Clear Distortion: Kafka’s Message
By Eliza Neeley
Set in the early 1900s Prague, Franz Kafka’s The Metamorphosis involves the protagonist, Gregor, supporting his family, who then is transformed into an over-sized insect. Gregor is ostracized and eventually intentionally starves himself to death. Seemingly a twisted and abstract story, Metamorphosis encompasses societal issues, such as living a caged life of meaningless, unfulfilling work, still prevalent today. Kafka contorts time, exaggerates physical proportions, and alters the usual storyline structure, which dissolves the distinction between imagination and reality, and relays the consequences of conforming through the use of distortion.
Kafka alters the time sequences of the novel to represent Gregor’s transformation as well as his family issues. Gregor first notice after he wakes up as a monstrous creature is that “it was six-thirty, the hands were quietly moving forward, it was actually past the half hour, it was already nearly a quarter to” (4). Gregor misses the five o'clock train, or his childhood development. Explaining his dissatisfaction and odd parental relationships, his missed childhood leads directly to his metamorphosis. While Gregor is a vermin, it is difficult to decipher separate days, hours, and months. Hellmuth Keiser explains that the metamorphosis “is preceded by a span of five years, during which time...Gregor devotes himself to his job” (148). Before his metamorphosis, Gregor spends five drudging years, working for the same job and supporting his entire family. He never misses a day, consuming his time with unfulfilling labor, therefore losing his individualistic qualities. After the metamorphosis, time speeds up, showing the urgency of Gregor’s situation. Though only three months, each family member alters dramatically, through physical and mental attributes. In these three months their mentality towards Gregor completely alters, they make different life choices, and they alter their previous personalities. The daughter develops physically into a woman, cares for Gregor and obtains a job. The father metamorphosizes from a lethargic slob, to the primary income-earner, who always wears his suit. Even the mother begins to sew again in the three months. Though possible the unlikeliness of such changes within each character suggest an alteration within actual time. Gregor’s five years of neglect and dissatisfaction are preceded with a missed five o'clock train and then three months in which Gregor’s mental self is revealed.
Similarly, Kafka exaggerates the size and filth of Gregor. Though it is unclear if Gregor is an actual insect or merely a man suffering from mental illness, Gregor is portrayed in the most repulsing way possible. While attempting to calm his mother, Gregor “could not resist snapping his jaws several times” (18). Through an almost ridiculous image of Gregor snapping his jaws as an over-sized insect, the Samsas’ isolation, alienation, and appreciation towards Gregor is highlighted. Directly following the reveal that Gregor will no longer be able to provide for the family, his family is stricken with horror and disgust. He is largely over-sized, leaves trails of slime with him and is only permitted to interact with his sister. She had brought him a wide assortment of things, all spread out on an old newspaper; old, half-rotten vegetables; bones left over from the evening meal...and with tears of contentment,” he devoured the food (24). The only food he enjoys is rotten and molded-over. His extreme filth is to draw attention to the sins of unwanted work. Gregor’s voice is high and squeaky, causing it to be a contrast of repulsively frightening and overwhelmingly weak. Gregor’s dream is to be free from his family’s constrictions, no longer having to provide for them and having the ability to choose his own path. Because he is too afraid or guilty to transfer his longings into actions, Gregor becomes a bug. His nastiness represents his sinful actions. Though at first glance, choosing one’s family over himself seems noble, the selflessness is also sacrificing their individualism, which Kafka believed more important.
Even the storyline itself appears to be distorted. The most significant action, the climax, occurs on the first page, as Gregor transforms into an insect in the first paragraph. The novella begins with, “when Gregor Samsa woke up one morning from unsettling dreams, he found himself changed in his bed into a monstrous vermin” (3). The abruptness grabs attention, creating confusion, but also establishing the urgency of the novel’s message. Gregor, the protagonist, seems almost indifferent to the fact that he is a bug. His family, though disgusted, does not seem particularly surprised. This also points to the possibility that Gregor never physically turned into a vermin. None of the family members, Gregor included, ever makes any effort to search for a cure or an answer. Everyone seems to accept Gregor’s fate from the start. Seemingly unrealistic or implausible, this emphasizes the family’s lack of actual care for Gregor. He was important to them almost entirely financially. After he couldn’t provide for them financially, he was as valued as a beetle.
Though the same story could have been told literally, about a man dissatisfied with his life, who eventually cracks, the use of distortion provides evidence for an existential crisis through many interpretations. Gregor’s internal struggles can relate to many dissimilar people’s issues. Whether it be in a relationship, in a career, or in place, Metamorphosis acts a warning to act against dissatisfaction. Simply ignoring unhappiness and choosing not to instigate change leads to a life as worthless as an insect’s. The reality of alienation, isolation, and conformity is revealed through a distorted reality.
By Eliza Neeley
Set in the early 1900s Prague, Franz Kafka’s The Metamorphosis involves the protagonist, Gregor, supporting his family, who then is transformed into an over-sized insect. Gregor is ostracized and eventually intentionally starves himself to death. Seemingly a twisted and abstract story, Metamorphosis encompasses societal issues, such as living a caged life of meaningless, unfulfilling work, still prevalent today. Kafka contorts time, exaggerates physical proportions, and alters the usual storyline structure, which dissolves the distinction between imagination and reality, and relays the consequences of conforming through the use of distortion.
Kafka alters the time sequences of the novel to represent Gregor’s transformation as well as his family issues. Gregor first notice after he wakes up as a monstrous creature is that “it was six-thirty, the hands were quietly moving forward, it was actually past the half hour, it was already nearly a quarter to” (4). Gregor misses the five o'clock train, or his childhood development. Explaining his dissatisfaction and odd parental relationships, his missed childhood leads directly to his metamorphosis. While Gregor is a vermin, it is difficult to decipher separate days, hours, and months. Hellmuth Keiser explains that the metamorphosis “is preceded by a span of five years, during which time...Gregor devotes himself to his job” (148). Before his metamorphosis, Gregor spends five drudging years, working for the same job and supporting his entire family. He never misses a day, consuming his time with unfulfilling labor, therefore losing his individualistic qualities. After the metamorphosis, time speeds up, showing the urgency of Gregor’s situation. Though only three months, each family member alters dramatically, through physical and mental attributes. In these three months their mentality towards Gregor completely alters, they make different life choices, and they alter their previous personalities. The daughter develops physically into a woman, cares for Gregor and obtains a job. The father metamorphosizes from a lethargic slob, to the primary income-earner, who always wears his suit. Even the mother begins to sew again in the three months. Though possible the unlikeliness of such changes within each character suggest an alteration within actual time. Gregor’s five years of neglect and dissatisfaction are preceded with a missed five o'clock train and then three months in which Gregor’s mental self is revealed.
Similarly, Kafka exaggerates the size and filth of Gregor. Though it is unclear if Gregor is an actual insect or merely a man suffering from mental illness, Gregor is portrayed in the most repulsing way possible. While attempting to calm his mother, Gregor “could not resist snapping his jaws several times” (18). Through an almost ridiculous image of Gregor snapping his jaws as an over-sized insect, the Samsas’ isolation, alienation, and appreciation towards Gregor is highlighted. Directly following the reveal that Gregor will no longer be able to provide for the family, his family is stricken with horror and disgust. He is largely over-sized, leaves trails of slime with him and is only permitted to interact with his sister. She had brought him a wide assortment of things, all spread out on an old newspaper; old, half-rotten vegetables; bones left over from the evening meal...and with tears of contentment,” he devoured the food (24). The only food he enjoys is rotten and molded-over. His extreme filth is to draw attention to the sins of unwanted work. Gregor’s voice is high and squeaky, causing it to be a contrast of repulsively frightening and overwhelmingly weak. Gregor’s dream is to be free from his family’s constrictions, no longer having to provide for them and having the ability to choose his own path. Because he is too afraid or guilty to transfer his longings into actions, Gregor becomes a bug. His nastiness represents his sinful actions. Though at first glance, choosing one’s family over himself seems noble, the selflessness is also sacrificing their individualism, which Kafka believed more important.
Even the storyline itself appears to be distorted. The most significant action, the climax, occurs on the first page, as Gregor transforms into an insect in the first paragraph. The novella begins with, “when Gregor Samsa woke up one morning from unsettling dreams, he found himself changed in his bed into a monstrous vermin” (3). The abruptness grabs attention, creating confusion, but also establishing the urgency of the novel’s message. Gregor, the protagonist, seems almost indifferent to the fact that he is a bug. His family, though disgusted, does not seem particularly surprised. This also points to the possibility that Gregor never physically turned into a vermin. None of the family members, Gregor included, ever makes any effort to search for a cure or an answer. Everyone seems to accept Gregor’s fate from the start. Seemingly unrealistic or implausible, this emphasizes the family’s lack of actual care for Gregor. He was important to them almost entirely financially. After he couldn’t provide for them financially, he was as valued as a beetle.
Though the same story could have been told literally, about a man dissatisfied with his life, who eventually cracks, the use of distortion provides evidence for an existential crisis through many interpretations. Gregor’s internal struggles can relate to many dissimilar people’s issues. Whether it be in a relationship, in a career, or in place, Metamorphosis acts a warning to act against dissatisfaction. Simply ignoring unhappiness and choosing not to instigate change leads to a life as worthless as an insect’s. The reality of alienation, isolation, and conformity is revealed through a distorted reality.
Frederick Douglass Syntax
By Eliza Neeley
Frederick Douglass escapes slavery only to find himself a slave to his own mind. He celebrates his liberty but the knowledge that too much trust could lead back to slavery plagues his thoughts. Through tones of desperation, isolation and anxiety, Douglass portrays the life of a fugitive slave running from the perpetual fear of slave catchers.
Douglass’s use of fluctuating syntax reflects his inner turmoil and paranoia, as well as the struggles of all fugitive slaves. Paragraph one reveals his emotions during and following his escape through the use of antithesis and dashes. The paragraph begins with a balanced antithesis, portraying the freedom and relief Douglass felt after escaping confinement. However the end of the paragraph is a long, interrupted sentence, that contradicts his previous claim to be “without interruption.” This foreshadows the onset of confusion and contrast. Towards the middle of the passage, Douglass displays paranoia and loneliness through parallel and contrast. His repetition of the fact that he is “in the midst of thousands” emphasizes his isolation. Due to fear of being kidnapped and returned to the tortures of slavery, Douglass alienates himself, trusting nothing but his own paranoia. His writing widens to address the surrounding population and then returns to his individual perspective in which he is trapped. Douglass is a slave to his own mind. The last sentence of the passage is the longest; shifting between balanced parallel and antithesis while continuing the ongoing analogy of the predator-prey relationship. This elongated sentence shifts from first person point of view to the perspective of an overarching figure, broadening the passage from being personal to encompassing the inner turmoil of all escaped slaves. The passage ends by shifting again from figurative to literal language, calling attention to the “toil-worn and whip-scarred fugitive slaves.” Douglass ensures the passage cannot be ignored or interpreted as only a metaphor. The slave owners are worse than bloody-thirsty monsters and they are as real as the issue of slavery.
By Eliza Neeley
Frederick Douglass escapes slavery only to find himself a slave to his own mind. He celebrates his liberty but the knowledge that too much trust could lead back to slavery plagues his thoughts. Through tones of desperation, isolation and anxiety, Douglass portrays the life of a fugitive slave running from the perpetual fear of slave catchers.
Douglass’s use of fluctuating syntax reflects his inner turmoil and paranoia, as well as the struggles of all fugitive slaves. Paragraph one reveals his emotions during and following his escape through the use of antithesis and dashes. The paragraph begins with a balanced antithesis, portraying the freedom and relief Douglass felt after escaping confinement. However the end of the paragraph is a long, interrupted sentence, that contradicts his previous claim to be “without interruption.” This foreshadows the onset of confusion and contrast. Towards the middle of the passage, Douglass displays paranoia and loneliness through parallel and contrast. His repetition of the fact that he is “in the midst of thousands” emphasizes his isolation. Due to fear of being kidnapped and returned to the tortures of slavery, Douglass alienates himself, trusting nothing but his own paranoia. His writing widens to address the surrounding population and then returns to his individual perspective in which he is trapped. Douglass is a slave to his own mind. The last sentence of the passage is the longest; shifting between balanced parallel and antithesis while continuing the ongoing analogy of the predator-prey relationship. This elongated sentence shifts from first person point of view to the perspective of an overarching figure, broadening the passage from being personal to encompassing the inner turmoil of all escaped slaves. The passage ends by shifting again from figurative to literal language, calling attention to the “toil-worn and whip-scarred fugitive slaves.” Douglass ensures the passage cannot be ignored or interpreted as only a metaphor. The slave owners are worse than bloody-thirsty monsters and they are as real as the issue of slavery.
A Slow Road to Success
By Eliza Neeley
In chapter three of The Grapes of Wrath, a turtle begins his journey uphill, over a wall, and across a road, while various instances make reaching his destination a difficult plight. Steinbeck uses the turtle to symbolize migrant farmers, like the Joad family, describing their lives through tones of despondency and darkness, but recognizing the ambitious farmers as inspirational.
Through diction, Steinbeck portrays the life of a farmer as arduous and full of obstacles. As the turtle “[threshes] slowly” along, dried grass acts as “twisting darts...passive but armed.” The comparison of harmless weeds to weapons of war reflect the troubled times of farmers in the Great Depression era. While the turtle travels, even the most insignificant of obstacles, attempt to debilitate the animal. Similarly, the Joads are faced with storms, deaths, and poverty throughout their trip and until the end of the novel. While the turtle crosses the highway, one woman driver swerves to avoid him, “wheels [screaming]” as she almost drives off the road, whereas a man driving a truck serves to hit him, “[flipping] the turtle like a tiddly-wink, [spinning] it like a coin.” The use of power is displayed through the drivers’ choices. The women risks her wellbeing to ensure the safety of the creature, whereas the man uses the small command he possesses to maliciously injure the turtle for sport. Just as the man does not value the turtle’s life, the bank does not value the lives of the farmers. The turtle resembles a spinning coin after being hit, representing the bank’s regard towards the farmers; their only purpose being profit. To farmers and the turtle, the natural world along with the evils of man make traveling an affair of struggles.
Exemplified by descriptions of seemingly insignificant details, the farmers’ determination is compared to the strength of the turtle. While the turtle “[peers] over the wall,” a red ant slips under the his shell, “into the soft skin inside,” but “is crushed between body and legs.” The description of an irritating ant attempting to harm the turtle from inside portrays workers inner turmoil during the Great Depression. Thoughts of their family starving and anxiety over where to find the next job plagues the Joads daily, but they fight despair and continue ahead, knowing survival is only possible with strength. Especially Ma continues to possess a positive attitude to keep her family hopeful. Even after being hit by a truck, the turtle “[flops] upright” and begins walking, while “spearhead seeds’ fall off him, “[sticking] in the ground.” Following his greatest setback, the turtle renews hope while accidentally initiating new life. This resembles the end of the novel, when the family is reduced to a few members, possesses almost no money, and takes shelter in an old barn. They are at the low depths of poverty, but Rose of Sharon feeds a dying man her milk to help him heal. In both instances, a rebirth of hope and life occurs, indicating that the will of the farmers contain almost fantastical abilities.
Steinbeck's point of view reveals his reverence and sympathy for the farmers. Through the hardships, the turtle remains with “humorous frowning eyes,” legs moving “as though they worked independently.” Though the turtle is out of place on a busy highway, lacking control, his eyes remain emotionless and his legs continue forward. The migrant farmers are out of place among industrialization, corruption, and greed. Steinbeck regards them as morally sound and respects their inhuman amount of determination. From the “concrete wall four inches high” to the “burning hot” highway, Steinbeck establishes the turtle’s tenacity through the his completion of each obstacle. Steinbeck does not disregard the farmers for their lack of education or money, he acknowledges their plight and strength of will. According to Steinbeck, character depends on emotional vigor not materialistic value.
Though the road to success is a slow, arduous journey, full of malicious forces, the farmers choose to continue fighting, rather than choosing to be defeated. Like the turtle’s shell of protection, the farmers will never breaks.
By Eliza Neeley
In chapter three of The Grapes of Wrath, a turtle begins his journey uphill, over a wall, and across a road, while various instances make reaching his destination a difficult plight. Steinbeck uses the turtle to symbolize migrant farmers, like the Joad family, describing their lives through tones of despondency and darkness, but recognizing the ambitious farmers as inspirational.
Through diction, Steinbeck portrays the life of a farmer as arduous and full of obstacles. As the turtle “[threshes] slowly” along, dried grass acts as “twisting darts...passive but armed.” The comparison of harmless weeds to weapons of war reflect the troubled times of farmers in the Great Depression era. While the turtle travels, even the most insignificant of obstacles, attempt to debilitate the animal. Similarly, the Joads are faced with storms, deaths, and poverty throughout their trip and until the end of the novel. While the turtle crosses the highway, one woman driver swerves to avoid him, “wheels [screaming]” as she almost drives off the road, whereas a man driving a truck serves to hit him, “[flipping] the turtle like a tiddly-wink, [spinning] it like a coin.” The use of power is displayed through the drivers’ choices. The women risks her wellbeing to ensure the safety of the creature, whereas the man uses the small command he possesses to maliciously injure the turtle for sport. Just as the man does not value the turtle’s life, the bank does not value the lives of the farmers. The turtle resembles a spinning coin after being hit, representing the bank’s regard towards the farmers; their only purpose being profit. To farmers and the turtle, the natural world along with the evils of man make traveling an affair of struggles.
Exemplified by descriptions of seemingly insignificant details, the farmers’ determination is compared to the strength of the turtle. While the turtle “[peers] over the wall,” a red ant slips under the his shell, “into the soft skin inside,” but “is crushed between body and legs.” The description of an irritating ant attempting to harm the turtle from inside portrays workers inner turmoil during the Great Depression. Thoughts of their family starving and anxiety over where to find the next job plagues the Joads daily, but they fight despair and continue ahead, knowing survival is only possible with strength. Especially Ma continues to possess a positive attitude to keep her family hopeful. Even after being hit by a truck, the turtle “[flops] upright” and begins walking, while “spearhead seeds’ fall off him, “[sticking] in the ground.” Following his greatest setback, the turtle renews hope while accidentally initiating new life. This resembles the end of the novel, when the family is reduced to a few members, possesses almost no money, and takes shelter in an old barn. They are at the low depths of poverty, but Rose of Sharon feeds a dying man her milk to help him heal. In both instances, a rebirth of hope and life occurs, indicating that the will of the farmers contain almost fantastical abilities.
Steinbeck's point of view reveals his reverence and sympathy for the farmers. Through the hardships, the turtle remains with “humorous frowning eyes,” legs moving “as though they worked independently.” Though the turtle is out of place on a busy highway, lacking control, his eyes remain emotionless and his legs continue forward. The migrant farmers are out of place among industrialization, corruption, and greed. Steinbeck regards them as morally sound and respects their inhuman amount of determination. From the “concrete wall four inches high” to the “burning hot” highway, Steinbeck establishes the turtle’s tenacity through the his completion of each obstacle. Steinbeck does not disregard the farmers for their lack of education or money, he acknowledges their plight and strength of will. According to Steinbeck, character depends on emotional vigor not materialistic value.
Though the road to success is a slow, arduous journey, full of malicious forces, the farmers choose to continue fighting, rather than choosing to be defeated. Like the turtle’s shell of protection, the farmers will never breaks.
Jocasta Poem Analysis
By Eliza Neeley
“Jocasta,” a poem by Ruth F. Eisenberg conveys the Greek tragedy of Oedipus through the eyes of Jocasta and a third-person narrative. With the alternating perspective, Jocasta’s evolution from life with Laius, to life with Oedipus, to discovering the truth, is revealed as ripples of emotions. The third-person point of view tells the story through a broader scope, while still focusing on Jocasta as the main subject, while Jocasta’s point of view contains internal emotions and thoughts. The contrast between factual details and personal opinions build to create a versatile tale of tragedy.
Through Jocasta’s point of view, the story of Oedipus is portrayed as a woman’s struggle in a patriarchal kingdom. Jocasta hates King Laius, who she was forced to mary. She describes scenes of rape, in which she is too young and afraid to resist. Jocasta, though believing her duty is to obey her husband, feels dehumanized, used, and abused in their relationship. Her rage against patriarchy even causes her to “bless the gods” after his demise. Though her death allows her freedom she feels isolated and alone, missing her child that her husband condemned to death. Only after Oedipus saves Thebes and they mary, does she become happy again. Though Jocasta doesn’t know Oedipus is her son, his return is object of light in her life. Her motherly longings are fulfilled once her lost child is found. Her child awakens in her, sexual desire and longings she never felt with her husband. Through a Freudian plot, Jocasta experiences a period of joy with her son-husband, whom with she has four children with. She consults Oedipus in ruling the kingdom, acting as a mother figure to all of her five children. Jocasta is happiest as a mother, whom possesses freedom and power. Once she discovers her husband is also her song, Jocasta is rageful; against the gods for using her life as a joke and against Laius for inflicting his curse upon her. She ends her life because she cannot bare to live a life of torment and abuse any longer.
The third-person point of view tells the Oedipus story, but only focuses on details concerning Jocasta and her specific actions and details. The narrator displays the town’s fortunes and Jocasta’s physical appearances throughout the tale. While married to Laius, Jocasta “lost delight in being a queen” and the Sphinx plagued the kingdom of Thebes. The narrator describes the Thebe’s disasters while Jocasta only explains her confined and tortuous marriage during this time. The story reflects Jocasta’s emotions. Once with Oedipus, the third-person point of view depicts Jocasta as young, bright, and renewed, similar to Thebes condition after it was saved by Oedipus. As Jocasta ages, coming closer to the truth, Thebes reaches a state of disaster once more. The narrator relates Jocasta’s actions to the well-being of the city and her physical health. This portrays a sense of mother Earth, and a woman’s importance within the natural.
Told through the perspective of Jocasta and an over-looking force, Eisenberg alters Oedipus, a play primarily based on men, to a story of feminist struggles and a fight for freedom in a patriarchal world.
By Eliza Neeley
“Jocasta,” a poem by Ruth F. Eisenberg conveys the Greek tragedy of Oedipus through the eyes of Jocasta and a third-person narrative. With the alternating perspective, Jocasta’s evolution from life with Laius, to life with Oedipus, to discovering the truth, is revealed as ripples of emotions. The third-person point of view tells the story through a broader scope, while still focusing on Jocasta as the main subject, while Jocasta’s point of view contains internal emotions and thoughts. The contrast between factual details and personal opinions build to create a versatile tale of tragedy.
Through Jocasta’s point of view, the story of Oedipus is portrayed as a woman’s struggle in a patriarchal kingdom. Jocasta hates King Laius, who she was forced to mary. She describes scenes of rape, in which she is too young and afraid to resist. Jocasta, though believing her duty is to obey her husband, feels dehumanized, used, and abused in their relationship. Her rage against patriarchy even causes her to “bless the gods” after his demise. Though her death allows her freedom she feels isolated and alone, missing her child that her husband condemned to death. Only after Oedipus saves Thebes and they mary, does she become happy again. Though Jocasta doesn’t know Oedipus is her son, his return is object of light in her life. Her motherly longings are fulfilled once her lost child is found. Her child awakens in her, sexual desire and longings she never felt with her husband. Through a Freudian plot, Jocasta experiences a period of joy with her son-husband, whom with she has four children with. She consults Oedipus in ruling the kingdom, acting as a mother figure to all of her five children. Jocasta is happiest as a mother, whom possesses freedom and power. Once she discovers her husband is also her song, Jocasta is rageful; against the gods for using her life as a joke and against Laius for inflicting his curse upon her. She ends her life because she cannot bare to live a life of torment and abuse any longer.
The third-person point of view tells the Oedipus story, but only focuses on details concerning Jocasta and her specific actions and details. The narrator displays the town’s fortunes and Jocasta’s physical appearances throughout the tale. While married to Laius, Jocasta “lost delight in being a queen” and the Sphinx plagued the kingdom of Thebes. The narrator describes the Thebe’s disasters while Jocasta only explains her confined and tortuous marriage during this time. The story reflects Jocasta’s emotions. Once with Oedipus, the third-person point of view depicts Jocasta as young, bright, and renewed, similar to Thebes condition after it was saved by Oedipus. As Jocasta ages, coming closer to the truth, Thebes reaches a state of disaster once more. The narrator relates Jocasta’s actions to the well-being of the city and her physical health. This portrays a sense of mother Earth, and a woman’s importance within the natural.
Told through the perspective of Jocasta and an over-looking force, Eisenberg alters Oedipus, a play primarily based on men, to a story of feminist struggles and a fight for freedom in a patriarchal world.
Simone De Beauvoir Rhetorical Analysis: Prostitutes without Power
By Eliza Neeley
In the first five pages of “Prostitutes and Hetaeras,” Simone De Beauvoir explains the prostitution industry of the early 1900s France. Though not opposed to the act of selling sex, Beauvoir’s disgust towards the present prostitution industry is apparent as a feminist’s struggle for equality. Through syntax, diction, and organization, Beauvoir depicts the dehumanization of prostitutes, the desperation the women feel, and the power struggle between men and prostitutes.
Beauvoir carefully utilizes syntax by repeating “deflower” and using balanced sentences, to reveal the reason a prostitute usually becomes a prostitute. Through the repetition of “deflower,” rape is contrasted with the innocence of the young victims. A pattern of youthful ignorance connects almost all the victims, who eventually all become prostitutes. Once beautiful flowers, their virginity is robbed from them by force and they are forced into maturity. Psychological trauma and lack of self-confidence resulting from rape leads to them becoming prostitutes. They know they are wanted sexually, whether it be consensual or not, and they want to be wanted. With an emphasis on “deflower,” attention is drawn to their loss of innocence. Requiring emotional support, these troubled young women became prostitutes to cope. Beauvoir utilizes balanced sentences to outline the desperation involved in becoming a prostitute. In a society with poverty, misery, and injustice, “as long as there are police and prostitution, there will be policemen and prostitutes.” Many prostitutes become prostitutes because they felt it was their option. An available job is an available job. Women often choose prostitution to survive, not because they aspire to be a prositute. Beauvoir’s balanced sentence correlates to choice between degradation and survival. Regarded as sinful and mistreated by employers, prostitutes are often tied to despair and lack of money.
Through diction, Beauvoir depicts prostitutes as slaves and victims of men’s insecurities. Within the business of prostitution the man asserts “exclusive tyranny,” which results in “all types of feminine slavery at once,” not a mutual, voluntary sexual act. Comparing prostitution with the relationship between a king and a slave, outlines the mistreatment and disrespect for prostitutes. The man, or the king, executes his full power upon the prostitute, the slave, containing little regard for her life at all. Although paid, their lack of control and abundance of humiliation, prostitutes are closer to slaves than legal workers. A prostitute is “used as an object” for a male’s sexual desires and a “scapegoat” for his guiltiness. Often deemed as criminals, men can blame prostitutes for men’s own wrongdoings, conveniently lacking responsibility of their own. Unregulated and shunned by society, prosition allows men to feel like kings and abuse women without feeling remorse. Buying her, like buying an object, the man perceives her differently from his female friends, family members, or partners. He believes she is his, and with no legal rights, she can do little to nothing about this. Because he has bought her, a man can justify committing sexual acts he would never dream committing to an actual partner. Through demeaning objectification and mistreatment, prostitution resembles age-old slavery.
Beauvoir’s organization of the “Prostitutes and Hetaeras” passage involves fluctuation between commentary and brief personal stories. The contrast between Beauvoir's factual data and emotional accounts from the prostitutes themselves, creates a complex and concrete argument. Appealing to pathos, the prostitutes tell eye-openings tales of rape and abuse. Beauvoir appeals to logos by explaining their experiences with less opinion and emotion. Lastly, the passage contains diverse and plentiful sources, resulting in ethos. A woman who was raped at age 19, “had to leave her family, as she was pregnant,” became a “prostitute for thirty three years,” and “now wishes to be hospitalized.” The addition of real women and their real stories adds emotion that could not be expressed through numbers and facts.
Women are often to taught to suppress their sexuality, but confidence in body and self is a form of feminism. Prostitution could be female-empowering industry, but without regulation, prostitution is only a disguise for female oppression. If it became legalized and was formed into a legitimate career, including minimum wage, protection, safety, and security, than prostitution would not necessarily be a symbol of inequality.
By Eliza Neeley
In the first five pages of “Prostitutes and Hetaeras,” Simone De Beauvoir explains the prostitution industry of the early 1900s France. Though not opposed to the act of selling sex, Beauvoir’s disgust towards the present prostitution industry is apparent as a feminist’s struggle for equality. Through syntax, diction, and organization, Beauvoir depicts the dehumanization of prostitutes, the desperation the women feel, and the power struggle between men and prostitutes.
Beauvoir carefully utilizes syntax by repeating “deflower” and using balanced sentences, to reveal the reason a prostitute usually becomes a prostitute. Through the repetition of “deflower,” rape is contrasted with the innocence of the young victims. A pattern of youthful ignorance connects almost all the victims, who eventually all become prostitutes. Once beautiful flowers, their virginity is robbed from them by force and they are forced into maturity. Psychological trauma and lack of self-confidence resulting from rape leads to them becoming prostitutes. They know they are wanted sexually, whether it be consensual or not, and they want to be wanted. With an emphasis on “deflower,” attention is drawn to their loss of innocence. Requiring emotional support, these troubled young women became prostitutes to cope. Beauvoir utilizes balanced sentences to outline the desperation involved in becoming a prostitute. In a society with poverty, misery, and injustice, “as long as there are police and prostitution, there will be policemen and prostitutes.” Many prostitutes become prostitutes because they felt it was their option. An available job is an available job. Women often choose prostitution to survive, not because they aspire to be a prositute. Beauvoir’s balanced sentence correlates to choice between degradation and survival. Regarded as sinful and mistreated by employers, prostitutes are often tied to despair and lack of money.
Through diction, Beauvoir depicts prostitutes as slaves and victims of men’s insecurities. Within the business of prostitution the man asserts “exclusive tyranny,” which results in “all types of feminine slavery at once,” not a mutual, voluntary sexual act. Comparing prostitution with the relationship between a king and a slave, outlines the mistreatment and disrespect for prostitutes. The man, or the king, executes his full power upon the prostitute, the slave, containing little regard for her life at all. Although paid, their lack of control and abundance of humiliation, prostitutes are closer to slaves than legal workers. A prostitute is “used as an object” for a male’s sexual desires and a “scapegoat” for his guiltiness. Often deemed as criminals, men can blame prostitutes for men’s own wrongdoings, conveniently lacking responsibility of their own. Unregulated and shunned by society, prosition allows men to feel like kings and abuse women without feeling remorse. Buying her, like buying an object, the man perceives her differently from his female friends, family members, or partners. He believes she is his, and with no legal rights, she can do little to nothing about this. Because he has bought her, a man can justify committing sexual acts he would never dream committing to an actual partner. Through demeaning objectification and mistreatment, prostitution resembles age-old slavery.
Beauvoir’s organization of the “Prostitutes and Hetaeras” passage involves fluctuation between commentary and brief personal stories. The contrast between Beauvoir's factual data and emotional accounts from the prostitutes themselves, creates a complex and concrete argument. Appealing to pathos, the prostitutes tell eye-openings tales of rape and abuse. Beauvoir appeals to logos by explaining their experiences with less opinion and emotion. Lastly, the passage contains diverse and plentiful sources, resulting in ethos. A woman who was raped at age 19, “had to leave her family, as she was pregnant,” became a “prostitute for thirty three years,” and “now wishes to be hospitalized.” The addition of real women and their real stories adds emotion that could not be expressed through numbers and facts.
Women are often to taught to suppress their sexuality, but confidence in body and self is a form of feminism. Prostitution could be female-empowering industry, but without regulation, prostitution is only a disguise for female oppression. If it became legalized and was formed into a legitimate career, including minimum wage, protection, safety, and security, than prostitution would not necessarily be a symbol of inequality.
Atonement Related to Gender, Race, and Social Class
By Eliza Neeley
Though the American Dream claims that anyone, no matter race, gender, or class can achieve anything they set their mind to, general society has an opposing opinion. Through the generations, this dream has become more of a reality, but even in 2017, characteristics and situations people are born with affect their social and economic success. Decisions made in court and judgements made on the street often correlate with appearance. A black man is more likely to be convicted of a crime than a white man, a man is more likely to be CEO of a corporation than a woman, a women wearing hijab is more likely to be stopped at the airport than a woman with light skin and blond hair. People unaccepted by society are forced to rely on their will and perseverance to achieve and to overcome obstacles. However, the privileged tend to also be privileged in relation to atonement and punishment. A wealthy white man with connections can often use his money and social status to commit moral digressions with no consequences. This applies to literature, being even more relevant to novels written in past generations. In the novels, Beloved, Jane Eyre, and Scarlett Letter, the main characters are ostracized females whom must rely on themselves for atonement; Jane Eyre is characterized as poor and plain, Hester Prynne as an adulteress, and Sethe as a depressed psycho. Whereas, Daisy Buchanan in The Great Gatsby commits a murder and due to her high status, large wallet, and pretty face of innocence, suffers no reparation.
In Jane Eyre, Jane begins as an outcast in each location she lives. Because she cannot rely on society to forgive her lack of beauty or wealth, she must prove herself as valuable in both heart and mind. This leads to self realization and an independence that societal atonement could not grant. Through Jane’s childhood the Reeds hate her for reasons beyond her control.. As Millicent Bell, writer of “Jane Eyre, The Tale of the Governess” explains, Jane is punished at Gateshead for her “economic inferiority” and “suffers the dependency of childhood and femalehood” (Bell). Mrs. Reed acknowledges her as a burden, hating her without ever knowing her. Jane lacks childhood cuteness, which results in lack of sympathy from adults. She is inferior in appearance and wealth, and because she does not blindly obey the Reeds commands, she is unloved and eventually sent away. Growing up unloved and unwanted and unattractive, Jane relies on her sheer strength to grow up. She stands up to the Reeds and stands for her beliefs. Even as a child, Jane is independent. When Jane expects a fresh start at Lowood, she is again ostracized when Mr. Brocklehurst advises the children and teachers of Lowood to “be on guard against [Jane],” to “shun her” because she is “a liar” (Jane Eyre 94). Jane then must rely on herself to disprove Mr. Brocklehurst’s claims. She is kind, diligent, creative, and intelligent, graduating as the top student of her class. She wins her classmates’ and teachers’ affections through not the words of others, but the actions of herself. Her power of will, moral integrity, and carries over to her relationships with St. John and Rochester. While Rochester speaks of marrying Miss Ingram, Jane announces she must leave Thornfield, asserting “I am no bird; and no net ensnares me; I am a free human being with an independent will; which I now exert to leave you” (378). Even though Jane is financially stable and comfortable at Thornfield, she is not a meek quiet person. She could not suppress her love and would rather struggle on her on than struggle with suppressed emotions. Morally she feels it the answer to leave him. When she eventually does leave Rochester after discovering he has a secret wife, she is forced to beg for food, almost dying of starvation and fatigue. She almost dies rather than becoming Rochester’s mistress. Jane refuses to be dependent in a form she views as demeaning and immoral. Jane acts upon her own emotions and own knowledge, not the knowledge or commands of others. Because Jane is an outcast, financially and physically throughout most of the novel, she becomes an empowered individual who relies on herself for atonement.
Sethe, in Beloved, is subject to torment and hate, living as a former slave after the abolishment of slavery, from the white people for being African-American, but also from her black community for having murdered her daughter. Sethe is dehumanized through her treatment by white people, possessing a permanent “tree” of scars on her back as proof. Sethe beliefs that the fate of a slave is fate worse than death, which leads her to kill Beloved before they can take her back to slavery. Sethe says to the spirit of Beloved, “When I put that headstone up… I couldn't lay down with you. No matter how much I wanted to. I couldn't lay down nowhere in peace, back then. Now I can. I can sleep like the drowned, have mercy. She come back to me, my daughter, and she is mine” (Morrison 154). Though she believes the murdering of Beloved was the only way to save her, she regrets the decision immediately. She was fueled to kill by love and once her daughter is dead is overcome with her need to love. Once Beloved returns, Sethe invests all of her energy into making up for lost time, and making Beloved feel as comfortable and at-home as possible. She is finally at peace and can connect with the daughter she’s lost for 18 years. Sethe was abused and hated by the white people and once she slits her daughter’s throat, she is ostracized and despised by her black community as well. According to an article by David Cosca, published from Cornell University, when Sethe informs Paul D that she killed one of children, “his response is to explicitly exclude Sethe from his definition of human culture by identifying her as an animal: ‘you got two feet, Sethe, not four,’ he says” (Cosca). Even Paul D, who Sethe feels most connected to does not understand. He has been sexually assaulted, and mentally and physically abused in his time as slave, but he doesn’t understand Sethe killing her child. He cannot connect to the maternal connection to children; he sees the act as barbaric murder, while Sethe saw the act as saving her child. To both the black and white community, Sethe is animalistic alien. She is alone except for Denver, who she loves and focuses her energy on. After Paul D calls Sethe’s love “too thick,” Sethe responds with, "Too thick? Love is or it ain't. Thin love ain't love at all" (Morrison 102). The love she holds for children is the love that allows her to be a single African American mother in the 1800s. Her love is her strength, her pride, and her identity. She atones for her sins by investing her love in her children. She works tirelessly at home and at her job to allow for plenty of food and a comfortable home. Against a backdrop of hatred; hatred for her as a murderer and hatred for her for simply being an African American woman, Sethe focusses on her own love.
Although Daisy Buchanan, in The Great Gatsby, is repressed in ways in which women were repressed in the 1920s, she is privileged with charm, beauty, and wealth. She is presents herself as a delicate, innocent flower. An article on “Oxymoron in The Great Gatsby” highlights that,“Lovely Daisy is a hit-and-run killer. Appearances are deceiving” (Hays). She resembles a daisy, with beautiful white petals and a bubbly, positive, yellow center. This, however, is her persona and physical appearance, her inner values are darker, focused on public image, selfishness, and greed. Jane Eyre who is unattractive and untitled relies on her character and intelligence to reach atonement and grow as a person, but Daisy, who is gorgeous and wealthy, seems to recieve a free pass in society. She is never forced to atone because society doesn’t seem to notice her flaws. Daisy chooses to stay with Tom rather than leave with Gatsby because she “realizes the safety of staying ‘with her own kind,’ those of her social class, however repellent her husband is” (Hays). Throughout the novel she chooses money and social status over emotion and love. This never changes about her; even when she hates Tom, and declares her devotion towards Gatsby, she chooses Tom in the end. Her true lack of innocence and kindness is displayed after she kills Myrtle, denies all blame, and leaves Gatsby to be accused and murdered. Daisy doesn’t even attend his funeral. She knows that attending his funeral may look poor socially, so does not even pay respect to the man she loved and was responsible for his death. When Daisy first finds out she has a girl, she comments, “I hope she’ll be a fool-that’s the best thing a girl can be in this world, a beautiful little fool” (Fitzgerald 17). Daisy suppresses herself just as much as 1920’s society suppresses her. She has the choice to follow love and makes the decision to choose greed, yet still plays the victim. Her view of herself as delicate and weak allows her to feel justified in never atoning for her sins. After she kills Myrtle, she acts oblivious, dumb, and innocent; all stereotypes of a patriarchal society that she makes true. She does not have to admit to the murder because she fulfills her duty as the “beautiful little fool.” Instead of using oppression to gain strength, like Jane Eyre and Sethe, Daisy uses stereotypes to cover her sins, never actually atoning for them herself.
While Jane proves herself through intelligence and passion, and Sethe through love and devotion, Daisy fails to grow as a person, instead choosing to use her role in society to avoid atonement. All three women come from varying levels of hardship, but that does not define their character. Through hardships people can gain intelligence, perspective, or persistence, but it is the choice of those people. There is only so long that anyone can be an innocent, delicate, daisy.