Author: Heidi Kim

“Could your sister be your brother too? Could your brother be your father?
Can your Pappy be your Pappy and your Grandpappy at the same time?” (25) 

Tyler is curious about the “rules” of familial relationships that are somehow ingrained into the way we think about normalcy. He asks his grandma, whom he calls Cigarette Smoking Nana, whether an individual family member can share/be two roles at once. This become the context for the story of Ramchandin and familial/non-familial relationships.  

Before telling the story, Cigarette Smoking Nana explains that several familial roles can be shared by one individual. This concept is an unconventional concept because society has taught us that mothers inherently assume the motherly role, the father assumes the fatherly role, etc.  

The hesitation in Cigarette Smoking Nana’s answer depicts how unconventional the concept is. It further portrays the uncomfortableness and taboo surrounding such idea of shared familial roles.  

While this concept is unorthodox, it is still evident in society. Sociology experts state that many lower-income families rely on each other. Meaning, someone’s aunt (even though not blood related) can help raise a child that is not related to them. Another example would be single-parent households. A single mom takes on both the mother and father role.  

This first part of the passage, “Could your sister be your brother too?”, could allude to the concept of gender roles and society. Being a sister is associated with feminine ideas such as dresses, makeup, the color pink, and opposition to masculine ideas such as toy trucks, jeans, t-shirts, and short hair. Tyler’s sexuality was evident through his curiosity of switching roles, familial and gender. Maybe he didn’t know that he was essentially asking and looking for affirmation for his future self, who (as it becomes evident) likes to dress in women’s clothing and is essentially sharing/alternating between 2 roles.  

Introducing the idea of one individual sharing 2 roles suggests the confusion Tyler has about his sexuality and suggests that he wants to hide it by asking the same general question but with a different scenario. Just as an individual family member sharing more than one role is unconventional, so might the concept of being trans. While both concepts are evident in society, it is not part of the “normal” narrative that we grow up with and is therefore seen as unconventional.

Throughout Autobiography of Red, personification is used to bring the environment around Geryon to life and allows readers to feel what Geryon felt about his surroundings. The personification gives more information about the setting Geryon is in and whether it not it has significance to Geryon’s experience. For example, in section IV. Tuesday, Carson describes the setting as, “a black January wind came flattening down from the top of the sky hitting the windows hard” (35). Giving a month (January) the characteristic/ability to flatten and hit is used to contrast the unpleasantness outside and the pleasantness inside whilst hanging out with his mom. By enabling this use of personification, we can use the negative aspect of the quote to reiterate the importance of this weekly enjoyable moment for Geryon. Another example in which personification enables readers to understand the emotions of Geryon in a certain environment is when Geryon’s brother states that their mother would not be home for hours, at which point Geryon “felt everything in the room hurl itself away from him” (31). Equipping his room the characteristic of hurling is inventive because it helps readers understand Geryon’s emotions of feeling alone and powerless when he becomes aware that he will be alone with his abusive brother. Carson’s use of personification provides readers a different understanding of Geryon’s emotions.  

“’We could decide in three months. That would be fairer wouldn’t it? To Elgin, to you?’ 
‘What about you?’ 
I shrugged. ‘I’ve done with Jaqueline. I’m here for you if you want me.’ 
She said, ‘I want to offer you more than infidelity.” (Winterson 84) 

This passage stood out to me because it revolves around the active decision to continue infidelity. The first sentence indicates premeditation and affirmation that went into their affair. Louise is deciding when to leave her husband, Elgin, so that she can continue her affair with the narrator. Additionally, that process of decision making affirms the notion that Louise wants (more or less) to be with the narrator that she is willing to leave her husband. From my knowledge, most affairs do not end up with the cheater and the wife/husband/partner getting together. Furthermore, the sentence “that would be fairer, wouldn’t it?” is ironic because she is talking about being “fair” while cheating and while still being with her husband rather than leaving him as soon as she started the affair. Continuing the affair behind Elgin’s back for three months is beyond asking what is fair.

Moreover, Louise’s statement of “I want to offer you more than infidelity” depicts that she feels she may be at fault for the affair. While, yes she is at some fault, I believe the narrator is more at fault for continuing the affair knowing that Louise was married. Written on the Body is all about infidelity and is told from the perspective of a cheater rather than of the cheated on. This perspective is important because there are always two sides to a story and when it comes to affairs, we only ever hear the side of the cheated on and not the thought process or story of the cheater.

In relation to the book as a whole, this passage is about cheating and cheating is a concept that has no sexuality or gender. Reading Written on the Body from a character whose gender is unknown allows readers to read without prejudice. Reading from the perspective of the cheater not only strays away from the norm of only hearing from the cheated on, it also offers an explanation as to why they decided to cheat and what made them decide to continue (or not continue) the affair. I, personally, do not condone cheating and am not trying to justify cheating, but I believe Written on the Body offers a perspective, explanation, and some sort of closure as to why people make the decisions they make.

“Never unfold too much, tell the whole story. I didn’t know that Louise would have reading hands. She has translated me into her own book” (89).

I believe the passage is about secrecy and the fear of secret thoughts becoming known. The first part of the passage indicates the narrator’s “rules” for thoughts to remain secret. The second part of the passage, specifically the words “I didn’t know” and “her own book”, depict the unexpected reality of their thoughts and self being discovered. When the narrator states, “never unfold too much, tell the whole story”, it indicates the fear of letting their loved one in, yet we (strangers) are able to read their whole story (89). Additionally, the second part of the passage indicates that Louise views the narrator how she wants to view them. As secretive as the narrative is with her thoughts, they are also made very public to the readers that can also be interpreted so differently. I was reading the novel as the narrator’s diary, filled with thoughts not wanting to be publicly known to those around her. It speaks to the level of comfort the narrator has with the reader, but not with those around her.

It’s a little ironic that the narrator implies the idea of secrecy and “never telling the whole story” because Written on the Body is essentially written by the third party of the affair (the cheater rather than the cheated on).  This perspective is different from most other stories as we are used to hearing or reading the perspective of someone who’s been cheated on, not the one who’s doing the cheating.