Review of The Dubliners

Ashamedly I've avoided reading any James Joyce for as long as is feasibly possible whilst studying for an English Lit degree. My time was up this week, and I had to cave in the form of The Dubliners in order to get ahead with some module reading. Admittedly the book made me feel like a rather inadequate student - I knew there must be some meaning behind this quandary of characters and situations, but had few ideas as to what. So, after doing a bit of research and rereading over notes I took whilst reading the book (yes, I'm that type of lit student, urgh), I've come up with some ideas about my take on this book.

For the majority of the novel I had no clue as to what was going on. I felt like I was wandering in circles around this semi-fictional Dublin and couldn't escape from the inane repetition of reading about the lives of various seemingly insignificant characters. I actually got rather annoyed at this and in this way missed the point - I wasn't confused because I didn't understand Joyce, I was confused because Joyce wanted me to be. If that makes sense. He purposefully made the life of the key protagonist of each chapter seem mundane and repetitive because he was trying to make his readers realise that that is the nature of Dublin society. Take, for example, Eveline. She could escape her tragic, boring life to go to Argentina with her love. Yet she doesn't. And why? Like most middle class women living in Dublin at the time she is stuck in a rut of routine, and cannot escape without casting off all familial, traditional and supposedly moral ties to her formal life. 

All of the characters reside on the outskirts of middle class society, and in this way give a sort of overview of life in Dublin during this period. Thus, they don't really speak to the reader as individuals, but as a collective entity of different sub-sections of the middle class. We have the potentially violated young boy, the manipulative mother, the lover with lost hopes and the list goes on.

Now, as to whether I enjoyed it ... I can't say it's going to be in my top ten. or really anywhere near there to be honest. Although I appreciate the literary merit of the work as it was relatively important for the avant-garde movement, it wasn't something that I exactly lost the track of time with whilst reading. Saying that, it's Joyce, so it's obviously well written. It's also quite interesting because of the sheer range of lives that he provides perspective on.

Have you read it? What did you think?

Steph x

Review of House of Mirth

“Since she had been brought up to be ornamental, she could hardly blame herself for failing to serve any practical purpose”

Truth be told, this wasn’t a “random” pick like the majority of my books recently have been. I decided to be a bit keen and get cracking on some early reading for the modules I’m doing in my third (and final, eeek) year at uni. However, for a book that I kind of had to read, I did really enjoy it. Plus, it made me feel as though I’ve learnt something about my own life. Personally, if a book changes my opinions about things or makes me see things in a different light, then it’s a success in my eyes.

Edith Wharton, the author of this insightful novel, wrote it in the style deemed American naturalism. This bildungsroman follows the downwards spiral of Lily Bart’s character from a much-sought after woman to, well, you’ll see if you read the book. Lily Bart is the orphaned niece of rich former socialite Mrs Peniston. Her inestimable beauty allows her to weave her way into the hearts of many of the right people, but sadly also the wrong. On the face of it, this is a book about how tough it is for a girl to remain unmarried in high society for too long, but it appealed to me more as a tragic love story.

Don’t get me wrong, I struggled with the book at times. But that was purely because Lily Bart wasn’t exactly the most likeable character (to put it nicely). That’s kind of the point though isn’t it? She was realistic. Deep down we’re all far from perfect and make some irreconcilable mistakes in our lives. This is what Lily Bart did. She was the victim of circumstance and her upbringing, which drove her to act in the way she did.

I did however find the book a little out of place. Usually twentieth century American novels are distinctive in their content and style in order to define themselves as being not English. House of Mirth however felt to me as though it could have hopped off of the shelves of any English bookstore in the twentieth century.

Overall though, it was an invaluable read.

What did you think?

Crime and Bleak House

Charles Dickens' fictional novel Bleak House was originally published in serials. It explores both social and legal crimes, appearing to set them up in conflict with one another. This allows him to pose the question to the reader: which type of crime is worse? Do we see (spoilers, but it was written quite a while ago) Esther's bastardization as a result of Lady Dedlock's youthful sexual liberty as something inherently more immoral than Mr Tulkinghorn's murder? My answer is no. Dickens is known for his exposés of the physically and metaphorically filthy state of London in the nineteenth century. This novel appears to occupy a similar strand of argument, which means that it examines the implication of social crimes upon legal ones. Thus, Lady Dedlock's sexual activity cannot be viewed in a light which puts all other plot strands to darkness: all other crimes are in some way involved with it, to the extent that Mr Tulkinghorn's murder could even be said to be caused by it. 

Lady Dedlock's sexual crime, by which she decides to engage in premarital sexual intercourse with Captain Hawdon, is also a domestic crime. This crime is inextricably linked to the haughty mask of secrecy which controls Lady Dedlock's domestic life. Although at first it appears that her aristocratic snobbery allows her to occupy this position of aloofness, it is eventually revealed that it is crippling shame which induces this facade. She maintains this cool exterior by flitting from place to place, refusing to fully engage herself in her life. Lady Dedlock continues to live in this manner for a number of years until Mr Tulkinghorn invades her domestic sphere with a vicious sting of truth: her past. Tulkinghorn's revelation to Lady Dedlock of his knowledge of her youthful sexual affair is central to the criminal strand of the novel's plot. Once this invasion has occurred, the social order which the reader experiences at the beginning of the novel can never be restored. Thus, this indicates that the theme of this Victorian fictionalisation of crime is the secrecy of the home's problematical relationship with the public sphere. Indeed, Lady Dedlock is not initially aware of the long-lasting consequences of her affair: Esther, her daughter, is alive! Once this is revealed, her life becomes fraught with tension. Lady Dedlock is no longer able to feel "at home" in her stately mansion because her sexual "crime" has made her unworthy of such a high social position. 

Furthermore, questions surrounding Mr Tulkinghorn's murder are at first seemingly unanswerable because of the number of enemies he has made by collecting peoples' domestic secrets. Indeed, his own secrecy is involved in the seemingly impossible nature of the inquest as nobody knows to whom he was attending on the evening of his murder. Mr Tulkinghorn's death, in parallel to his life, is shrouded in mystery. His death, and life for that matter, is, moreover, at the heart of all of the criminal strands of the complicated plot of Bleak House. He represented the watchful eyes of the public social sphere upon Lady Dedlock's life. His invasion of the secrecy of her home led to his murder. In addition, the death brings a number of minor criminal figures out from the shadows of crime-ridden London. Mr Smallweed, Hortense and Mr George are all characters with questionable moral qualms, and all have committed some crime, whether it be legal or moral, in the novel. In this way, Mr Tulkinghorn's murder ironically results in the invasion of the secrecy of his home by representatives of the public sphere.

Moreover, there is an interesting link between women and crime in the text as it is Hortense and Lady Dedlock who arguably commit the greatest crimes. In Victorian culture, women were expected to occupy the domestic sphere: this provides another (albeit tenuous) link between domestic life and the fictionalisation of crime. Hortense is a maid, which means that her role in society is to invade the secrecy of the home. She occupies a peripheral position in the house as she is both integral to its pragmatical functioning and unnecessary to the family emotionally. Hortense's lack of understanding of the position which she occupies is revealed in her childish indignance at losing her place as Lady Dedlock's favoured female companion. Hortense's vengeful plan which she enacts as a result of this is incredibly detailed and cunning. This shows that if the secrets of the house are revealed to the public sphere, serious crimes can abound in Victorian London. Moreover, Horetense's plot to frame Lady Dedlock would have been successful had she not been residing with Mrs Bucket - the detective's wife - at that period of time. A crime can therefore only be successful is it remains hidden from other members of a household. 

Furthermore, Mrs Pardiggle's unmannerly invasion of the brickmakers' homes reveals the presence of domestic abuse to both the naive wards of Jarndyce and the reader. The black eye which Liz sports and her husband's drunk, aggressive behaviour are designed to imply that he beats her. Had Mrs Pardiggle not have entered the house, this awareness would not have been made public in the novel. Indeed, Liz and her friend Jenny, a fellow brickmaker's wife, suffer from a great deal of physical and emotional abuse from their husbands to the extent that they are made penniless, voiceless and powerless to do anything about it. 

What are your thoughts about crime in Bleak House?

Cross-dressing in Shakespeare's Plays

Cross-dressing in Shakespeare's plays is often inextricably linked with times of carnival. Although the rituals associated with modern-day carnivals developed from this concept it was obviously incredibly different during the early seventeenth century. Carnival was a period of license in authoritarian England which involved masquerade balls (which are themselves a form of cross-dressing), bouts of drinking, and a general inversion of social hierarchical order. Shrove Tuesday, the May Games and Misrule - the period extending from Christmas to Epiphany - are key dates associated with it. Carnival is followed by a period of lent or fasting.

Shakespeare highlights that Twelfth Night is going to be associated with carnivalesque themes through the very wording of this play's title. Twelfth Night is the last day of the period of Misrule, the most extravagant period of carnival in the year.the tension between carnival life and lent is evident throughout the play, and is potently explored through a multitude of characters' cross dress. the most obvious example of this is Viola who not only re-configures herself physically, but gives herself a man's name: Cesario. Viola subverts the natural hierarchical order of her position in society through this disguise. She recognises that in order to survive the shipwreck socially she must become a man; in this respect she saves her life to a greater extent than the Captain does. Here, to occupy the space of a woman onstage is to render oneself powerless. There is also a great deal of humour created through this disguise as the actor playing Viola in this play would have been a boy playing a woman playing a man. Humour and laughter are tropes of periods of carnival. Moreover, the layers of cross-dressing here hyperbolises the chaotic confusion of social hierarchies which carnival induces. 

It is interesting to see how cross-dressing creates an interplay with one's sexuality. Viola must engage in the language of courtship with Olivia on behalf of Orsino, which results in Olivia's acquisition of a homosexual attachment to Viola. This can evidently never be satisfied. Moreover, Viola's disguise renders the sexual boundaries of her and Orsino's relationship into a state of confusion. When he believes that Viola is a man he recognises the beauty of Viola/Cesario's red lips. Moreover, Orsino continues to call Viola Cesario even after she has revealed her female nature. Perhaps Shakespeare characterises these characters in such a way as to indicate that all genders and sexualities are performative. This allows Olivia's love for Cesario, as well as the homosexual relationship between Antonio and Sebastian, to evade negative connotations. There is a certain fluidity inherent to all gender relations in the play.

Similarly, in As You Like It Rosalind alters her gender in a performative manner in order to evade social ruin. She escapes her town and secures the man she loves as a result of her cross-dressing, This indicates that perhaps socially it is safer to be a man in Elizabethan England rather than a woman. Men, according to psychological theories of this period, were more rational creatures than woman, which may be a reason for Rosalind's success at manipulating her situation and keeping calm whilst she performs as Ganymede. the inverse of this is explored in Titus Andronicus when Titus dresses up as a female cook to enact his bloodthirsty revenge upon Tamora and her sons. The frantic bloodbath which follows highlights the chaotic nature of a woman's hysterical passions. Conversely, In Macbeth Lady Macbeth masculinises herself in order to conduct cold, efficient revenge.

What are your thoughts?

Stephanie

The Harry Potter series as a social commentary?

J.K.Rowling’s series of novels designed for teenagers seem to me to have a deep socio-historical context that is not clear upon an initial examination. This is often portrayed in a humorous manner which allows it to become a rather satirical representation of modern life.

            For starters, the character of Voldemort appears to be an amalgamation of several historical figures as well as a figment of Rowling’s imagination. Whether these influences were intentional or not is unclear, but as one of them especially is a clear character in the world’s cultural consciousness it is easy to recognise him. This particular individual is Adolf Hitler. The key parallel between the two of them is his insistence on eradicating those not of “pure-blood” (in Hitler’s case those not of the Aryan race, and in Voldemort’s those not of wizarding blood). This drive to eradicate people whom these powerful men saw as inferior to them led to cruelly hunt people down and murder them often in their homes. As Voldemort becomes more powerful, it becomes unsafe for students of Hogwarts who are of mixed blood or who derived from muggles to travel unprotected. This mimics a similar situation in Germany when Hitler was at the peak of his power. The almost hypnotic power of these two men in securing followers is also similar as people dis whatever was asked of them out of both fear and respect for these despotic leaders. Moreover, the existence of the Order of the Phoenix seems to be a representation of the Allies in World War II: they exist to stop the increasing malevolent power of Voldemort.

            Another character which appears to be embodied in Voldemort is that of Satan himself. In previous times the name Satan, Devil or even Beelzebub was something spoken with a great deal of fear, and thus was something to avoid. In a similar way Voldemort is largely called “You-know-who” or “He-who-must-not-be-named” in order to avoid incurring pain from him or one of his followers. Voldemort is an embodiment of all evils in the text and is the source of them also; there is an awareness in the books that if Voldemort did not exist the use of dark magic on muggles or other wizarding folk would not have occurred. Indeed, he tempts people to join his side with thoughts of safety and adoration, just as the devil tempts people to join him.

            There are several other aspects of the series which have satirical social contexts and, when contemplated, are rather funny. The primary example of this in my opinion is the fact that goblins run a bank. These shrunken, ugly creatures whose only concern is for gold caricature the popular perspective of bankers. Moreover, the corruption within the bank which emerges quietly throughout the books mimics the loss of trust our modern day English public have felt in the banking system. Not only are several people’s vaults broken into (something that can only be done with the help of a goblin) but in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows we are given a first-hand view of how a goblin will breach the bank he works for in order to seek personal wealth.

However, perhaps the most important aspect of the series which is most relevant to modern day life is the fact that how you perceive someone’s character is from the way they act is not their true character. In our modern society we are endlessly encouraged to understand the importance of beauty. Also, in the majority of modern texts we have lost the depth of characters that formerly existed in classical tomes. Yet J. K. Rowling has managed to bring this back, particularly in the characters of Snape and Professor Dumbledore. The immense plot twist towards the end of the series of books in which we realise that Dumbledore isn’t as much of a paragon of excellence as Harry understood him to be and that Snape does have a heart, at the centre of which is Harry himself, forces modern readers to accept that you can never truly know a person until you have been inside their head. This is an important lesson to learn as it highlights that we ought to suspend our judgements on everybody as you cannot know their nature or true motivations. This appears to be the most potent lesson for modern day readers to take in by reading these books and thus ought to remain with us for a long time after the reading of them has been completed.

A Comment Upon Love Triangles in Victorian Literature

Most of us are accustomed to love triangles as being a standard part of the majority of modern romantic comedy films, however this has been around for considerably longer than originally thought. Although it has been used by writers (or poets as they were known in Ancient times) since Ancient Greek literature the development of feminist perspectives in the Victorian era allows it to take on a new meaning.

            There are clearly two ways Victorian writers create love triangles: two men vying for a woman’s affections, or two women vying for a man’s. Which one they choose depends on the particular representation of the two genders that they are trying to evince in their writing. Emily Bronte explores gender through this type of love rivalry in Wuthering Heights in a particularly interesting way as she utilises both of the above forms and does so in a way that makes the reader sympathetic towards women as well as making them strong characters. Cathy Earnshaw is sought after by two men (Heathcliff and Edgar Linton) and is free to make her own decision regarding her future husband. This commences well until Cathy is forced by Heathcliff to realise that in marrying Linton she has defied her true nature which is bound to him. The mental turmoil she then succumbs to eventually leads to her death as she cannot lie with this inner tension. Thus, although Bronte creates Cathy as a seemingly independent, strong woman her death is induced by the power this love triangle has over her. Indeed, this book has another triangle in which the wrong choice is made, however this time not unwittingly. This is between Heathcliff, Cathy and Isabella Linton. Heathcliff’s intentional abuse of Isabella’s feelings in marrying her to secure property and because he cannot marry Cathy (thus making her the second choice) serves as an example of the cruelty of men in the art of love in the Victorian era.

            Another writer who particularly likes the use of love triangles is Thomas Hardy. Both Tess of the D’Ubervilles and Far From the Madding Crowd explore the nature of men through their differing attitudes towards love. Hardy uses this arrangement to comment socially upon the transition between traditional ways and the coming of the “Golden Age”. In Tess the contrast between the new age and the old is highlighted with the characters of Angel and Alec D’Uberville. Although there is this foundational contrast between the two they are both morally corrupt, which highlights the fact that neither traditional ideals nor modern ones are morally and socially appropriate; perhaps an amalgamation of the two is more ideal. Thus Hardy utilises the love triangle between these two men and Tess to not only explore the social context of womanhood in the late 1800s but also that of masculinity in a sexual context.

            Furthermore, Austen uses this form of relationship struggle to highlight the way in which a woman ought to behave in her novel Mansfield Park. Fanny Price and Mary Crawford vie for Edmund Bertram’s attention, but in the end Fanny secures the position of being his wife because of her inner purity and piety. Austen here socially condemns the modern way of life with drinking, gambling and doing perverse things in large towns, especially London. Mary’s character ensconces immorality at a simplistic life with her utter refutation of religion as well as leading a nice, rural life. Thus, this love triangle exposes the idea that cohering to modern ideals will not secure you a lover; you must stay true to being good.

To conclude, at the centre of these and many other Victorian love triangles I have not mentioned is not love. Instead these authors are exposing that to secure what one strives for in life (that is, a life partner in those days) one must have a keen moral sensibility and use it to do what is socially, as well as religiously, correct.