Author: spraguem

In the reading Gender Trouble by Judith Butler, Butler states that “…the construction of the gendered body through a series of exclusions and denials, signifying (signify) absences” (Butler, 135). In other words, gender can be defined by characteristics that people don’t have instead of characteristics that people do have. For example, facial hair is normally associated with men, so if someone doesn’t have a beard then they are constructed to be feminine. For me, Butler makes this confusing by identifying gender in terms of what people don’t have instead of what they do have.

In the novel Cereus Blooms at Night gender is constantly being performed and constructed by choices of appearance. For example, when Tyler puts on the dress for Miss Ramchandin he says, “I have never felt so ordinary, and I quite loved it” (Mootoo, 78). In this way, Tyler is constructed as his queer, gay self who feels typical in society with a dress on. However, when Tyler doesn’t wear the dress he is seen as masculine by his employers (nurses) since they make him wear pants like the other male workers. Gender is identified by what Tyler doesn’t wear according to Butler.

In addition, according to Tyler, before Mala, Nana “… was the only person who had ever truly…accepted me (Tyler) and my girlish ways” (Mootoo, 71). Mala and Nana see Tyler as feminine even without the dress but according to society appearance determines gender. His choice of clothing performs his identity, to wear a dress or not. Therefor, because his identity is performed his identity is also fabricated. Society sees his gender as masculine without the dress and feminine with the dress showing that we live in a heteronormative world wear dresses are considered to be feminine. Society shapes this fabrication, which in turn assigns a specific gender to individuals making these people declare things/objects as feminine or masculine adding to societies fabrication. It is an endless circle, which feeds the idea that if identity is performed it is fabricated.

Autobiography of Red is inventive by using synesthesia. It is inventive because it is a different form of language that makes the novel different from others and “…offers us not understanding but an affective reality that sets the conditions for interpretation” (155, Georgis). In other words synthesis allows one to depict or think about situations in one’s own way and to not be held down by legitimate or correct way of thought. The use of synesthesia in this novel serves to give clarity to the reader. It makes a more vivid image in the reader’s mind to make fantasy seem more as a reality since senses are intertwining. For example, in the quote “Outside the house a black January wind came flattening down from the top of the sky…”(35) the words “black” and “wind” vivifies the feelings and images the novel creates in the reader’s head. This is because seeing “black” joined together with the feeling of “wind” on one’s skin creates a cold and darkened sensation. Since this sensation or feeling is relatable to the reader synesthesia makes the reader feel that this fantasy book is no longer an imagination but a reality because enhancing senses to make true emotions allows the reader to relate to the novel. The novel is trying to collide a queer world as fantasy with a hetero normative world as reality through synesthesia. Since synthesis is used though, it keeps the novel fantasy and myth because one can’t have “black wind”. It keeps the novel queer.

 

“This is where the story starts, in this threadbare room. The walls are exploding. The windows have turned into telescopes. Moon and stars are magnified in this room”(190).

This quote from Written on the body is very puzzling. It mentions “Moon” and “stars” in the “room” so does that mean that it is night? Or does it mean that the narrator is imagining this scene in space? How could objects of space be located on earth? Also, the quote is odd because it states, “This is where the story starts…” but it is the last page in the book. How could the story begin when it is over? I think the narrator is implying that stories never end because as long as life proceeds time proceeds. I think this, because the word “exploding” reminds me of reactions or The Big Bang. Both of these aspects deal with time and occur over different lifetimes and different progressions.

Time however, is a tricky concept. We can think of it in hours and seconds, or relate time to calendar years and time zones. According to Halbustan, Queerness is a “potential to open up new life narratives and alternative relations to time and space” (2). Therefor, I think Halbustan is implying that if there are no boundaries and norms to fallow then there is an endless amount of time. An endless amount of time to define time in ones own way or to let time proceed on it’s own without a definition. This is shown in the moment “where the story starts…” The narrator takes this opportunity to define time in a new context. It might be crazy but I think the narrator measures time as a binary. This binary is earth vs. space where earth is the “room”, “telescope”, windows”, and “walls” while space is defined by the “moon” and “stars”. Since these are such contrasts and so far away from each other I think the narrator defines time as infinite. There is no beginning or “start”. There is no end but only a continuous movement. This book does a great job of manipulating time in this way and makes the reader think about it differently as well.

The language the narrator uses in this book, Written on the Body, shapes my perspective of identifying the reader. The narrator uses multiple different physical labels such as “branding irons” and “scored” as well as body parts such as “hands” and “shoulders” in the quote, “Who taught you to use your hands as branding irons? You have scored your name into my shoulders, referenced me with your mark” (89).

By having these descripting words shapes a very detail image in my mind of having a violent interaction between the narrator and Louise. For example, when the narrator said, “…use your hands as branding irons” or “You have scored you name into my shoulders.” I feel a sense of dominance and dominance I normally associate is with a male. However, that is just a norm. A very untrue norm nonetheless. But by not knowing the gender of the narrator affects my ability to see the narrators existence. That is why these descriptive words are so helpful to me because they give clues into knowing the gender throughout the book.

From the above quote I think the narrator is a male since the words the narrator uses are very dominant. However, when the narrator said “I don’t lack self-confidence but I’m not beautiful…”(85) I think the narrator is a women by using the descriptive term beautiful instead of handsome. These words make me go back and forth between guessing the gender of the narrator. It might be far off but I believe that the author wants the reader to juggle between gender identities. It is the perspective from both genders that allows the reader to understand the novel from a male or female point of view about love, loss, desire, and pleasure.

On the other hand, by not revealing the identity of the narrator makes me wonder if throughout the novel the narrator changes. I also wonder about the existence of the narrator. Since the narrator is not a male or female then what is there? Air? The novel does not say what is black and white but allows me to interpret and insert where I believe the boundaries and norms are. The narrator goes against all norms but if I read the book with no norms in my perspective to begin with then is the context of what the narrator does abnormal or ordinary?

In the book Written on the Body by Jeanette Winterson, the narrator starts out by saying, “Why is the measure of love loss” (10)? I find this, a great hook because the word “measure” is something I rarely associate with love. I don’t think of love as having measures or greatness or tiny portions that are possible. Measures are for music and food. However, this led me to think this sentence means that the biggest loves are the biggest losses such as the great Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet. That was a great love and it came with the biggest loss: death.

In addition, it might be far off but the quote could also mean that no matter how much one loves there will always be loss. Love is vulnerable. Loving someone fully and allowing them to love you requires one to reveal whom one truly is and by doing this, one guards must come down. One can love as a friend, peer, professor, or lover and in each case the fear of reciprocation is where the loss may come.

I think by starting with this sentence in the beginning of the novel sets up the book to talk about love in the perspective of an unhappy ending. Love is complicated and messy and comes with limits and restrictions. This novel explores these restrictions through the narrator’s perspective of being in relationships with multiple different girls. Time, distance, traits, marriage all cause separation and walls from living happily ever after. By being unable to find “the one” to settle down with and that makes the narrator truly happy, develops this theme of loss and explores the possibilities of what makes all these different losses possible. I think the narrator is trying to say that love is not possible without loss.