Initial Draft Seminar on Literature

   The House on Mango Street dan Caramelo adalah dua novel karya Sandra Cisneros yang berkisah tentang kehidupan immigran Latin di Amerika Serikat. Kedua novel tersebut dikisahkan melui sudut pandang dua tokoh utama dalam kedua novel tersebut, Esperanza dan Celaya. Novel ini merupakan novel Coming-of-age karena memuat kisah hidup kedua protagonis dalam novel tersebut sedari masih kecil hingga beranjak dewasa. Sedankan Woman Hollering Creek dan Eleven adalah dua cerita pendek karya Sandra Cisneros yang berada dalam kumpulan cerita pendek bertajuk Woman Hollering Creek and Other Stories. Permasalahan utama yang saya temukan dalam karya-karya tersebut adalah permasalahan mengenai identitas yang dialami oleh kaum imigran latin di Amerika Serikat. Para imigran tersebut seakan mengalami ambivalensi terhadap identitas mereka. Pada saat yang bersamaan, mereka menerima dan menolak untuk dikenakan dalam suatu budaya dari dua budaya yang melekat. Masalah berikutnya yang saya temukan, dan masih ada kaitannya dengan permasalahan sebelumhya, adalah tentang growing-up. Dimana pada masa pencarian identitas itu, tokoh-tokoh dalam karya Sandra Cisneros tumbuh dewasa dan dibentuk dalam dua budaya yang berbeda, yaitu budaya Amerika Serikat dan budaya Latin. Saya pun menemukan permasalahan tentang bagaimana peranan perempuan dalam suatu budaya. Bagaimana dalam hubungan lelaki dan perempuan terbentuk suatu hirarki, yang menempatkan perempuan dalam posisi yang tidak setara dengan pria dalam suatu konstruksi budaya.

   Beberapa narasi dalam karya-karya Sandra Cisneros, menggambarkan bahwa tokoh-tokoh dalam kisah tersebut memiliki rasa kepemilikan akan tanah air asal mereka dan tetap menjalankan budaya asal mereka, yang menjadi budaya minoritas di tempat mereka tinggal, sehingga rumah bagi mereka adalah tanah air asal mereka. Namun disisi lain, para tokoh dalam kisah-kisah tersebut seakan membaur dengan budaya mayoritas ditempat tinggal mereka, yaitu budaya Amerika, dan menjadikan Amerika, secara sadar maupun tak sadar, menjadi rumah kedua pula bagi mereka.

Seperti yang dijelaskan dalam The World and The Home oleh Homi Bhaba, “to be unhomed is not to be homeless, nor that the “unhomely” be easily accomodated in that familiat division of social life into private and the public spheres.” (Bhabha, halaman 141). Para tokoh dalam karya Cisneros mengalami apa yang disebut Bhaba sebagai unhomely. Bukan keadaan mereka tidak memiliki rumah sebagai payung berteduh mereka, namun lebih kepada rasa kepemilikan yang mereka miliki. Konsep rumah itu sendiri dapat kita lihat melalui perspektif tokoh Esperanza dalam novel The House on Mango Steet dalam di bawah ini:

“We didn’t always live on Mango Street. Before that we lived on Loomis on the third floor, and before that we lived on Keeler. Before Keeler it was Paulina, and before that I can’t remember. But what I remember most is moving a lot. Each time it seemed there’d be one more of us. By the time we got to Mango Street we were six—Mama, Papa, Carlos, Kiki, my sister Nenny and me.” (Cisneros, halaman 3)

“I knew then I had to have a house. A real house. One I could point to. But this isn’t it. The house on Mango Street isn’t it. For the time being, Mama says. Temporary, Papa says. But I know how those things go.” (Cisneros, halaman 5)

“We didn’t always live on Mango Street. Before that we lived on Loomis on the third floor, and before that we lived on Keeler. Before Keeler it was Paulina, but what I remember most is Mango Street, sad red house, the house I belong but do not belong to.” (Cisneros, halaman 109-110)

   Pada dua kutipan pertama, dapat kita lihat bagaimana Esperanza memandang rumah yang ia tinggali di Mango Street dan bagaimana pandangannya tentang rumahnya berubah pada kutipan ketiga. Pada dua kutipan pertama, Esperanza mengalami apa yang disebut Bhabha sebagai displacement, dan pada kutipan ketiga Esperanza sudah mulai dapat menerima rumahnya di Mango Street sebagai rumah untuk pulang, namun kalimat “the house I belong but not belong to” masih menunjukan ada nya paradoks yang terjadi didalam dirinya. Disatu sisi ia memiliki rasa kepemilikan atas rumahnya di Mango Street, namun disisi lain tidak.

   Apa yang disebut Bhabha sebagai displacement bukan hanya  dialami oleh karakter Esperanza, kita bisa melihat contoh lain dari displacement yang mengakibatkan keterasingan pada karakter Mamacita yang diceritakan sekilas dalam novel The House on Mango Street. Walaupun digambarkan secara sekilas, tokoh Mamacita menjadi signifikan dan penting karena Mamacita digambarkan sebagai pribadi yang sama sekali tak mau berbaur dengan budaya mayoritas di tempat tinggalnya. Ia tak menggunakan bahasa Inggris, dan setiap malam selalu menangis dan mendengarkan radio dengan bahasa Spanyol. Esperanza menggambarkan Mamacita sebagai seorang yang takut untuk menggunakan bahasa Inggris yang merupakan bahasa mayoritas dan hanya mengetahui delapan kata dalam bahasa tersebut. Hal ini yang membuat Mamacita teralienasi dari lingkungannya.

   Keterasingan yang dirasakan karena benturan dua budaya yang berbeda bukan hanya dapat kita temukan pada karakter Mamacita dalam The House on Mango Street namun juga dapat kita lihat pada karakter Rafael dalam novel Caramelo sesaat setelah Rafael kembali ke Amerika setelah mengenyam pendidikan di sekolah militer di Meksiko.

“He tries talking to us in Spanish, but we don’t use that language with kids, we only use it with growns-ups. We ignore him and keep watching our television cartoons.

Later when he feels like it and can talk about it, he’ll explain what it’s like to be abandoned by your parents and left in the country where you don’t have enough words to speak the things inside you.” (Cisneros, halaman 23)

Keadaan terasing dari dari dunia luar dijelaskan Bhabha dalam The world and the Home, “It could be said of these moments that they are of the world but not fully in it; thay they represent the outsideness of the outsideness of the inside that is too painful to remember.” (Bhabha, halaman 152)

   Ketaksaan akan dua kultur yang berbeda dapat kita lihat pula dalam novel Caramelo pada saat Celaya atau Lala, sang tokoh utama yang sekaligus pula berperan sebagai narator, dan keluarganya pergi melintasi perbatasan Meksiko dan Amerika Serikat. Lala berkata,”As soon as we cross the bridge everything switches to another language. Toc, says the light switch in this country, at home it says click.” (Cisneros, halaman 17). Dapat kita lihat bagaimana Lala mengatakan bahwa Meksiko adalah “home” namun disisi lain ia merasa asing ketika bahasa yang ia gunakan di negara tempat ia tinggal tak lagi menjadi bahasa nomer satu di tempat yang ia sebut sebagai “home”-nya. Disini peran perbatasan menjadi  signifikan. Ketika melintasi perbatasan, Lala melintasi antara satu tempat ke tempat lain dengan dua budaya yang berbeda, ke tempat yang seharusnya menjadi rumah baginya namun terasa asing karena ia tak dibesarkan disana, namun ia masih memiliki rasa kepemilikan karena ayah dan ibunya berasal dari sana, seperti yang dijelaskan Bhabha dalam The world and the Home pada halaman 143, “suddenly the home turns into another world”. Saat itulah, melintasi perbatasaan, berarti melintasi dua kultur yang berbeda. Batas antara mana yang sebenarnya rumah, dan mana yang sebenarnya tempat merantau menjadi kabur, karena ditempat yang dianggap rumah pun, ia merasa asing, Hal ini dijelaskan pula oleh Bhabha;

“The border between home and world becomes confused; and, uncannily, the private and the public become part of each other, forcing upon us a vision that is as divided as it is disorienting.” (Bhabha, halaman 141).

   Perasaan asing akan suatu tempat yang dianggap rumah karena tidak dibesarkan disana merupakan permasalahan yang terjadi ketika kita tumbuh dewasa diatas dua kultur yang berbeda. Permasalah tentang beranjak dewasa (growing up) ini juga hadir dalam cerita pendek berjudul Eleven dalam kumpulan cerita pendek Woman Hollering Creek and Other Stories. Cerpen ini bertutur dari sudut pandang seorang anak perempuan yang sedang merayakan ulang tahunnya yang kesebelas pada hari itu. Bagaimana menurutnya, berumur sebelas tahun berarti dituntut untuk bersikap lebih dewasa dari sebelumnya, untuk tidak menangis seperti anak usia tiga tahun, namun sebenarnya dalam dirinya ia masih memiliki sifat-sifat kekenak-kanakan.

   Selain itu, narator dalam karya-karya Sandra Cisneros seolah menuturkan tentang adanya ketidaksetaraan gender dalam masyarakat, dimana terdapat suatu hirarki yang menempatkan perempuan pada posisi yang tidak setara dengan laki-laki. Narator dalam karya-karya Sandra Cisneros adalam para tokoh perempuan yang menjadi tokoh sentral dalam cerita, sehingga mereka seakan mempertanyakan dan melawan adanya ketidak setaraan tersebut.

   Dalam The House on Mango Street terdapat beberapa tokoh laki-laki abusive yang menjadikan tokoh perempuan dalam cerita sebagai korbannya. Diantaranya adalah suami dari Mamacita dan Ayah dari Sally. Begitu pula dalam cerpen Woman Hollering Creek dari buku kumpulan cerpen Woman Hollering Creek and other Stories yang mengisahkan suami yang memukuli istrinya. Kekerasan itu dapat terjadi karena adanya hirarki yang menempatkan pria ditempat yang lebih tinggi, sehingga para tokoh laki-laki dalam cerita merasa memiliki power lebih yang membuat ia merasa dapat bertindak abusive pada para tokoh perempuan dalam cerita.

   Hirarki tersebut tergambar dalam percakapa antara Rafael dan Lala dalam novel Caramelo;

“Especially the brothers laugh and point and call me a boy.

--Oh, brother! What a chillona you turned out to be. Now what? Mother asks.

—What could be worst than being a boy?

--Being a girl! Rafa shouts. And everyone in the car laughs even harder.” (Cisneros, halaman 22)

   Selain itu, karakter Esperanza dalam novel The House on Mango Street digambarkan sebagai perempuan yang berpikiran modern dan memiliki pikiran maju kedepan untuk keluar dari tatanan sosial yang menempatkan perempuan dalam posisi yang tidak setara dengan laki-laki. Salah satu cara Esperanza untuk keluar dari tatanan sosial tersebut adalah dengan menulis. Dalam artikel jurnal The "Dual"-ing Images of la Malinche and la Virgen de Guadalupe in Cisneros's The House on Mango Street yang ditulis oleh Lelis Petty, karakter Esperanza sendiri digambarkan sebagai perpaduan antara la Malinche dan la Virgen de Guadalupe dalam mitologi latin. “Therefore Esperanza transcends the good/bad dichotomy associated with these archetypes and becomes a new model for Chicana womanhood: an independent, autonomous artist whose house is of the heart, not worshiper, nor of the conqueror.” (Petty, halaman 123)

Works Cited

Bhabha, H. (1992). The World and the Home. Third World and Post-Colonial Issue.

Cisneros, S. (n.d.). Caramelo.

Cisneros, S. (n.d.). The House on Mango Street.

Cisneros, S. (n.d.). Woman Hollering Creek and Other Stories.

Petty, L. (2000). The "Dual"-ing Images of la Malinche and la Virgen de Guadalupe in Cisneros's The House on Mango Street. Melus.

The In-Beetween-ness in Sandra Cisnero’s The House on Mango Street and Caramelo

The House on Mango Street and Caramelo are two coming-of-age novels by Sandra Cisneros. These two novels talk about the lives of Chicana immigrants in America. Two protagonists in these novels, who are also the narrators of these novels, Esperanza and Celaya, experience cultural confusion.  In one side, they have sense of belonging to their homeland, which is Mexico. In the other side, some narrations show how their ways of living are much like Americans’ way of living. Beside the main characters of these novels, the other characters also seem experience cultural confusion and displacement. They seem like being in between and unhomely. Unhomely here doesn’t mean that the characters are homeless. It has nothing to do with the condition of having or not having a house to live and stay. Just like what explained on Homi Bhaba’s The World and The Home, “To be unhomed is not to be homelss, nor that the “unhomely” be easily accomodated in that familiar division of social life into private and the public spheres.” (Bhabha, page 141).

First novel is The House on Mango Street. This novel is Coming-of-Age novel which is told by 12 years old Esperanza Cordero’s perspective. It tells about her growing up life in immigrant area in Chicago, Mango Street. In Mango Street, she meets Lucy and Rachel, and then they become friends. From her eyes, Esperanza also tells about people who live in Mango Street who have different life stories.

We can see the difference of how Esperanza sees her house on Mango Street in chapter The House on Mango Street and in the chapter Mango Says Goodbye Sometimes:

“We didn’t always live on Mango Street. Before that we lived on Loomis on the third floor, and before that we lived on Keeler. Before Keeler it was Paulina, and before that I can’t remember. But what I remember most is moving a lot. Each time it seemed there’d be one more of us. By the time we got to Mango Street we were six—Mama, Papa, Carlos, Kiki, my sister Nenny and me.” (Cisneros, page 3)

“I knew then I had to have a house. A real house. One I could point to. But this isn’t it. The house on Mango Street isn’t it. For the time being, Mama says. Temporary, Papa says. But I know how those things go.” (Cisneros, page 5)

“We didn’t always live on Mango Street. Before that we lived on Loomis on the third floor, and before that we lived on Keeler. Before Keeler it was Paulina, but what I remember most is Mango Street, sad red house, the house I belong but do not belong to.” (Cisneros, page 109-110)

First two quotations are quotations from the chapter The House on Mango Street. These quotations show how Esperanza actually never wants to live in a house such as the house on Mango Street. It shows displacement that happens to Esperanza. Comparing with the third quotation which is quotation from the chapter Mango Says Goodbye Sometimes, the last chapter of the novel, we can see how Esperanza already accepts Mango Street as the place where she lives. She is no longer experience displacement that shown in the first chapter.

Besides that, we can see cultural confusion that some characters of the novel experience. In My Name, we can see how Esperanza is not proud of her name that sounds very Mexican and some of her school mates see it funny. She also narrates how it is different for people who speak Spanish when they spell her name, “At school they say my name funny as if the syllables were made out of tin and hurt the roof of your mouth. But in Spanish my name is made of a softer something, like silver” (Cisneros, page 11). It also appears on Our Good Day, when she introduced herself to Lucy and Rachel, she said “I wish my name was Cassandra or Alexis or Maritza but Esperanza—but when I tell them my name they don’t laugh.”(Cisneros, page 15).  Esperanza also tells about the character named Mamacita in the chapter No Speak English. Mamacita described as a person who alienated by society because she can’t speak English, “I believe she doesn’t come out because she is afraid to speak English, and maybe this is so since she only knows eight words.” (Cisneros, page 77).

We can see contra-diction and paradox in how the way Esperanza narrates herself. In one side, we can found her urgency in using English by telling about Mamacita’s difficulties. The fact that she doesn’t proud of her name, shows how she assumed that to become American is way better than her identity as Mexican. But in the contrary, in some other narrations, we can see how Esperanza so much attached to Chicana culture and tradition and how Esperanza is siding on Chicana side. No matter how Esperanza feels ashamed of her identity, she always dreaming of a house just like in Mexico, it symbolizes she feels that to be Chicana is her identity.It seems like she admit but not admit about her identity. The in-between-ness is embodied in the character of Esperanza.

Talking about the character of Mamacita, her character becomes important and significant here even though Esperanza only tells about her in one chapter. The unhomeliness embodied in the character of Mamacita. Mamacita not only described as the one who can’t speak English, but also the one who’s not belong to the Mango Street, who always feel homesick and longing for her motherland. How Esperanza tells that Mamacita always play Spanish radio and cry every night shows to whom the sense of belonging that Mamacita has.

The second novel is Caramelo. Just like The House on Mango Street, Caramelo is also a Coming-of-Age novel which is narrated by Celaya, the only daughter in family amongst seven children. Same with Esperanza, Celaya is a Mexican who lives in Chicago. From her perspective, Celaya, or Lala, narrates about her family, especially her grandmother whom she calls The Awful Grandmother. She also tells about her trip to Mexico every summer holiday, and she tells how it feels when she came to Mexico. 

We can see the cultural confusion in the part when Lala and her family enter frontier between U. S. A and Mexico, “As soon as we cross the bridge everything switches to another language. Toc, says the light switch in this country, at home it says click.” (Cisneros, page 17). How the different of language in U. S.as the world where Lala lives and Mexico as home makes her confuse. When Lala go beyond the borderline everything turn into strange things for her. This is make border becomes something that is important and significant. When Lala go beyond the borderline, she is not only go beyond the borderline physically from one territory to another territory, but also she go beyond her comfort zone to public. She must face the differences in reality. It feels like what Bhabha has said as “suddenly the home turns into another world” (Bhabha, page 143). This particular thing described by Homi Bhabha in The World and the Home;

“The border between home and world becomes confused; and, uncannily, the private and the public become part of each other, forcing upon us a vision that is as divided as it is disorienting.” (Bhabha, page 141)

The similar thing also happens to Rafael, older brother of Lala. The moment when Rafael went to Army School in Mexico and at the moment he came back, everything has changed.

“He tries talking to us in Spanish, but we don’t use that language with kids, we only use it with growns-ups. We ignore him and keep watching our television cartoons.

Later when he feels like it and can talk about it, he’ll explain what it’s like to be abandoned by your parents and left in the country where you don’t have enough words to speak the things inside you.” (Cisneros, page 23)

The way how Rafael being allienated by her family after he came back from Mexico makes him feels the outsideness because of the impact of two different cultures.

According to Bhabha’s The World and the Home, the characters in Caramelo represents the outsideness.

“It could be said of these moments that they are of the world but not fully in it; thay they represent the outsideness of the outsideness of the inside that is too painful to remember.” (Bhabha, page 152)

Furthermore, we can also see the gender issue found on these two Cisneros’s novel. We can found gender role and position issue in these novels and also we can find the oppression based on gender. We can find gender-based oppression in The House on Mango Street. There are the characters of abusive men, such as Mamacita’s abusive husband who always force her to speak English and Sally’s abusive father. Sally is a friend of Esperanza who is acting older than her actual age. Lately, Sally decided to run from her house with her boyfriend. The hierarchy that place man in the position which is higher than woman makes it possible for the male characters to be abusive toward female characters. In Caramelo, that kind of hierarchy can be seen on the conversation between Rafael to Lala.

“Especially the brothers laugh and point and call me a boy.

--Oh, brother! What a chillona you turned out to be. Now what? Mother asks.

—What could be worst than being a boy?

--Being a girl! Rafa shouts. And everyone in the car laughs even harder.” (Cisneros, page 22)

From above explanation, we can conclude that we can see the unhomeliness embodied in these two Cisneros’s novels. These novels talk about Chicana immigrants that experience some cases such as unhomeliness, gender-based oppression, or cultural confusion. The fictional characters in these novels experience cultural confusion as the impact of two different cultures that blended into one in their selves. Since the characters grow-up in two different cultures, these characters tend to admit but not admit their identity as Chicana, and also admit but not admit their identity as American. They have problem in sense of belonging and in which identity they belong to.

Works Cited

Bhabha, H. (1992). The World and the Home. Social Text, No. 31/312, Third World and Post-Colonial Issues , 141-153.

Cisneros, S. (1984). The House on Mango Street.

Cisneros, S. (2002). Caramelo .

Between Self & Others

A person personality constructed by three elements, id, ego, and super-ego. In short, Id is the component that one has since one has born. We can simply say that Id is primitive desire that one has from the inside. Ego is another component that comes from the inside.  Ego is there to control the desire that comes from Id when it turns into reality. Super-ego is the third component that comes from the outside, such as parent, family, and society. These elements function in unconscious, sub-conscious, and conscious state of mind.

When a baby born, the moment when the baby sees his mother, or other persons and things around him, is the moment when he knows he is an “I”. The baby figure out his self as a person because the baby sees “the others”. Hence, to define oneself as an “I”, one indeed need other people.

Lacan in The Mirror Stage also stated that we can only see the fragmented bodies of ours. We can’t see the whole parts of our bodies as unity. We can only see hands as hands, feet as feet. We hardly can see our bodies as a full body. Other people can see us as a unity, but we can only see ourselves as fragmented bodies. The only exception when we can see our bodies fully is when we look at our reflections in the mirror. However what we see in the mirror is illusion. What we see in the mirror is just our reflections.  For Lacan, what an infant identifies in the mirror called as imago. Imago is a kind of Gestalt. Gestalt means form, figure, and character.  Lacan explains that:

“The mirror-image would seem to be threshold pf the visible world, if we go by the mirror disposition that the imago of one’s own body present in hallucinations or dreams, whether it concerns its individual features, or even its infirmities, or its object-projections; or if we observe the role of the mirror apparatus in appearances of the double, in which physical realities, however heterogeneous, are manifested.” (Lacan, Page 443)

Hence, when we see ourselves in the mirror, we create the image that we want to see. In the mirror, we want to see ourselves to be someone that we want to be. For example, when we do make up, we won’t stop make up our faces until we see the image that we want to create in the mirror’s reflection.  Lacan also explains “to regard the function of mirror stage as a particular case of the function of the imago, which is to establish a relation between the organism and ts reality—or, as they say, between the Innenwelt and the Umwelt.” (Lacan, page 443).

The imago then will established as an Ideal-“I”. The ideal-“I” as subject will perpetually struggle throughout his/her life. The ego of an “I” will need the others to be an object. That is how relation between self and others.

Works Cited

Lacan, J. (n.d.). The Mirror Stage as Formative of the Function of the I as Revealed in Psychoanalytic Experience.

Structure and Structuralism; To Strew or To Build?

Long time ago in ancient era, some of people who believe in Plato’s thoughts believe that all of the texts have its own “form” from God. All of the texts already have its own “form” since in the state of idea. But, along with the improvement and development of language and science, that way of thinking is change, and in the first decades of twentieth century, the term  “form”, which was much more commonly used by philosophers, linguist, and literary critics back then replaced by the term “structure”. And then, what is structure? What is structuralism? And what is structuralist?

According to John Carlos Rowe in Structure, the word “structure” is comes from the Latin word “structura”, the nominal formed from the past participle “structus”, and from the verb “struere” which means “to heap together, arrangement” or to strew. But in modern usage, the common meaning of the structure is to build or to construct which are etymologically at odds with to strew. According to Peter Barry’s Beginning Theory, it is difficult to place structuralism in a single meaning, but more or less the essence of structuralism is “the belief that things cannot be understood in isolation – they have to be see in the larger context of the larger structures they are part of.” (Barry, Page 39), and back to Rowe’s Structure, “structuralist means a set of relations among elements shaped by a historical situation.” (Rowe, Page 25).

Talking about structure, we can’t simply separate it with what Ferdinand de Saussure say about linguistic structures. Just like what Peter Barry writes on his book, Beginning Theory, Saussure has three arguments in particular. First, he highlighted that the meanings we give to words are arbitrary, it depending on individual rather than any system or reason. Second, he highlighted that the meaning of words are relational. No words can be defined in isolation from other words. The meaning of one word is depends on the meaning of other words. Three, Saussure assume that language constitutes our world. The meaning of one word is always attributed to the object or idea by human mind. For example, there are some words that would never been neutral, such as “corruptor” or “terrorist”, it is all because the human mind has been construct those words have negative connotation.

By these definitions above, we can define structure as something that is very contextual. The history and the larger context of the text that strewed here and there in the text build and construct the content of the text, and that is what called “structure”.

                                                                                                                             

Works Cited

Barry, P. (n.d.). Structuralism. In P. Barry, Beginning Thoery .

Rowe, J. C. (n.d.). Structure.

                                                                                                                              

Literature Works and Literary Criticism as Representation

Far from our present time, in ancient era, Plato has been said about representation in Ion. As I once said in my previous response, Socrates stated to Ion that good poetry is made by God, good poetry is divine and the work of God, poets are only the interpreters of the Gods and Ion, as rhapsode, along with other rhapsodes, is only the interpreter of the interpreters of Gods. It means that Ion, as a rhapsode, is also the representation of the poets and poets are the representation of God.

Talking about representation, Sandra Gilbert and Susan Gubar’s The Madwoman in the Attic and Edward Said’s Jane Austen and Empire criticize how sentimental fictions, which are seems to be apolitical, could be engage in such a highly politically charged discursive context  such as patriarchy (Gilbert and Gubar’s The Madwoman in the Attic) and British imperialism (Said’s Jane Austen and Empire).

In Jane Austen and Empire, Said presents his analysis about Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park (1814) and its relation with imperialism. He assumed Mansfield Park as the most explicit in its ideological and moral affirmations of all Austen’s novel. In his writing, Jane Austen and Empire, Said stated that, “Austen’s novel express an “attainable quality of life in money and property acquired, moral discriminations made, the right choice put in place, the place, the correct “improvements” implemented, the finely nuanced language affirmed and classified.” (P. 1115). Said also argued he found paradox in reading Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park, he wrote, “All the evidence says that even the most routine aspects of holding slaves on a West Indian sugar plantation were cruel stuff. And everything we know about Austen and her value is at odds with the cruelty of slavery.” (P. 1124).

However, Said underlined that he was not blame European culture as the major factor that caused late-nineteenth-century imperialism. Said assumed that European culture often, but not always, stimulates imperial rule. He also said that, “what stimulate the extraordinary discrepancy into life is the rise, decline, and fall of the British empire itself and the emergence of a post-colonial confusion”. (P. 1124).

As written in Peter Barry’s Beginning Theory (1995), Said has explained in his book, Orientalism (1978) about Eurocentric universalism that placed European or Western as superior and placed what is not, East, as ‘Other’ and inferior to the West. In Jane Austen and Empire, Said might explain about this binary opposition and siding to the inferior. He might voices the voice of the inferior and explain how the inferior seen by the superior. In this case, Said might be the representative of the inferior who is represents the inferior.

From Said’s Jane Austen and Empire, we go on to Sandra Gilbert and Susan Gubar’s view about patriarchy and women writers in The Madwoman in the Attic. Gilbert and Gubar see that men have been created the image of “angel” and “monster” for women characters in their writings and women have been “killed” into art. Gilbert and Gubar assumed, “a woman writer must examine, assimilate, and transcend the extreme images of “angel” and “monster which male authors have generated for her.” (P. 814). In some male writings in that era, male authors have been created the ideal how women should be and women have “killed” themselves into art objects; slim, pale, passive beings whose “charms” eerily recalled the snowy, porcelain immobility of dead. There is a standard that women should be angelic and fragile, purity of heart, maternal and merciful, when in the other side women are labelled by monstrous feminine symbol, such as witches, evil eye, menstrual pollution, and castrating mothers.

“She has no story of her own but gives “advice and consolation” to others, listens, smiles, sympathizes” (P.815)., “Man must be pleased; but him to please is woman’s pleasure” (P. 816). Woman described as someone who has no time for herself and has to please man all the time. If women have no story of their own, then when can be their own selves? When women own their selves as their selves without any label as mother, wife, of daughter? If women have to always please men all the time, is there any vice versa that men have to always please women all the time? If woman’s image is constructed by man’s point of view, can woman constructing her point of view toward man? Why a woman can’t own herself? Why women should always please men? It seems unfair for women, if they are constructed by male authors, who never know how the feeling of being a woman, in their piece of literature works. It becomes more unfair when the women can’t defend herself from that construction.

Gilbert and Gubar explain how difficult it is for women even to attempt the pen. Women write to have their authorities as a woman. To deconstruct the construction that male has been constructed. We can conclude that when female authors write about women, they often put themselves as the representative of women in the worldwide who do not even given the voices. The female authors represent women voices that demand equality, or at least, demand to be heard. I think that is why sentimental fiction that seems to be apolitical turns to be very political.

Works Cited

Barry, P. (1995). Postcolonial criticism. In P. Barry, Beginning Theory.

Gilbert, S., & Gubar, S. (n.d.). The Madwomen in the Attic.

Plato. (n.d.). Ion.

Said, E. (n.d.). Jane Austen and Empire.

Literary Criticism; From Plato to Paul De Man

“For in this way the God would seem to indicate to us and not allow us to doubt that these beautiful poems are not human, or the work of man, but divine and the work of God; and that the poets are only the interpreters of the Gods by whom they are severally possessed.” (Ion by Plato, Page 45)

   Quotation above is footage from Plato’s Ion. In the section when Socrates stated to Ion that good poetry is made by God, good poetry is divine and the work of God, poets are only the interpreters of the Gods and Ion, as rhapsode, along with other rhapsodes, is only the interpreter of the interpreters of Gods. This assumption might be relevant in that era, but if we consider the development of literature in the present time, is the assumption that good poetry is made by God can be a relevant argumentation?

   Different from what Socrates stated on Plato’s Ion, T. S Eliot in Tradition and the Individual Talent stated that good literature works should consider the tradition. One can’t simply value a literature work alone; the comparisons are needed, so the good author or good poet should also look for some similar works in the past time, in order to make a good work in the present time.

   Different from both theories above, Oscar Wilde’s The Decay of Lying emphasizes different point of view about art and literature. This essay emphasizes art never express anything but art itself, or in other words, art for art’s sake. Thus, according to this essay, other things beside the works itself are not necessary to be considered. The author of a piece of literature works is separated with the piece of literature works.

   Coming from many notions and opinions about “good” and “bad” literature and how good literature should be, literary criticism and theories are needed as the measurement about literature works. Literary criticism and theory are needed as the measurement to define literature works by many perspectives and many approaches. Beside as measurement, literary criticism can also function to bridge between the author and the readers. Just like what Northrop Frye said on his essay, The Function of Criticism at the Present Time, “One obvious function of criticism is to mediate between the artist and his public.” (P. 34)

   In his essay The Resistance to Theory, Paul De Man emphasizes notion about method and truth, he stated that the method of theory should deliver the truth as he said, “It is better to fail in teaching what should not be taught than to succeed in teaching what is not true.” (P.95) This essay also said that in the past there is no theory, there is only assumptions, and there are historical, aesthetic, and philological things that should be considered in literary criticism. Paul De Man in The Resistance to Theory also said, “a general statement about literary theory should nor, in theory, start from pragmatic considerations” (P. 95) and other ideology, philosophy, and religions are part of the literature itself as the power of system.

   From above explanation, we can conclude that the standard of “good” and “bad” literature develops along with literary criticism, and the function of its criticism is to mediate between the author and the readers, and also as the measurement of literature works. Those are why literary criticism is needed. 

Works Cited

Eliot, T. S. (n.d.). Tradition and the Individual Talent.

Frye, N. (n.d.). The Function of Criticism at the Present Time.

Man, P. D. (n.d.). The Resistance to Theory.

Plato. (n.d.). Ion.

Wilde, O. (n.d.). The Decay of Lying.

The Importance of Being Earnest: A Satire Comedy

“On the contrary, Aunt Augusta, I've now realised for the

first time in my life the vital Importance of Being Earnest” – Jack

   The Importance of Being Earnest is one of the examples of bourgeois theatre by Oscar Wilde. The play mainly focus on double life of Jack and Algernon, or Algy, that make their lives get a lot of more difficult, but in the other side, it also leads Jack and Algernon to find out their true identity and their origin. Actually, this play brings honesty as its theme. How “Earnest” names itself is an adjective which means sincere, serious, and honest. This paper will talk about how this play brings honesty, hypocrisy, and double-life of two Victorian men, Jack and Algernon in the same time as satire comedy.

   Once upon a time, Algernon visited by his acquaintance, Earnest. Earnest wanted to marry his cousin, Gwendolen. Make long story short, the real name of Earnest is actually Jack. Jack said that his name is Jack in the village and Earnest when he goes to the city. Knowing about Jack’s double life, Algernon or Algy and Lady Brecknell, the mother of Gwendolen, against Jack and Gwendolen’s marriage, moreover after Lady Brecknell knew about Jack’s origin. He only a child that be found on station. Coming for Algy curiosity about Jack and Cecily, Algy came to the village and said he is Earnest, the brother of Jack. Both Algernon and Jack changed their names into Earnest and in the end of story, finally the characters of this play found out that Algernon and Jack are brothers from the same father.

   The formula of mistaken identity is actually a usual formula for comedy drama. Shakespeare used this formula in some of his comedy dramas, such as The Comedy of Errors, but what makes Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of being Earnest different are how the idea of mistaken identity presented in satire way to criticize common things in daily life, such as hypocrisy and double-life, and how this idea embodied by the complexity of the characters of Jack and Algernoon.

   The story when Gwengolden and Cecily want to marry people with “Earnest” as their names may can represent how every girls’ dreams are to marry people who are earnest, honest, sincere, and serious. This play may also states that this is important to being such an earnest person, honest and sincere, beacause something that artificial, such as Algernoon and Jack’s double life won’t last.

Works Cited

Wilde, O. (n.d.). The Importance of Being Earnest.