Geryon and His Captivity

In the novel Autobiography of Red by Anne Carson, the main character Geryon is shown to be limited by the idea of captivity in his identity. I think that this stems from the difficulties he had in his childhood. His brother sexually assaulting him and his identity being different than those around him has limited him in how he sees himself.

Throughout the novel, the concept of “inside” connects to the mentions of captivity. After his brother assaults him for the first time he says, “He thought about the difference between outside and inside. Inside is mine, he thought” (Carson, 29). He then later says he writes about his “inside things” in his autobiography and says that he omits all “outside things. This connects to the concept of captivity because his inner thoughts are held captive in himself, he does not share them with any of the important people in his life. “Inside” are the parts that he can control and everything on the outside, his brother and Herakles’ treatment of him, are out of his hands. 

When doing graffiti with Herakles later, Herekles says “All your designs are about captivity, it depresses me” (Carson, 55). To me this would have been an opportunity for Geryon to talk to Herakles about his feelings, but he does not because of previous experiences with his brother. I think his brother telling him not to tell his mom about his assault has led to his feeling that he cannot tell anyone about his feelings.  Previously in the book, Geryon has also said that a cage is his favorite weapon when prompted by his brother. He has felt what a “cage” has done to him and thinks it is brutal enough to be a weapon. 

Another interesting moment regarding captivity was when Geryon was talking about seeing a dog with rabies. He says “When the owner stepped up and put a gun to the dog’s temple, Geryon walked away. Now leaning forward to peer out the little oblong window where icy cloudlight drilled his eyes he wished he had stayed to see it go free” (Carson, 78) This makes me think more about the attitude that Geryon has towards his own captivity. If he is thinking about death being a“freeing” experience, has he ever thought about that regarding himself and his own captivity?

 

Cereus Blooms at Night and Language Use

Throughout the novel Cereus Blooms at Night by Shani Mootoo, language is a source of control and autonomy for the main character Mala. This reflects the author’s deliberate word and language choices throughout the book to develop the characters identity in different ways. 

The author uses language as a tool of developing identity. When Ambrose’s wife leaves him, he corrects her writing. His view and use of language, which he used a lot with Mala and barely ever used with his current wife because he was asleep most of the time, show his attitudes towards the two of them. I took Mala’s control and limited use of language as a way for her to have control over an aspect of her life. Malas upbringing, from being left behind by her mother to the extensive rape from her father she had to battle, has left her no room for control in her life. Her father controls where she goes and what she cooks, and Mala has to obey due to his violence. Once he is gone and Mala is on her own, she can take control of herself and identity. 

The author says “Mala gives up verbal language, while I use verbal language to detail her trauma and her triumph. To my mind, her abandonment of this language and my use of it are only different sides of the very same coin.” (Mootoo, 111). This further shows the sense of control Mala has over herself now, she can control what she tells Tyler, her life is no longer someone else’s. Mootoo uses specific words to show the relationships and identities of characters. I saw this in the discussion of Mala’s father, “Pohpoh was what her father had lovingly called her since she was a baby…but when Chandin Ramchandin started touching her in ways that terrified and hurt her…” (Mootoo, 200). When talking about the past and their father daughter relationship, the author uses the titles “Poh Poh” and “father”, but when talking about the brutality, the author says “Chandin Ramchandin” and “Mala”, which is what PohPoh changed her name too because Mala reminded her too much of her fathers actions towards her. 

 

The Christmas Effect and Isolation

“What if instead there were a practice of valuing the ways in which meanings and institutions can be at loose ends with each other? What if the richest junctures weren’t the ones where everything means the same thing?” (Sedgwick 6)

Prior to this quote, Sedgwick describes  “The Christmas Effect”. The statement above is when she ponders what it would be like if family units were not focused on conforming to the norm that is enforced and instead embracing the differences that occur between them. She then goes on to list things like a surname, a building, and a circuit of blood relationships. 

The Christmas effect is the idea that during the Christmas season, everybody; families, businesses, schools, and churches are all on the same page. This then puts people who don’t celebrate Christmas into an out group. She relates this to the experience of being queer becuase it diverges from what society portrays as the normal experience. Because of the strict norm of creating a certain family dynamic that is expected, it forces queer people into isolation and having to go through the process of “coming out”.

When reading this, it made me think of Micheal Warner’s piece when he says “almost all children grow up in families that think of themselves and all their members as heterosexual, and for some children this produces a profound and nameless estrangement, a sense of inner secrets and hidden shame.” This is the experience that kids feel because of the Christmas effect. Around Christmas time, you can barely even leave your house without being bombarded by something having to do with the holidays. This made me think of the role models and adults that queer kids are surrounded by, being almost entirely heterosexual. 

When Sedgewick says “What if the richest junctures weren’t the ones where everything means the same thing,” I think of the definitions of queer that we have come across in our readings. Many of them separate queer from just being about sex and open them up to a broader specrum as anything that stems away from heteronormative. Sedwick herself refers to the word queer as an “open mesh of possibilities,” (Sedgewick 8). I think this definition relates to what Sedwick is saying because it opens up opportunities to enjoy the differences that occur among people and relationships instead of trying to force conformity.

 

Narrator and trust

“To borrow against the trust someone has placed in you costs nothing at first. You get away with it, you take a little more and a little more until there is no more to draw on. Oddly, your hands should be full with all that you are taking, but when you open them up there’s nothing there.” (pg 77)

At this moment in the novel, the narrator is reflecting on their experiences with cheating on their partners. I thought that this section reflected on their attitude regarding sleeping with married women, and them trying to rationalize their actions. The first part of the quote shows that the initial break of trust does not cost them anything. This then leads from going to a one time mistake, to a full blown affair. I think that the second part where the author says “you open them up and there’s nothing there” reflects the little remorse that they are actually feeling. In the case of Louise, they are so caught up in their obsession with her that they barely even notice the trust they are taking from Jacqueline. 

  I think that the narrator repeats “more” and “take” showing that they think that they are holding the power in their situation. They can take their fidelity from their partner and they still believe that they have the upper hand. I also found it interesting that with many other parts of the novel, the metaphor that was used was related to the body, using hands as the method of taking. This shows the  

I connected this to the narrator’s feelings on marriage. In a similar passage they say that “no one can legislate love” (pg 77) and “marriage is the flimsiest weapon against desire.” I think they are passionate about their distaste for marriage as a way to justify their affairs. This also connects to the novel as whole with the theme of trust. Although they believed they were doing the right thing when they left Louise with Elgin, they broke her trust. They continue to see themselves in a position of power, deciding how and when the relationship ends. They believed that they were morally correct in this situation, despite taking the same that they took from Jaquiline in the beginning of their affair, her trust.