! to be in her arms is lying in fresco, all perfumed air about me – was this your man friend too?” (195). Willmore, who can do no more than stutter, submits to the power of Hellena’s rhetoric, and then swears “I do never to think – to see – to love – nor lie – with any but thyself.” (196). Hellena’s choice to stay hidden from Willmore in order to observe him shows her cunning thought and her agency. A woman of less cunning might lose control of her emotions and blatantly accuse Willmore of lying with another woman. A woman of less agency might not think to question Willmore’s actions at all, even if presented with evidence of betrayal. Hellena, however, goes beyond simply accusing Willmore of foul deeds; she uses his own words – the means of his power over others – in order to gain power over him. She demonstrates that she can use a man’s words as well as Willmore, if not better than he.
In the final scene of the play, Hellena and Willmore banter as they do: they use each other’s rhetoric to assert power over the other. Hellena then decides to walk away from Willmore, and finally, the rover cannot control his love for her. He stays her, and then says, “Nay, if we part so, let me die like a bird upon a bough, at the sheriff’s charge, by Heaven both the Indies shall not buy thee from me. I adore thy humor and will marry thee, and we are so of one humour, it must be a bargain – give me thy hand. – And now let the blind ones (Love and Fortune) do their worst.” (243). Willmore’s marriage proposal allows Hellena to claim victory over him. Furthermore, Willmore asserts that “love and beauty have their own ceremonies;” which implies that if Willmore is to marry, he is to marry for love and beauty – not to make another human being his property. As women became the property of the men they married in the time of The Rover, this notion of marriage for “love and beauty” is another victory for Hellena.
These ideas are quite radical for the times in which they were written. If a culture such as Aphra Behn’s held these ideas of women as property to their husbands because they are lesser than men, how is it possible that her play was a smashing success? Would not the audience members begin to question the play as soon as Hellena presents herself as a wit? The form of this play – a comedy – undermines all of Hellena’s wit and agency – for she performs her role as a joke for the common person to laugh at. Comedy began as an imitation of “lower people,” but only in the sense that what is ridiculous is part of what is ugly. After evolution into a respectable form, comedy takes away the look of personal ridicule to make its stories more universal. Therefore, audience members of a comedy would have prior knowledge that what takes place on stage is supposed to be ridiculous. In Act III, Scene I, Hellena’s [aside] is a rhetorical device aimed at getting the audience’s attention. Her [aside] lines are, “Here’s fine encouragement for me to fool on.” They are in reference to Willmore boasting of his lying with another woman. This line implies that to ponder Willmore’s actions and words would be to fool. Therefore, for Hellena, to think would be foolish. Her choice to think on the matter anyway could be found to be ridiculous by the audience; she would play into the audience’s expectations of a comedy. These lines would be especially effective as a rhetorical device for they would capture the audience’s attention by directly addressing them with knowledge they are well-aware of. Knowing that the play further emphasizes their thoughts would allow them to relate to it and further draw them into its action. While Hellena could be seen as an early feminist hero, the play’s form undermines that notion. However, the audience members would not find as much pleasure in the play if Hellena were not as witty and cunning. Her person allows them to be pleasured. Therefore, she, and her creator, Aphra Behn, are in control, and have the last laugh at curtain call.
Aphra Behn’s genius allowed her to subtly promote feminist ideas in an incredibly misogynist time. Her careful contemplation allowed her to create a feminist hero, Hellena, undermine her using the form of her work in order to make her work well-read and successful, and then allowed her to remain in control. The common audience member viewing The Rover would not have been able to discern a feminist agenda – for a feminist agenda was such a radical idea at the time that not even comedy, the container for ridiculousness, could ground such an idea. It comes as no wonder, then, that Virginia Woolf, one of the largest figures in the tradition of women in literature, commented, “All women together ought to let flowers fall upon the tomb of Aphra Behn, for it was she who earned them the right to speak their mind.”
LIT102 - Paper #2
Darlene McCoy
Susan Gillman
LIT102
16 February 2012
Notice: Persons Attempting to Translate Twain Will Be Shot
If I were a translator-editor working on a “multilingual” version of Mark Twain’s Adventures of Huckleberry Finn for a multicultural age, I would leave the text as it is, especially if the stated goal of the publisher was to step squarely into the debates over the history of censorship of the novel. Alas, if I were a translator-editor, I would have to produce some sort of work, for otherwise, I would not receive my income. So, for the sake of providing for myself, I would render this “translation.” It is adapted into “standard English” that would be acceptable for public high school students in the United States to read and process.
It is impartial to define what exactly, “standard English” is, because I am translating to this standard. I wrote for a specific audience, so I wrote to their idea of “standard English.” Before I define “standard English” as seen by a public high school of the United States, it is also impartial to address why I translated for them. The education system in the United States, specifically, is one that every citizen must take part in (at least on paper). Thus, the curriculum taught there must be correct and acceptable, because every child born in the United States must get an education through this system. The question, then, becomes, “what is standard curriculum?” I cannot speak for any high school save my own; I do not have the adequate knowledge to speak for others – so for the sake of simplicity – I use “public high school of the United States” as a synonym for my conception of a public high school, based roughly on Cordova High School, in Rancho Cordova, CA. My specific school may not follow the same standards as all others, but it is, indeed, a public high school in the United States, and thus relevant to this discussion. A public high school of the United States would not want to use Mark Twain’s original text because a public high school in the US would define “standard English” by much more restricting criteria. “Standard English” would need to be grammatically correct, convey semantic meaning, and be inoffensive to each student who reads it. Furthermore, in the history of the United States education system, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has been a highly controversial novel, for in the eyes of at least one individual, it contains “racist” language and “coarse” ungrammaticalness, and those elements of the novel do not comply with ideas of correctness and what is acceptable in school.
Having said that, I deem that my translation is unacceptable and incorrect, because of Mark Twain's preface to his novel:
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is not a novel that is up for interpretation. It is not to be translated. It is not to be changed in any shape or form. Out of respect for Mr. Mark Twain, it is to be taken by the reader for what it is, and nothing more.
I would like to take a minute to examine a change I made in my translation to “standard English,” as it would be defined by those who oppose the use of “nigger” in the novel due to the offensive nature of the term. The word “nigger” appears in the original selection twice. I have translated this word in two different ways, which are bolded in the translation: “someone of lower social status” and “person of lesser intelligence.” The word “nigger” is a term that has evolved through time and space. The Oxford English dictionary defines a “nigger” in the sense of referring to people in seven different ways and uses sub-definitions to further define some entries. This word connotes much more than just simply a person of lower social status or a person of lower intelligence. The word “nigger” evokes the entire history of the United States, because it is intertwined with it. It evokes people believing that they are less than another person because of their skin color. It evokes horrible scars, and unnecessary violence. In another context, it evokes thoughts and feelings of kinship. My translation does not use this word, and suffers no loss of logical meaning because of it. It instead loses the history and evocations of the word, “nigger.”
In my translation, I have changed Jim’s “dem”s and “dey”s into “them”s and “they”s. Jim’s use of “dem” and “dey” in Mark Twain’s original text is considered ungrammatical by my audience’s working definition of standard English because “dem” and “dey” do not follow any logical grammatical construct. My “them”s and “they”s convey correct grammatical meaning, but by changing Jim’s “dem”s and “dey”s I have taken his voice away from him – and he is not the same Jim that Mark Twain originally penned. He is a bastardized Jim, for Jim’s language creates Jim, and I should be shot. Furthermore, in my translation, Jim speaks in the same language as Huck does, so the differences between their dialects of English disappear. Dialects are evidence of different cultures, because a language is a part of what creates a culture. Therefore, by taking Jim’s voice away, I have taken away his language and culture.
“Nigger” is generally seen as an offensive term, and “Dem” and “dey” are generally seen as ungrammatical terms, but in the context of Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, I would consider both to be words of Twain’s personification of his characters’ natural English, and therefore, see no issue with having the “incorrect and unacceptable” by “standard English” words reprinted. I would not dare touch a single word of Mark Twain’s work. His use of language points directly to multicultural and multilingual differences, because his language does not try to hide the fact that people and languages are different. The word “nigger” alone evokes the censorship debates concerning it because it is perceived as so offensive. “Nigger” will not appeal to every person who reads Adventures of Huckleberry Finn; nor will “dem” and “dey.” They will not be of their tastes, for whatever reason, but that does not make them incorrect or unacceptable. It only makes them unacceptable and incorrect in a society that defines “standard English” as the way my audience does, because that audience has a specific taste that must be satisfied by my work.
Susan Gillman
LIT102
16 February 2012
Notice: Persons Attempting to Translate Twain Will Be Shot
If I were a translator-editor working on a “multilingual” version of Mark Twain’s Adventures of Huckleberry Finn for a multicultural age, I would leave the text as it is, especially if the stated goal of the publisher was to step squarely into the debates over the history of censorship of the novel. Alas, if I were a translator-editor, I would have to produce some sort of work, for otherwise, I would not receive my income. So, for the sake of providing for myself, I would render this “translation.” It is adapted into “standard English” that would be acceptable for public high school students in the United States to read and process.
I told Jim about Louis XVI, a French king that was beheaded in France a long time ago; about his little boy, the dolphin, which would have been king if those who opposed his father hadn't taken him and shut him up in jail. Some say he died there.
"Poor little kid."
"Some say he escaped, and then came to America."
"That's good! But he'll be pretty lonesome-- there aren't any kings here, right Huck?"
"No."
"Then he can't get involved in anything. What is he going to do?"
"I don't know. Some people join the police, and some teach others to speak French."
"Why do they do that, Huck, don't French people speak the same way we do?"
"No, Jim; you couldn't understand a word they said -- not a single word."
"Well I'll be a monkey's uncle! Why couldn't I?"
"I don't know, but that's how it is. I read some French in a book. Suppose a man came up to you and said parlez-vous français-- what would you think?
"I wouldn't think anything. I'd just take him and beat him over the head-- that is, if he wasn't white. I wouldn't allow someone of a lower social status to say that."
"Aw, he wouldn't be insulting you. He's just be saying, 'Do you know how to speak French?'"
"Well, then, why couldn't he just say that?"
"He is saying that. It's just a Frenchman's way of saying it."
"Well, it's a ridiculous way, and I don't want to hear anymore about it."
"Look, Jim; does a cat speak like we do?"
"No, a cat doesn't."
"Does a cow?"
"No, a cow doesn't, either."
"Does a cat speak like a cow, or a cow speak like a cat?"
"No, they don't."
"It's natural and right for them to speak differently, isn't it?"
"Of course."
"Isn't it natural and right for a cat and a cow to speak differently from us?"
"Why, it most surely is."
"Well then, why wouldn't it be natural and right for a Frenchman to speak differently from us? Answer me that."
"Is a cat a man, Huck?"
"No."
"Well, then, there isn't any reason why a cat should speak like a man. Is a cow a man? -- er is a cow a cat?"
"No, a cow isn't either of them."
"Well, then, a cow has no place to speak like either of them. Is a Frenchman a man?"
"Yes."
"Well, then, gosh darn it, why doesn't he speak like a man? Answer me that!"
I then realized that I was wasting my breath -- one cannot teach a person of lesser intelligence to argue. So I quit.
It is impartial to define what exactly, “standard English” is, because I am translating to this standard. I wrote for a specific audience, so I wrote to their idea of “standard English.” Before I define “standard English” as seen by a public high school of the United States, it is also impartial to address why I translated for them. The education system in the United States, specifically, is one that every citizen must take part in (at least on paper). Thus, the curriculum taught there must be correct and acceptable, because every child born in the United States must get an education through this system. The question, then, becomes, “what is standard curriculum?” I cannot speak for any high school save my own; I do not have the adequate knowledge to speak for others – so for the sake of simplicity – I use “public high school of the United States” as a synonym for my conception of a public high school, based roughly on Cordova High School, in Rancho Cordova, CA. My specific school may not follow the same standards as all others, but it is, indeed, a public high school in the United States, and thus relevant to this discussion. A public high school of the United States would not want to use Mark Twain’s original text because a public high school in the US would define “standard English” by much more restricting criteria. “Standard English” would need to be grammatically correct, convey semantic meaning, and be inoffensive to each student who reads it. Furthermore, in the history of the United States education system, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn has been a highly controversial novel, for in the eyes of at least one individual, it contains “racist” language and “coarse” ungrammaticalness, and those elements of the novel do not comply with ideas of correctness and what is acceptable in school.
Having said that, I deem that my translation is unacceptable and incorrect, because of Mark Twain's preface to his novel:
Notice
PERSONS attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted; persons attempting to find a moral in it will be banished; persons attempting to find a plot in it will be shot.
BY ORDER OF THE AUTHOR, Per G.G., Chief of Ordnance.
Explanatory
IN this book a number of dialects are used, to wit: the Missouri negro dialect; the extremest form of the backwoods Southwestern dialect; the ordinary “Pike County” dialect; and four modified varieties of this last. The shadings have not been done in a haphazard fashion, or by guesswork; but painstakingly, and with the trustworthy guidance and support of personal familiarity with these several forms of speech.
I make this explanation for the reason that without it many readers would suppose that all these characters were trying to talk alike and not succeeding.
THE AUTHOR.
Huckleberry Finn
Scene: The Mississippi Valley Time: Forty to fifty years ago
Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is not a novel that is up for interpretation. It is not to be translated. It is not to be changed in any shape or form. Out of respect for Mr. Mark Twain, it is to be taken by the reader for what it is, and nothing more.
I would like to take a minute to examine a change I made in my translation to “standard English,” as it would be defined by those who oppose the use of “nigger” in the novel due to the offensive nature of the term. The word “nigger” appears in the original selection twice. I have translated this word in two different ways, which are bolded in the translation: “someone of lower social status” and “person of lesser intelligence.” The word “nigger” is a term that has evolved through time and space. The Oxford English dictionary defines a “nigger” in the sense of referring to people in seven different ways and uses sub-definitions to further define some entries. This word connotes much more than just simply a person of lower social status or a person of lower intelligence. The word “nigger” evokes the entire history of the United States, because it is intertwined with it. It evokes people believing that they are less than another person because of their skin color. It evokes horrible scars, and unnecessary violence. In another context, it evokes thoughts and feelings of kinship. My translation does not use this word, and suffers no loss of logical meaning because of it. It instead loses the history and evocations of the word, “nigger.”
In my translation, I have changed Jim’s “dem”s and “dey”s into “them”s and “they”s. Jim’s use of “dem” and “dey” in Mark Twain’s original text is considered ungrammatical by my audience’s working definition of standard English because “dem” and “dey” do not follow any logical grammatical construct. My “them”s and “they”s convey correct grammatical meaning, but by changing Jim’s “dem”s and “dey”s I have taken his voice away from him – and he is not the same Jim that Mark Twain originally penned. He is a bastardized Jim, for Jim’s language creates Jim, and I should be shot. Furthermore, in my translation, Jim speaks in the same language as Huck does, so the differences between their dialects of English disappear. Dialects are evidence of different cultures, because a language is a part of what creates a culture. Therefore, by taking Jim’s voice away, I have taken away his language and culture.
“Nigger” is generally seen as an offensive term, and “Dem” and “dey” are generally seen as ungrammatical terms, but in the context of Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, I would consider both to be words of Twain’s personification of his characters’ natural English, and therefore, see no issue with having the “incorrect and unacceptable” by “standard English” words reprinted. I would not dare touch a single word of Mark Twain’s work. His use of language points directly to multicultural and multilingual differences, because his language does not try to hide the fact that people and languages are different. The word “nigger” alone evokes the censorship debates concerning it because it is perceived as so offensive. “Nigger” will not appeal to every person who reads Adventures of Huckleberry Finn; nor will “dem” and “dey.” They will not be of their tastes, for whatever reason, but that does not make them incorrect or unacceptable. It only makes them unacceptable and incorrect in a society that defines “standard English” as the way my audience does, because that audience has a specific taste that must be satisfied by my work.
LIT103A - Paper #2
Darlene McCoy
Michael Ursell
LIT 103A
12 February 2012
Idealized Forms of Beauty in Fashion and Poetry
It is no surprise to find a description of aesthetically pleasing attributes of a woman in poems written by men of earlier times. The first edition of Christopher Marlowe's "Hero and Leander" was published in 1598. Robert Herrick's "Delight in Disorder" found its way into the hands of readers in 1648. Each poem makes an aesthetic statement using descriptions of clothing, and these statements express an ideal form in both fashion and poetry.
However, for fashion and poetry to correlate, there must be a reasonable connection made between them. How are the clothes humans use to decorate their bodies like rhetorical devices used to decorate poetry? Clothing is used to persuade another human being into believing a particular disposition. Rhetoric is used to persuade another human being into believing a particular disposition. Their only difference, in this sense, is the medium in which they are presented: one on a human body; one on a material body.
"Hero and Leander" is a free and original treatment of a classic tale of two ill-fated lovers written in the form of an epyllion. It begins by setting up the situation of the tale - two lovers live in two different cities - and then begins describing one of the actors. Her name is Hero; "Hero the fair." What follows should be a description of the ideal form of beauty - since a hero, in the time this tale was first written by Musaeus of Alexander, was the ideal form of a human being. Marlowe then takes twenty-five lines to describe Hero's apparel. He describes seven different articles of clothing in hyperbolic terms. For example: "Her kirtle blue, whereon was many a stain, / Made with the blood of a wretched lovers slain." (15-16). is an extravagant claim that those whom Hero denied her love committed suicide, thus leaving their blood on her dress. Each article is described using the same degree of excessive hyperbole; each description is uncannily precise. Another notation to be made about the description of Hero's dress is its monstrous implications. Heroic couplets perform in each line of Marlowe's description of Hero. A heroic couplet consists of two lines of iambic pentameter that end in a perfect rhyme.
"Hero and Leander" states that in both fashion and poetry, a work that is in perfect order and that encompasses every detail is the most beautiful. This is an Aristotelian ideal of poetry. The length of the description is excessive because it is all-encompassing, as Aristotle would have it. Nothing is left unexplained: every piece of Hero's attire is described in such overbearing detail that it is uncanny. "Uncanny" connotes feelings of strangeness and the supernatural. Something that is supernatural is not natural; something that is unfamiliar is strange because it is also not natural. How would a woman adorned in the blood of "wretched lovers" be natural? "Hero and Leander" adheres perfectly to the form of an epyllion. An epyllion is a term that hails from the nineteenth century meaning, "mini-epic." It is also noted that an epyllion follows the form of an epic precisely, except that it is shorter in length. This means that to be a proper epyllion, a poem must be written using heroic couplets, which, as stated above, Marlowe employs in his work. Aristotle believed that the epic had enough room to create a sense of wonder in the work, which would be why "Hero and Leander" is an 819 line poem.
"Delight in Disorder" is a fourteen line lyric poem that focuses on the imperfections of a woman's attire. It begins by stating that, "A sweet disorder in the dress / Kindles in clothes a wantonness." (1-2) This line establishes the theme of the poem: controlled forms of disorder are beautiful. Therefore, the lines that follow this initial set must be in the form of controlled disorder. It then continues to further elaborate on the woman's dress without the use of hyperbole: "A careless shoestring," (11). He simply states that a shoestring is untied. There is no implicit monstrosity to this shoestring and its untied-ness. While each line of the poem contains eight syllables, they do not all have the same meter. The meter in lines two and eight differs from the rest of the poem. Meter is not the only difference in form that lends itself to the theme of the poem. The rhyme scheme of the poem is not uniform. The first couplet, the fifth couplet, and the seventh couplet all end in perfect rhyme. The others, however, end in a rhyme that is only perfect if the reader changes their pronunciation of the last words of the couplets.
"Delight in Disorder" states that in both fashion and poetry, a work that is in order but contains minor imperfections, such as the leaving out of some details, is the most beautiful. This is a Horatian ideal of poetry. The length of the description is shorter because it does not encompass every detail of the woman's dress. Not every garment adorning her body is explained in full, explicit detail. Horace would not scorn Herrick's deliberate imperfections, because his poetics allow for imperfections, as long as they are appropriate and controlled. The words used to describe the woman's dress are not too explicit nor do they tell a specific story on their own - they are intentionally simple, but their simplicity is controlled. As stated above, a "careless shoestring" is a shoestring that is left untied, for some reason deemed by the author as "careless." "Careless" implies that something is arranged or uttered without art. Art is in the image of nature - so if art is taken away, all that is left is nature. Therefore, Herrick's line implies natural feelings. Horace abhors the thought of creating monstrosities using poetry. He does not believe that nature is supreme beauty and that humans cannot improve upon it by imitating it, but rather that humans must take considerable thought in creating their imitations, or monstrosities will appear in their work. Slight imperfections do not create a monstrosity; they are simply the mark of the human hand in creation, and that, in its own, is beautiful. "Delight in Disorder" is a lyrical poem, but it defers from its form in order to convey its meaning. A lyrical poem is a poem that allows itself to be recognized as a piece of work that is to be sung. Because it requires the use of voice, pronunciation and meter become an important part of the poem's meaning. In "Delight in Disorder", one who performs this poem may choose to pronounce its imperfect rhymes by changing the natural pronunciation of the rhyming words in order to form a perfect rhyme or pronounce them as they are, and allow the imperfect rhyme to be heard. They may also notice that lines two and eight do not fit the normal iambic pattern. They might pronounce the lines in iambs, anyway, or choose to pronounce the lines in another form: tetrameter. This confusion just further exemplifies Herrick's theme - because either way a performer speaks his words, they will feel the disorder the poem invokes. Whether or not they enjoy it - is up to the opinion of the performer.
"Hero and Leander" and "Delight in Disorder" are two poems that describe a woman's attire using distinctly different forms. Christopher Marlowe's form holds perfect imitation as the champion of beauty; Robert Herrick holds naturally imperfect order as the champion of beauty. Each poem expresses its view, and each is as lovely as the other, because the amount of effort and knowledge gone into each piece was enough to push it into the realm of classical British literature. They are simply two ways of going about writing poetry - just as Aristotle was simply a different man than Horace.
Michael Ursell
LIT 103A
12 February 2012
Idealized Forms of Beauty in Fashion and Poetry
It is no surprise to find a description of aesthetically pleasing attributes of a woman in poems written by men of earlier times. The first edition of Christopher Marlowe's "Hero and Leander" was published in 1598. Robert Herrick's "Delight in Disorder" found its way into the hands of readers in 1648. Each poem makes an aesthetic statement using descriptions of clothing, and these statements express an ideal form in both fashion and poetry.
However, for fashion and poetry to correlate, there must be a reasonable connection made between them. How are the clothes humans use to decorate their bodies like rhetorical devices used to decorate poetry? Clothing is used to persuade another human being into believing a particular disposition. Rhetoric is used to persuade another human being into believing a particular disposition. Their only difference, in this sense, is the medium in which they are presented: one on a human body; one on a material body.
"Hero and Leander" is a free and original treatment of a classic tale of two ill-fated lovers written in the form of an epyllion. It begins by setting up the situation of the tale - two lovers live in two different cities - and then begins describing one of the actors. Her name is Hero; "Hero the fair." What follows should be a description of the ideal form of beauty - since a hero, in the time this tale was first written by Musaeus of Alexander, was the ideal form of a human being. Marlowe then takes twenty-five lines to describe Hero's apparel. He describes seven different articles of clothing in hyperbolic terms. For example: "Her kirtle blue, whereon was many a stain, / Made with the blood of a wretched lovers slain." (15-16). is an extravagant claim that those whom Hero denied her love committed suicide, thus leaving their blood on her dress. Each article is described using the same degree of excessive hyperbole; each description is uncannily precise. Another notation to be made about the description of Hero's dress is its monstrous implications. Heroic couplets perform in each line of Marlowe's description of Hero. A heroic couplet consists of two lines of iambic pentameter that end in a perfect rhyme.
"Hero and Leander" states that in both fashion and poetry, a work that is in perfect order and that encompasses every detail is the most beautiful. This is an Aristotelian ideal of poetry. The length of the description is excessive because it is all-encompassing, as Aristotle would have it. Nothing is left unexplained: every piece of Hero's attire is described in such overbearing detail that it is uncanny. "Uncanny" connotes feelings of strangeness and the supernatural. Something that is supernatural is not natural; something that is unfamiliar is strange because it is also not natural. How would a woman adorned in the blood of "wretched lovers" be natural? "Hero and Leander" adheres perfectly to the form of an epyllion. An epyllion is a term that hails from the nineteenth century meaning, "mini-epic." It is also noted that an epyllion follows the form of an epic precisely, except that it is shorter in length. This means that to be a proper epyllion, a poem must be written using heroic couplets, which, as stated above, Marlowe employs in his work. Aristotle believed that the epic had enough room to create a sense of wonder in the work, which would be why "Hero and Leander" is an 819 line poem.
"Delight in Disorder" is a fourteen line lyric poem that focuses on the imperfections of a woman's attire. It begins by stating that, "A sweet disorder in the dress / Kindles in clothes a wantonness." (1-2) This line establishes the theme of the poem: controlled forms of disorder are beautiful. Therefore, the lines that follow this initial set must be in the form of controlled disorder. It then continues to further elaborate on the woman's dress without the use of hyperbole: "A careless shoestring," (11). He simply states that a shoestring is untied. There is no implicit monstrosity to this shoestring and its untied-ness. While each line of the poem contains eight syllables, they do not all have the same meter. The meter in lines two and eight differs from the rest of the poem. Meter is not the only difference in form that lends itself to the theme of the poem. The rhyme scheme of the poem is not uniform. The first couplet, the fifth couplet, and the seventh couplet all end in perfect rhyme. The others, however, end in a rhyme that is only perfect if the reader changes their pronunciation of the last words of the couplets.
"Delight in Disorder" states that in both fashion and poetry, a work that is in order but contains minor imperfections, such as the leaving out of some details, is the most beautiful. This is a Horatian ideal of poetry. The length of the description is shorter because it does not encompass every detail of the woman's dress. Not every garment adorning her body is explained in full, explicit detail. Horace would not scorn Herrick's deliberate imperfections, because his poetics allow for imperfections, as long as they are appropriate and controlled. The words used to describe the woman's dress are not too explicit nor do they tell a specific story on their own - they are intentionally simple, but their simplicity is controlled. As stated above, a "careless shoestring" is a shoestring that is left untied, for some reason deemed by the author as "careless." "Careless" implies that something is arranged or uttered without art. Art is in the image of nature - so if art is taken away, all that is left is nature. Therefore, Herrick's line implies natural feelings. Horace abhors the thought of creating monstrosities using poetry. He does not believe that nature is supreme beauty and that humans cannot improve upon it by imitating it, but rather that humans must take considerable thought in creating their imitations, or monstrosities will appear in their work. Slight imperfections do not create a monstrosity; they are simply the mark of the human hand in creation, and that, in its own, is beautiful. "Delight in Disorder" is a lyrical poem, but it defers from its form in order to convey its meaning. A lyrical poem is a poem that allows itself to be recognized as a piece of work that is to be sung. Because it requires the use of voice, pronunciation and meter become an important part of the poem's meaning. In "Delight in Disorder", one who performs this poem may choose to pronounce its imperfect rhymes by changing the natural pronunciation of the rhyming words in order to form a perfect rhyme or pronounce them as they are, and allow the imperfect rhyme to be heard. They may also notice that lines two and eight do not fit the normal iambic pattern. They might pronounce the lines in iambs, anyway, or choose to pronounce the lines in another form: tetrameter. This confusion just further exemplifies Herrick's theme - because either way a performer speaks his words, they will feel the disorder the poem invokes. Whether or not they enjoy it - is up to the opinion of the performer.
"Hero and Leander" and "Delight in Disorder" are two poems that describe a woman's attire using distinctly different forms. Christopher Marlowe's form holds perfect imitation as the champion of beauty; Robert Herrick holds naturally imperfect order as the champion of beauty. Each poem expresses its view, and each is as lovely as the other, because the amount of effort and knowledge gone into each piece was enough to push it into the realm of classical British literature. They are simply two ways of going about writing poetry - just as Aristotle was simply a different man than Horace.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Lit 102 Paper #2
Title ultra shamelessly stolen from XKCD. It's just so damn funny!
Darlene McCoy
Susan Gillman
LIT 102
2 February 2012
Translations of "El Desdichado": I’m so Meta, Even This Acronym
Gérard Nerval wrote "El Desdichado" in 1854. Since then, the poem has been translated by T.S. Eliot, Robert Duncan, and A. S. Kline. In their translation, each translator changes codes used to convey meaning, and therefore, the meaning of each translation differs. A theme of loss of meaning runs through the work, and the poem shows the eventuality of death in poetic meaning and the human life cycle.
In the first stanza of the poem, the addresser begins by describing its state of being. It is, in all translations, "the widower" and "the unconsoled/unconsoled/un-consoled." It has lost something dear - and cannot be comforted. In the second stanza, the addresser describes the state of the addressee. It paints the addressee as something that can console and as a flower that pleases its heart. In the third stanza, the addresser begins to have an internal conflict. Its asks of itself if it is more like one being or the counterpart to that being. In the final stanza, the "I" and "you" pronouns that designate the addresser and addressee disappear after the word "crossed/crosst/crossed."
"It" is not a specific term to describe who or what the addresser is in this poem, but it is difficult to determine the addresser-addressee relationship in this poem. The addresser may be either a character in the world of the poem, or a poetic voice. The addressee may be either another character, or the idea of poetry as an art form that has the ability to console. At first the poem leads the reader to believe that a beloved has perished, but if the second stanza describes this beloved, and this beloved is human, there is no possible way that this person could console the addresser on his/her funeral night. Who or what could have consoled the addresser on that night, then? The second line in stanza two alludes to Posilipo/Mount Posilip/Posilipo. Vergil, a renowned classical poet, is buried at Mount Posilip. This allusion conveys the importance and history of poetry, which allows the reader to believe that poetry, possibly, consoled the addresser, because dead beloveds do not simply console their left-behind loved ones. On the other hand, in the third stanza, when the addresser questions his state of being, he makes comparisons between allusions. He asks: "Am I like Lusignan or Biron?" Brion was a French war hero during the wars of religion. Lusignan was a man who lost his wife because he looked upon her bathing and found that she was a mermaid. Brion's character symbolizes loyalty - a trait seen here in a positive light, while the story of Lusignan is an example of a man giving into temptation - not an action to be held in high regard. The addresser's debate is now about whether it should be loyal to its beloved or not. Poetry cannot tempt a man, for it does not have the ability to love, nor can a man have romantic interest in the concept of poetry. He can love what poetry has the ability to express, but he cannot love poetry. How could this addresser be the poetic voice if it contemplates romantic loyalty to another? In the context of the poem, there is only one poetic voice; there is not an additional waiting for the first to entice it. In this poem, it is difficult to discern who or what the speaker is, which only builds upon the theme of the poem itself: through translation, some meaning is lost. For simplicity's sake, the context of the poem will be described using a character and a beloved, and not the poetic voice and poetry.
In the context of the poem, a person loses a beloved, as designated by the word "widower," which is present in all three translations. The word "united/unites/entwines" designates that this beloved was the person's other half because the presence of the beloved allowed the person to be whole. Since this beloved is no longer living, the person contemplates staying loyal to him/her in the third stanza. In the fourth stanza, the person attempts to bring his/her beloved back from the grave, which is personified as the Underworld by the allusion made to Orpheus and his tale. The result is: that after crossing the Acheron, a river in the Underworld, twice, the person and the beloved both disappear. This tells the reader that death is necessary to being human; that it is an innate trait that is not to be tampered with. If the person had not attempted to bring back his/her beloved, they would not have disappeared in the last stanza.
Each translation of the poem treats the state of the speaker differently. T.S. Eliot uses the phrase "I am the man of shadows" as his first line. This code choice implies a number of things: first, the speaker is a man, and second, he is of shadows. The word shadows can convey an immense number of signs and allusions. It can mean literally that the speaker is a man of comparative darkness or figuratively that he is a man of gloom and unhappiness, or it could be an allusion to Hades and the Underworld. Robert Duncan uses "I am the dark one" to begin his translation. This choice of code does not allow the reader to discern what exactly the speaker is - only that whatever it is, it is dark. The word dark, like shadows, has many different meanings and connotations linked to it. A.S. Kline uses "I am the darkness" to start her translation. This could mean the quality or state of being dark or signify the absence of the ‘light’ of life. The reader must make a decision in their interpretation process. They must decide what connotations, allusions, figurative, or literal meanings of words they will include in their interpretation of a work. Because it is impossible to incorporate each additional sign that one sign signifies, some meaning will be lost in interpretation. If the reader were to choose T.S. Eliot's translation of the poem, and to choose to discern "I am the man of shadows" as "I am a man of gloom and unhappiness," their interpretation will differ from another reader who decided to discern "I am the man of shadows" as an allusion to Hades and the Underworld. The first reader will not incorporate the allusion of Hades in their interpretation, and the second will not incorporate the gloom and unhappiness into theirs. The overall meaning of the poem that each reader decides on will be different.
It is a curious thing that each translator treats the addressee in the same fashion. All three translators use the word "consoled" to describe what the addressee did for the addresser. All three use the word "flower" and "trellis" to describe the addressee. Because a theme of indiscernible meaning runs through this poem, it is significant that across three translations, all written at different times, by different people, these three words associated with the addressee have remained intact. This discernible definition of the addressee shows that the addressee is always the same in some way. If the addressee is always the same in the sense that no matter how many times it is defined and communicated, its full meaning will never be translated, then there is no need for discerning who or what that addressee may be because communicating meaning is a process of translation, and that in that process, some meaning will be lost.
Each translator treats the code of the work in a different way. In the third line of the third stanza, each translator translates the original French phrase "où nage la sirène" into different phrases. T.S. Eliot's translation uses "where the mermaids sing." The words "mermaids" and "sing" together convey an image of beautiful mer-women lounging upon a rock while singing a pleasant tune. Robert Duncan's translation uses "where the mermaid swims." This choice of words describes a different scene: a singular mermaid swims in a body of water. She is free and exotic. Unlike T.S. Eliot's version, there is no sense of song conveyed by his choice of words. A.S. Kline translated the original French to "where Sirens swim." The imagery portrayed by these words differs from the other two translators' work. Sirens are female mer-creatures of Greek mythology. They are known to sing songs that are irresistible to sailors, and once a sailor gives into his temptation, a Siren consumes him. This slight change in code changes some meaning of the poem. Some meaning will be included, and some will be lost.
It is important to note that the addresser and the addressee exist more than on just the level of the world of the poem. The author is too, an addressee. He addresses whoever decides to interpret his work; in this case, a translator. That translator then becomes the addresser to a new addressee: whoever decides to interpret the translator's translation of the author's original poem! Since in the context of this poem, the addressee always remains the same, the ability to communicate with that addressee always remains the same. No matter who an addresser addresses, he/she/it will never be able to convey their full meaning due to changes in code, and meaning will always be lost. The loss of meaning will always create change in a work.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)