Confusion and Fear...Brimstone and Fire...

So I must admit that I have not yet completed this book, although, I am finding it interesting. That said; I’m also quite confused. When I first started reading this book, I was completely lost. I couldn’t keep track of who was who and what time frame we were in and what the heck was going on. Eventually, I started realizing that we were sort of jumping back and forth between different times within the life of Stephen. It is almost like following the train of thought of someone who has no ability to stay focused on one thing. One thought reminds them of something else so then they start talking about that, and then that thought reminds them of something else and so on. Sort of like “Wiki-walking”, going to Wikipedia for one thing, finding a highlighted section related to something else and before you know it, you’ve spent 2 hours looking at Wikipedia, you’re on a completely different subject than intended and you’ve not even completed what you initially intended to do. But, I digress.

Now I’m not sure if that was James Joyce’s intention or not in his writing style for this novel, but the whole jumping here and there, distracted sort of writing seemed to follow exactly the confusion and feelings of being lost that Stephen seemed to be going through in the novel.

Now being a “recovering Catholic” myself, I found the religious commentary in this novel quite interesting. Hopefully my comments don’t offend anyone, just my opinions. I immediately related to the situation that Stephen discussed in the novel at his Christmas dinner with Dante, Mr. Casey and Simon. As with any great argument/discussion the topics usually revolve around religion and politics. Joyce wrote,

“God and religion before everything! Dante cried. God and religion before the world!” (Joyce 38).

Now in my personal opinion, religion and politics have no right to be tied to each other and when they do things always get heated. In this example, it is my opinion, that it’s these extreme views and complete lack of ability to allow others the right to their opinions that caused and continues to cause unnecessary violence in this world. This is almost completely the history of Ireland, dating back to the very beginnings with the druids and Milesians. Not to mention really it's the history of probably just about every country in the world. There's always a fight triggered due to religious beliefs that get involved in politics. Actually, now that I think about it, perhaps politics is a direct descendant of religion. Without religion, maybe there would have never been any politics since people would have possibly not had anything to fight about or cared.

And finally, continuing with the issues of religion, I was awe struck when reading the section on the “fire and brimstone” in the novel. Joyce’s descriptions actually made my stomach turn a little and completely brought back some of my own personal fears from childhood. The descriptions were so very vivid and quite honestly, so very “Catholic”. Again, having been raised Catholic by very devout Catholic grandparents (have been married 53 years and said/say the full rosary EVERY night) and having gone through 8 plus years of Catholic education; I’m only speaking of my own experiences. But the “fear factor” that the Catholic religion uses literally scares people into trying to be good. I was scared again (just a little) just reading this section. It is this fear that is driven into you from an early age that leads to extreme guilt over any misstep you take in life. I think this was very clearly demonstrated by Stephan throughout the book, but especially during the retreat. Joyce writes,

“God had called him. Yes? What? Yes? His flesh shrank together as it felt the approach of the ravenous tongues of flames, dried up as it felt about it the swirl of stifling air. He had died. Yes. He was judged.” (Joyce 134).

I definitely think this may be the purest form of guilt and utter terror when a sermon can bring about an almost complete psychological break down. Again, just my opinion, but not something I see as healthy at all and not something a religion should be known for.

Tragic Hero

Let's try this again, hopefully without anymore technical difficulties.

So I didn't post on last week’s blog because quite frankly, I was completely confused and actually annoyed with this book. I found it very frustrating yet quite intriguing. Almost like watching a car crash that you can't look away from, I was annoyed by Dorian and Harry but still had to keep reading to see what happened. I think that most of my frustrations stemmed from the complete lack of responsibility that both of these characters showed for their own actions and the ridiculous rationalizations that they went through in order to explain away the guilt they felt. At least I think that was quite true for Dorian, but I'm still unsure of Lord Henry. I often found myself wondering if perhaps Lord Henry knew all along what was happening with Dorian and that he was simply pushing, molding and influencing him to see what would happen; sort of a sick psychological experiment to see how far you could push someone before they snapped or gave up. Who knows, that’s just a few of my thoughts on that topic.

Obviously while reading the book, I was picking up on the homosexual undertones but was often confused and not quite sure if I was reading more into the text than was really there. I was fairly certain that Basil’s adoration for Dorian was a representation of his homosexual attraction to Dorian. And I was fairly certain that Basil was trying to come to terms with his feelings about another man for the first time and continued to struggle with it throughout the book but ultimately seemed to be more accepting of who he was. As for Dorian, I thought perhaps he too had strong homosexual feelings but was ashamed of them. This is partly why he became so corruptive in other people’s lives. It seemed that his adoration for Sybil was his first attempt at trying to “love” a woman, however, when his friends saw her with him, he realized it was truly not her he loved but that he wanted desperately to be in love with a woman. I think this realization was one of the first steps he took towards understanding his life and trying to come to terms with who he was, unfortunately, he never seemed to actually accept himself for who he was. Instead he led a double life. Doing the “pretty” in high society as was expected of him, but also living out his frustrations and true identity in secret. To me, this was one of the most obvious points of hypocrisy in the book.

In reading the article by Alley, I found a whole new meaning or perspective on the book. As I stated previously, I had seen Basil as sort of the “good guy” in the book and Lord Henry as the “bad guy”. Almost like the little angel and devil sitting on opposite shoulders of Dorian. I think this is why Dorian was so torn in most of his life. He would give into his “temptations”, see the results, and then feel guilt for which he tried to rationalize away his part in the situations. What I didn’t see until reading Alley’s article is that Basil could be seen as the hero in the book who essentially triumphed despite his murder and lifestyle choice, that because he was more true to himself he was vindicated in the end. I saw this in Alley’s comment,

“Hallward was wayward in his confessions of love, bold in his portraitizing, and yet lacking in the ultimate execution of his love. In this sense, he represents the phrase, "to have a capacity for passion and not to realize it." His valorization and spiritualization are found, however, in his discovery of areas of himself he had not known before, and that very act makes him at one with Montaigne, Michelangelo, Winckelmann, and Shakespeare. The restored portrait serves as a commemorative of that initiation as well as a tragic reminder of his ultimate deficiency as a full agent of his own adventurous potential” (6-7).

To me this quote captures what I think Wilde was trying to express, that in the end despite the hypocrisy, corruption, and guilt that occur during one’s life, you can never escape your true identity.

"Seduction Theory" 101...

Sorry for the crazy layout with the pics. Haven't quite figured this part out yet.

As for the reasoning for the pics, it's just my way of displaying some
of the "Gothic" genre in film. Specifically vampires...and I have
to say I am a huge fan of vampire stories. Apparently

they hold a certain "Enigma" for me, but more likely it's just how much I'm in love with David
Boreanaz !!! ;D

Another week and another critique…sort of? Michael Davis’ critique of Carmilla in “Gothic’s Enigmatic Signifier” was not what I thought it would be. Although interesting and at some points seemingly plausible or sensible, for me, the critique places far too much emphasis on psychoanalysis, particularly psychosexual analysis. I clearly understand that there are definitely some overt sexuality issues being played out in Carmilla as evidenced by comments such as the following paragraphs,

“And when she had spoken such a rhapsody, she would press me more closely in her trembling embrace, and her lips in soft kisses gently glow upon my cheek.

Her agitations and her language were unintelligible to me.

From these foolish embraces, which were not of very frequent occurrence, I must allow, I used to wish to extricate myself; but my energies seemed to fail me. Her murmured words sounded like a lullaby in my ear, and soothed my resistance into a trance, from which I only seemed to recover myself when she withdrew her arms.

In these mysterious moods I did not like her. I experienced a strange tumultuous excitement that was pleasurable, ever and anon, mingled with a vague sense of fear and disgust. I had no distinct thoughts about her while such scenes lasted, but I was conscious of a love growing into adoration, and also of abhorrence. This I know is paradox, but I can make no other attempt to explain the feeling” (Le Fanu chpt IV).

In this passage, you can clearly see or feel the underlying sexuality being portrayed by Carmilla. You can also see that Laura does not understand the meanings of Carmilla’s advances; however, she seems unable to pull away and is left with mixed feelings and sensations of pleasure, excitement, disgust and fear.

In Davis’ critique, he pushes further into the meaning and potential theory behind these encounters. Davis discusses several famous psychoanalysts such as Freud, Lacan, and Laplanche. Interestingly, each of these men were almost like successors of each other; first came Freud in the development of psychoanalysis, then Lacan further expanded into works related to the unconscious, and finally Laplanche studied under Lacan and further developed and revised Freud’s “Seduction Theory”. It is this revision of the “Seduction Theory” that Davis uses to describe the sexual encounters and overall “enigma” of Gothic writing.

According to Davis it seems that the Gothic genre is characterized by the combination of fear and pleasure with an inexplicable desire to “figure it out”. In the case of Carmilla, the character Laura is seen as the “infant/child” from the “Seduction Theory” and Carmilla fills the role of the “adult/mother/other” who “inadvertently” exposes Laura to a sexual encounter at an age when she is unable to understand the experience and situation. This inability to understand is what leaves her with what Davis describes as,

“This alien thing (this horror without meaning) inside Laura, ‘put inside [her] by an alien’ (Otherness, 65) is precisely the untranslated residue of the earlier childhood experience, when the ‘seductive intrusion of the other’ (Intro., 9), freighted with unconscious sexual meaning, effected its violent (and incomprehensible) intromission” (Davis 230-231).

Essentially, this is stating that this initial trauma caused a lingering, although, unconscious effect within Laura which once “triggered” by secondary sexual traumas inflicted by Carmilla led Laura subconsciously to “repress” her understandings of the situation while still drawn to the “enigma” of Carmilla.

This is where I can clearly see how or why Davis feels that the "Seduction Theory" idea fits in this scenario, but I personally just don’t buy it. I think it is possible that this theory fits, but I don’t personally think that Le Fanu was specifically looking to address an issue of psychosexual analysis in his writing. Perhaps he was looking at subtly, or not so subtly, addressing sexuality but I don’t think he went so far as to discuss potential childhood sexual trauma leading to subsequent repression of unwanted feelings of “disgust” or “shame”. However, once again, the only one to know the true intentions behind the writing would be the author.

I did, however, really enjoy Davis’ last paragraph in discussing the Gothic text or genre. I find this to be an interesting twist on how we as observers or readers become engrossed and inexplicable drawn to the enigma found in the characters within the Gothic genre itself.

“Finally, if we, as readers of the Gothic, are in fact caught in the same ‘vortex of summons and repulsion’ (Powers, 1) as Laura, then our constant attempts to decipher the Gothic text, ‘to master, to translate, those enigmatic, traumatising messages’ (Otherness, 165), leave us all trapped in our own repetition compulsion, inexorably (but perhaps pleasurably) drawn to ‘the place where meaning collapses’ (Powers, 2); a place ‘very nearly dark’ (278).” (Davis 234).