Author: nallaa

Luna and Boy Meets Boy, in my opinion are more obviously different. I think that the main difference is the very different environments that the characters of each novel reside in. Boy Meets Boy describes a utopia. Paul lives in a very accepting environment. His family knew when he was a young age that he was gay and they never challenged that or forced different ideals upon him. Where as for Luna, she grew up with a father that wanted her to be someone that she is not. He pushed Luna into playing baseball and other sports in order to morph her into a “masculine male.” The role of stereotypes and gender norms is very different between the two novels. In Boy Meets Boy, we see cheerleaders on motorcycles and a drag queen as the star quarterback. The “normal” of Boy Meets Boy would horrify the characters in Luna, an environment so set to sticking to the strict stereotypical gender norms. For Luna’s birthday as a child she wanted dolls and a bra, and instead her family got her “gender appropriate” toys deemed for boys. Luna’s parents don’t even allow her to do any housework such as cooking or cleaning because of the feminine stereotype. They always have Reagan do it. This mindset is spread throughout all characters of the novel, outside of Luna’s family. Luna was mocked and ridiculed at Reagan’s slumber party by the girls because he liked having his nails painted. Also when Luna wants to try on women’s clothes at the mall, she is given a look of disgust and is escorted out by security guards. An unexpected similarity that I saw between the two novels was the discussion of childhood. Each novel mentions childhood and child development. In Paul’s case he always knew that he was different from other boys. He discovered that he was gay in kindergarten by reading a note written by his teacher. In Luna’s case, she also knew she was always different from other boys. She had lots of friends who were girls, preferred pink, and other stereotypical “feminine” things. I thought that it was interesting that both of these characters knew their true identity from a young age. This clearly is not the case for all members of the LGBTQ community. It makes me wonder if this is a common trend among young adult novels involving characters of the LGBTQ community. From these two novels, I am drawing the conclusion that young adult narratives focus on the struggle of expressing one’s known identity as opposed to the struggle of discovering one’s true identity. I would like to compare this to a novel where this is not the case.

Louis points out to Joe all the wrong that he has done throughout his law career. He shows Joe that in his career he has helped those in the “wrong” as opposed to those who are in the “right.” The main case that Louis points out to him was the case where a soldier was discharged for being gay. Joe tells Louis: “It’s law not justice, it’s power, not the merits of its exercise, it’s not an expression of the ideal, it’s…” (242). Joe tries to say that the practice of law isn’t to bring about justice, but merely a way for powerful people to remain powerful and protected. This form of reasoning that Joe uses to describe law is very similar to Roy’s mindset. Roy made sure that Ethel Rosenberg was convicted even though there wasn’t enough evidence to prove that she was guilty. This shows a similarity between the seemingly different characters of Roy and Joe. However, Roy is on his deathbed, continually seeing the ghost of Ethel, a sign that his subconscious feels guilty for what he has done. In my opinion, I feel that Roy’s life is Joe’s future. Roy is dying: closeted, alone, unhappy, and hated for what he has done in his life.   Meanwhile, Joe leaves Louis, someone who he claims to love and goes back to his wife. This shows that Joe is unhappy, alone because Harper leaves him, and denies his sexuality by leaving Louis based on Roy’s command. The mindset of Roy and Joe: “It’s law not justice,” in my opinion is very revealing of what this play is trying to say as a whole.   It shows that society is in need of change. This play takes place during the AIDS crisis, a time where it was termed the disease of the “degenerate” and believed to affect the 4 H’s. AIDS had this large negative connotation, that it could only affect the lower class and not the upper class. The stigma that the upper class/important people get special treatment in the law and could not get AIDS gets challenged when Roy, an important lawyer gets diagnosed with the disease. The play shows that the disease can affect anyone in the population, a belief that was not widely accepted at the time of the crisis. The play challenges the “it’s law not justice” lens of view for society and shows that it is wrong.

‘All things fall and are built again

And those that build them again are gay’ (30).

I found it rather interesting that the author chose this section or rather these two lines from “Lapis Lazuli” by William Butler Yeats to include in this novel. Although, this quote is not directly from Winterson herself, I found that these lines directly related to the story. My interpretation of these lines in the context of this novel is that the “things” that have fallen represent the LGBTQ community. These members fall because of the ridicule, disrespect, and hate that they receive from society.   For example, as we saw in the “It Gets Better” videos there were several common similarities in the different coming out stories. These people were all made fun of, judged, and unhappy. This was their “fall,” however, they “built themselves again” by experiencing these common aspects essential to “Coming Out Narratives,” like the ones we had discussed in class. For example in these narratives they go through steps such as re-introducing themselves, realizing that they were different, and coming out. I know that William Butler Yeats intended to have the meaning of gay as happiness, but in this context I think that Winterson wants the reader to see that those who must “build themselves again” or transform themselves are members of the LGBTQ community. Looking at the greater scheme of the novel as a whole, I believe Winterson’s message is that members of the LGBTQ community do not have it easy, however, they can build themselves again and be happy.

Winterson includes these lines on page 30, so fairly early in the novel. I think this purpose is a way for the reader to foreshadow that the main character, Jeanette, over the course of the novel is going to struggle and fall, however, will find herself despite her strict family upbringing.   As I’ve been getting further into the novel, I have found support for my conclusion. For example, Jeanette faces struggles in school. It is obvious that she is different from the other students and misunderstood by her teacher. Mrs. Virtue criticizes her artwork because she only used 3 colors while the rest of the class used 4. This shows her deviance from the “normal,” however; Jeanette tries to defend her artwork, which is a way of defending herself to the Mrs. Virtue.

In the poem Cartographies of Silence, the author uses this constant repetition of the word and ideas relating to the topics of language and silence. I felt that silence represented those oppressed and suffering that society doesn’t hear or chooses to ignore. However, “silence is not absence” (140). Even though society may choose to not hear them and there cries, does not mean that they do not exist. The 6th stanza stuck out to me because it was bold. The ideas that Rich develops seem to be used as a way of building up to this stanza throughout the poem. There seems to be this voice that is screaming to come out. This voice or the inner voice is speaking to those suffering and it can no longer be silenced anymore. “It has ceased to hear itself” (141). I noticed that the author didn’t use he, she, or them but instead ”it.” I believe that the author uses this “it” to really strengthen the idea that she is not talking about a person or physical object. Those suffering must break the silence for the continuation of silence leads to no social change. This strong and meaningful passage and message connects to previous readings that have discussed language: why do we write poetry? The author believes poetry is old and ancient. Taking a shot in the dark, my mind began to form this cascade of connections between writing, language, and silence. I believe that the writer is trying to say that writing another form of language in which voices can be heard. Poetry and writing were ways that ideas could be spoken but not heard by society, silence. Thinking about the text as a whole, perhaps language is the medium through which social ideas can be changed and in order for that change to occur silence must be broken. The suffering cannot continue using the “ancient” way of poetry to say what they need to say, but by speaking what’s inside.