The protagonists in Written on the Body and Cereus Blooms at Night both create an extension of themself who they feel an obligation to protect, ultimately sacrificing their form to save “their child.”
The narrator in Written on the Body views Louise as a part of themself, a person who is very similar and part of an intertwined and complementary set of bodies. They are two halves of the same whole, made of similar parts with very minimal differences: “Your body is twice. Once you once me. Can I be sure which is which?” (Winterson 99). They clearly see Louise as an extension of themself, or themself as an extension of Louise. Either way, the narrator views this relationship as dependent, with one unable to exist fully without the other. The narrator also sees Louise as their creation, calling her “My child. My baby” (Winterson 159). The narrator feels a parental obligation to Louise, to protect her from the world and take care of her. This parental lens taken by the narrator in viewing their relationship forces the narrator to take a position of authority, one where they feel entitled to making decisions on behalf of Louise, as a parent would their child. Therefore, the narrator makes the decision to leave Louise to ‘save her from her cancer,’ because “Our love was not meant to cost you your life. I can’t bear that. If it could be my life I would gladly give it” (Winterson 105). The narrator takes on the role of the savior, sacrificing themself and this love to allow Louise to get care from Elgin. They emphasize that they would rather die than her, but because they cannot take her cancer away from her body, they do the next best thing — they cut themself out like a tumor, theoretically saving Louise. For the rest of the novel, the protagonist floats through life incomplete, unable to have what they truly want. For a majority of the novel the protagonist sees this action as a justifiable and courageous sacrifice they make for Louise to be free, to survive.
Similarly, Mala creates Pohpoh as an extension of her childhood self to separate that trauma and period of her life from her current woes. Mala views herself as Pohpoh’s mother, and intends to be “the mother of Pohpoh or at least her older sister” who would have “hugged her and protected her as well as PohPoh had protected Asha” (Mootoo 173). Mala, the grown up Pohpoh, separates a part of her identity, that childhood youthfulness, from the whole so she has someone to take care of after Asha leaves. The maternal role Mala/Pohpoh has filled since her real mother abandoned her is deeply ingrained in her identity, and so when one ‘child,’ Asha, leaves, Mala must create another child to protect. This child just happens to be an extension of herself, a figment of her imagination that represents her childhood and innocence that needs to be shielded from the violence of the father. Mala also takes on the role of ‘mother’ for the entire family, acting as a mother for Asha or Pohpoh, a wife for Chandin, and the one who runs the household.
Just as the protagonist does, Mala ‘sacrifices’ herself to save Pohpoh from violence. In addition to taking the brunt of her father’s sexual abuse, when the police investigate her house and find Chandin’s body, Mala places herself as a barrier between them and Pohpoh: “‘They coming after you, run, run!’ Mala shouted to the child who, in her imagination, had already escaped the yard’s confines. […] ‘Yes, Pohpoh, you take off and fly, child, fly!’” (Mootoo 186). Mala is tackled by the police, but this self-sacrifice allows Pohpoh, or her childhood, to remain free and escape from reality. This metaphorical sacrifice of the narrator and Mala ‘saves’ the child they care for in an ultimate act of parental love. Just as the protagonist views Louise as “the tender thing I wanted to protect,” Mala says her “first duty was to save and care for Pohpoh” (Winterson 159, Mootoo 172). Both characters view their relationship with this extension or creation of theirs through a parental lens, making their primary purpose to protect and care for that person, like a child.
By framing both of these protagonists as parents who shield and defend aspects of themself, both authors comment on this phenomenon of hiding away aspects of one’s identity to protect it from the harsh world. This component is usually manifested or thought of as a child, because they represent innocence and purity and must be protected from trauma. By separating this part of self and manifesting it as something physical, whether that is onto one’s lover or as a figment of one’s imagination, these characters use escapism to protect this aspect of self that may be threatened by external factors. For the narrator, Louise represents all of the good parts of a relationship before it meets that ‘six month mark’ where things usually go south. For Mala, separating her childhood innocence and wish to escape keeps it from being corrupted by her father’s violence. However, this reaction is a bit paradoxical, since it puts one in harm’s way to protect one from another form of harm. Does this approach imply that keeping one’s childhood pure is essential?
That’s such an interesting comparison to make. For Mala, taking the physical violence to protect her childhood self from the emotional impact of that violence. For the narrator of WotB, taking the emotional impact of losing Louise to save her physical body from pain/suffering. In class, a lot of us agreed that for Mala, it’s actually a form of self-sacrifice, but for the narrator, it’s more just running away to be the “hero” (which ultimately hurts Louise). There is a similarity in trying to “protect” that childhood innocence, as you put it, but the ways they go about it are still different. Mala sees this responsibility as standing in the way of harm, where the narrator sees it as stepping out of the way for someone else to “protect” Louise.