Heimatlosigkeit…yeah, I can say it…

When I started to read Lukacs I honestly felt a bit overwhelmed by the language. I turned to secondary sources to try to make sense of his piece. J.M Berstein’s Philosophy of the Novel: Lukacs, Marxism and the Dialectics of Form, David H. Miles, “Portrait of the Marxist as a Young Hegelian: Lukacs’ Theory of the Novel, Graham Good’s “Review Essay: Lukacs’ Theory of the Novel, and WIKI. This research helped me to grasp some of the main points in Lukacs’ theory. There were so many that we were not able to even touch on in class. We tried to focus on what we thought were most relevant for our purposes as we are examining what the novel is and most specifically with Lukacs, its origin historically.

Lukacs’ comes from a very German philosophical tradition and is heavily influenced by Hegel.

Hegel developed a comprehensive philosophical framework, or “system”, to account in an integrated and developmental way for the relation of mind and nature, the subject and object of knowledge, and psychology, the state, history, art, religion, and philosophy. In particular, he developed a concept of mind or spirit that manifested itself in a set of contradictions and oppositions that it ultimately integrated and united, such as those between nature and freedom, and immanence and transcendence, without eliminating either pole or reducing it to the other. His influential conceptions are of speculative logic or “dialectic,” “absolute idealism,” “Spirit,” negativity, sublation (Aufhebung in German), the “Master/Slave” dialectic, “ethical life,” and the importance of history. (WIKI)

Just in this paragraph from WIKI I can see the some of the language and ideas Lukacs uses in his theory about the novel. Lukacs is also influenced by Kant. The concepts of immanence and transcendence:

• “philosophical and metaphysical theories of the divine as existing and acting within the mind or the world. This concept generally contrasts or coexists with the idea of transcendence“
• “In the context of Kant‘s theory of knowledge Immanence means to remain in the boundaries of possible experience”
• “In modern philosophy, Kant introduced a new term – transcendental, thus instituting a new, third meaning. In his theory of knowledge, this concept is concerned with the conditions of possibility of knowledge itself. He also opposed the term transcendental to the term transcendent, the latter meaning “that, which goes beyond” (transcends) any possible knowledge of a human being. For him transcendental meant knowledge about our cognitive faculty with regard to how objects are possible a priori. “I call all knowledge transcendental if it is occupied, not with objects, but with the way that we can possibly know objects even before we experience them.”He also equated transcendental with that which is “…in respect of the subject’s faculty of cognition.”Something is transcendental if it plays a role in the way in which the mind “constitutes” objects and makes it possible for us to experience them as objects in the first place. Ordinary knowledge is knowledge of objects; transcendental knowledge is knowledge of how it is possible for us to experience those objects as objects”
• “Eighteenth-century German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1781) advocated a blend of rationalist and empiricist theories. Kant states, “although all our knowledge begins with experience, it does not follow that that it arises from experience” According to Kant, a priori knowledge is transcendental, or based on the form of all possible experience, while a posteriori knowledge is empirical, based on the content of experience. Kant states, “… it is quite possible that our empirical knowledge is a compound of that which we receive through impressions, and that which the faculty of cognition supplies from itself (sensuous impressions giving merely the occasion).”

In our presentation, Tabitha mentioned critic David Miles who argues that Lukacs theory has been “more praised than read” because of the intangible concepts and the reader to have extensive knowledge of German philosophy (22). Yes I think that it would make sense to do some research on Hegel & Kant to have some familiarity with the schools of thought from which Lukacs has been inspired by.

Bernstein suggests that “the function of Lukacs historiographical schema is not to forward a universal philosophy of history, but rather to aid in the establishing of the historical specificity, the historical uniqueness of the novel and its world., the world of capitalism” (47). In other words, Bernstein is suggesting that Lukacs’ contribution to the theory of the novel is to ascertain a starting point for the inception of the novel. He does this by examining the form of Epic literature which was pre-capitalist society, influenced by gods, then God. The novel appears when “god abandons man” or as Lukacs advocates “when man became lonely and could find meaning and substance only in his soul, whose home was nowhere” (210). This idea of “tanscendental homelessness” lends itself to the origin of the novel, its content and its form. Lukacs piece was written during WWI which has been a catalyst fro the Modern literary movement, much like WWII and Post-Modernism. Both were times of great disallusionment. In Lukacs writing of his theory on the novel we are getting his worldview at a particular time period in history. I would argue that the effect of history at the time something is written is inherently significant. Vidal’s Myra is a perfect example of Lukacs’ “historico-philosophy”. I would like to examine this correlation further.

I found Armstrong’ s opinion that “desire and sexuality”  as not being independent of political history very interesting.  The inclusion of the history of sexuality in understanding the novel as being crucial, makes sense to me. I can’t help but think of how Myra would fit here. Armstrong includes Foucault in her discussion, which also harkens back to Myra, sexuality, power, politics. Hmmm…

I also found Jameson’s theories compelling. He, like Lukacs & Armstrong sees history as a vital component of the novel. “He believes novels chronologically demonstrate the evolution of culture & power-political history” (B&K’s abstract). I am drawn to the historical aspects of these theorists. Brandon said that for Jameson, the novel reflects the morals of the time, Myra, Myra, Myra…

This is taken from Kate Millet’s “Sexual Politics” written in 1969, one year after Vidal published Myra.

“a disinterested examination of our system of sexual relationship must point out that the situation between the sexes now, and throughout history, is a case of that phenomenon Max Weber defined as herrschaft, a relationship of dominance and subordinance. What goes largely unexamined, often even unacknowledged (yet is institutionalised nonetheless) in our social order, is the birthright priority whereby males rule females. Through this system a most ingenious form of “interior colonisation” has been achieved. It is one which tends moreover to be sturdier than any form of segregation, and more rigorous than class stratification, more uniform, certainly more enduring. However muted its present appearance may be, sexual dominion obtains nevertheless as perhaps the most pervasive ideology of our culture and provides its most fundamental concept of power” (Ch 2)

Bakhtin’s concept that there is no canon is something that I’d like to read more about. Why does he feel this way? How does he support this contention?

Turn The Page…

 A novel should make the reader want to keep turning the pages. I know this sounds basic, but is is crucial.  The narrative should be engaging from beginning to end. For the past few months I have been asking people questions about the novel: Why do you read what you read? What makes a good novel for you? Responses that keep coming up are: A novel is good: if I can’t put it down, if it keeps me up all night reading it, I think about it when I am not reading it, I have dreams about it, I want to read it again and again.

I have also been paying attention to this in my creative writing workshops. I have been having a difficult time reading some of the pieces written by some of my classmates. I know that this is a totally different level. I am just looking at the ability to engage the reader aspect. It is vital.

In Uses Of Enchantment, Julavits was successful at fulfilling this expectation for me. However, Julavits goes even further by making the reader want to, or have to, turn back the pages to check, examine, clarify, re-analyze possible connections that are essential to understanding certain plot points. For example, the cigarette case is first introduced in the beginning of the novel on P. 42 in the “What Might Have Happened” section. The next time it is mentioned is 15 years later in the “West Salem” section on P.55. This section is the present part of the narrative. It appears a third time on P. 246 in “Notes” when “Aunt Helen”/Paula/Mary’s mom goes to see Dr. Hammer with the cigarette case & a handwritten receipt. Later in that same section on p.262, hammer recalls the session with Mary & the game she suggest they play a that involved listing objects. The “Dented Silver Cigarette Case” is the first item on her list. 

The second time the cigarette case is mentioned we know that it is important, but we still don’t know to what extent completely. As a reader, I am keeping that in the storage bin of my brain for further reference as I continue reading, hoping of course, that it doesn’t get blown out by some huge crosswind, I am kidding. Julavits doesn’t mention the case until almost 200 pages later.  I am forced to go back to find the passages where it was first mentioned to piece it all together. Kim suggested that we do a very close reading of this novel. I see why. The cigarette case is just one of many parts of the whole that Julavits sprinkles throughout the entire novel. She wants the reader to work at making connections. I found this an effective way to keep me turning the pages of her novel.

Terry Eagleton: The novel is “one of the great revolutionary cultural forms of human history.” I have to agree with Eagleton. Since its inception the novel has evolved into a medium that allows people with radical, innovative ideas or perspectives on social, political, or cultural commentary or critique to have a voice. The novel is a fictional prose narrative. This allows the writer to utilize literary devices to engage the reader through form, imagery, characterization, allusions, POV, stream of consciousness, etc. The novel becomes the world that is created by the author. The author’s ideas, commentary, criticism or message permeate this world. As a reader we see the world as the writer sees it and it is up to us to draw our own conclusions.

A perfect example of a “great revolutionary” work is Vidal’s Myra. Vidal was ahead of his time. As Kim pointed out he came before Foucault’s theories on sexuality and power. By using the medium of the novel, Vidal  couches his social, political, & gender commentary/critique in a bizarre story about a man who changes into a woman… who rapes a man… who then falls in love with a woman… and goes back to being a man. This novel was considered pornography by some when it was first published. I am sure some people today may even think so. But there is so much going on in this book. That is the beauty of Vidal’s brilliance. He knows the whole concept of Myra was controversial at that time. He knew people would read it. But by reading it you are reading about the human condition as Vidal perceives it. His voice is being heard at a time, especially politically, when he wants it to be.

I Think I Know What K is…

One of the main themes in this novel is memory. In our last class, Kim asked the question “What does it mean to know something?” She directed us to a few passages that through analysis may provide some clarification:

The girl tells the man about the paper she wrote about a man who burned down a girl’s house:

“I based it on a book I read as a kid. Or at least I think I read it. I’ve never been able to find the actual book. Sometimes I wonder if maybe I just made the whole story up myself. I mean who would write a kid’s book about an arsonist who kills a whole family and then tries to kill a little girl…

I wonder if she knew something, the girl said. Do you think maybe she knew something she didn’t know she knew?

The real question is, the man said, pointing at a half eaten shrimp at her, if she has to be reminded that she knows something, does she really know it?

Maybe she blanked it out to save herself, the girl said. She knew if she knew this thing that someone would try to pry it out of her” (78).

I think the last part of this is Freud’s theory on repression. The first sentence, “Maybe she blanked it out to save herself”, is a defense mechanism against having to remember unpleasant experiences. The second part of the passage, “She knew if she knew this thing that someone would try to pry it out of her” appears to suggest a fear of the interrogations by the local authorities, or especially the psychoanalysts, as in Mary’s case.

I found something rather interesting while writing this post. I have The Freud Reader, edited by Peter Gay. It’s on my bookshelf collection from college courses I have taken. So when I started to analyze the passage above, I reached for it to look up Freud’s repression theories. I looked up repression in the index and went to the first page listed. Guess what Freud called this section…Draft K… Is this where Julavits/ Mary gets the K????? It is a memorandum he enclosed with a letter to a colleague. Draft K “deals with the vexed question of “choice of neurosis,” …defense activity (repression) and the nature of symptoms as compromises. …he thinks their origins go back to traumatic sexual experiences.” (Gay 89). Not only that but the first section is entitled The Neuroses Of Defence, (A Christmas Fairy Tale). As we have mentioned in class a few times Julavits has made allusions to children’s fairy tales. The title of this novel is taken from Bruno Bettelheim’s 1975 book, in which he analyzes fairy tales in terms of Freudian psychoanalysis. Kim explained that he was against the sanitizing of stories that are told to children. His argument being that the children need to know that bad things happen in the world. It prepares them to deal with life.

Another significant passage to examine found in the “Notes” section. It is Mary’s third session with Hammer and he introduces the term “paramnesia”:

“Mary pretended to be entranced by my bookshelves. I wondered if she suffered from “true amnesia” — gaps into which not only very old memories have fallen but recent events as well. Often “paramnesias” form to fill these gaps—stories that take the place of memory, memories which can conveniently disappear at the point a patient tries to put them into words. Often this disappearance is due to subverted shame—meaning that Mary’s seemingly disingenuous forgetting could be the result of a force exerted by her unconscious” (99).

 

Mary’s motivation…

“The kiss did not ruin her; her mother’s slap did. And so years later, when she had read Dora, the book ingnited a chain of electric connections. She thought of herself like a bulb in a string of Christmas lights; one bad bulb left the bulbs after it in darkness. So she ignited herself, and the string reached back and back and back, and she became emboldened not only by her own injustice but by a continuum of injustices linking her to Bettina and Dora and Dorcas Hobbs and Abagail Lake and beyond. She’d begun playing games, games inside of games inside of games. But now when she tried to visualize that string of lights, all she could see was an expanding brightness that erased more than it revealed” (128).

In this passage Mary is recalling the kiss by Kurt, her parent’s friend. Her mother found out through one of her sister’s and instead of consoling Mary, she is slapped for lying. It is clear that at this point this is where Mary began to repress as a defense against her mother’s anger. This repression was “ignited by a chain of electric connections” beginning with Freud’s Dora. She identified with other women who had been unjustly accused of something. She was encouraged by finding “a continuum of injustices” in “Bettina and Dora and Dorcas Hobbs and Abagail Lake and beyond”. I think the problem with Mary identifying with all of these women is in the way she does it. It’s almost as if all the women’s stories become one with Mary’s. Now that Mary wants to remember what her story is, it is almost impossible “to visualize that string of lights”. The only thing Mary can see when she looks back is “an expanding brightness that erased more than it revealed”.  I believe that Julavits wants the reader to experience the same difficulty that Mary is having in trying to sort out the truth. That would explain Julavitz’s choices in the form of this novel.

“Overprivileged Non-Traumas”

The passage I chose to do a close reading on is P.31-32. It is one of the three points of view that Julavits uses in the narration of Uses Of Enchantment. This section is entitled “Notes” and is told from first person perspective of Dr. Hammer, a psychologist. In this chapter he is recounting his first session with Mary Veal. I will focus my close reading on the first paragraph in which Dr. Hammer describes how it came about that Mary Veal became his patient. He was given the case by Rosemary Beidelman, part-time mental health adviser at Summering, who had received it from the head psychiatrist at the local hospital, Dr. Antoine Hicks-Flevill.           

Hammer refers to Mary’s case as “high profile” and regards his acquisition of it as “an extremely lucky turn”. He has a “troubled record with teenage female patients”. He admits that Roz was giving him “a second chance” and no one “less deserved” Mary’s case more than he. He has “familiarity with her (Mary’s) personality type” and acknowledges that experience was “defined by failure”. This he deduced “made me (him) a natural” by way of “counterintuitive (ity)”. Roz did not do this as a “selfless good turn”.  She “complained” to Dr. Hammer that she had “quite enough of overprivileged non-traumas”.  He maintains that they were “doing each other a favor” but confesses the “debt weighing a bit more heavily” on his side. Finally, he says this “ongoing inequity” which he had gotten used to.

Key words or phrases:

“high profile”

 ”an extremely lucky turn”

 ”troubled record with teenage female patients”

 ”a second chance”

“less deserved”

“familiarity with her (Mary’s) personality type”

“defined by failure”

“made me (him) a natural” by way of “counterintuitive (ity)”

“selfless good turn”

 ”doing each other a favor”

“debt weighing a bit more heavily” on his side

“ongoing inequity”

This paragraph evokes in me a sense of mistrust of both Dr. Hammer and Roz. I question their motivations for taking Mary’s case. I understand that because it is high profile case there will be media, fame, exposure which may make names for them.  As a result, their status in the field of psychology will be elevated. They will also benefit financially.  I get that part. I think what bothers me is the fact that Dr. Hammer tells us that he has had problems with other young female patients. Roz knows this. She also knows that he will take the case or any case she gives him. I suspect that Dr. Hammer’s reputation has been tarnished. I don’t know to what extent at this point. We are getting his thoughts, his take on the situation. I am unclear whether he has kept whatever it is he has done, his “failures” under wraps.

Hammer is familiar with Mary’s “personality type”. What is her type? Why is she classified and if so, does that imply that there are a lot of other girls where she came from? Were these the same girls that he had trouble with before? Roz has a problem with the “overprivileged traumas” of the girls at Summering. Are the girls Hammer had problems with from Summerin? Does Roz supply Hammer with an abundance of patients from there? Is that why “the debt weighs heavily on his side”? In this paragraph, I question the motivation of both Roz and Hammer.

Vidal, you are brilliant…

This novel, Myra Breckinridge has left me in awe of its author, Gore Vidal. When I read it I felt compelled to do so with the aid of my computer. The text is chock full of historical, mythological, political, literary & early film references that I spent a great deal of time looking things up. Not to mention Vidal’s vocabulary. Some people may find this to be too tedious a task while reading. I happen to enjoy the interactive process of researching these references because they contain significant meaning that I simply don’t want to miss out on. This makes the text complex by adding these layers of allusions. That to me is one aspect of a great novel.

I picked up on the satirical tone of the novel from the very first chapters as Vidal introduced, or Myra introduces herself to the reader, in the first person narrative in the form of a journal. This was an effective way for us to plunge right inside Myra’s world via her head. The SOC of the “Buck Loner Reports” provides a play by play plot development. It has the same effect as the Myra’s journal writing, in that it allows the reader to see things from Bucks POV. Myra’s head is much more fun to be inside, but these forms do contrast well in the structure of the novel. I found myself looking forward to reading the next “Report”. It had a sort grounding effect. I like to read a novel that plays around with POV. I prefer the non-linear narrative that shifts around. Complexity is important for a novel to keep the reader engaged by challenging their perceptions.

I thought of the way Vidal wrote that rape scene was insane and truly brilliant. (I know I already posted about this)  

I think as a novel this is by far one of the greatest I have ever read. Vidal was ahead of his time as you mentioned in class. His commentary on the power of sexual identity/sexuality and political implications came before Foucault. I definitely recommend that you, Kim, keep this one on your syllabus. I have to agree with someone who posted that it is not for the 200 level classes. They won’t have the maturity or the literary muscle to be able to embrace Myra effectively.

“Power To Politics To Sexuality” (Eisner 257)

What is Myra trying to destroy & then create in the Rusy rape scene? As we disccused in class, in this scene Vidal blurs the gender roles to the point of non existence or total confusion. Myra is a man who physically becomes a woman who anally rapes a man with a man made penis. How are we to intepret what is going on here?. Vidal is challenging the traditional  sexual roles that have been reinforced by the dominant ideology. Eisner suggest that both Vidal and Millet “connect politics to power to sexuality” (257). In the scene Vidal is clearly breaking down these boundaries. Perhaps, by doing this the political power can be recreated, redirected?  Whoever controls sexuality can dictate politically? I don’t know where I am going with this. But I do think that this scene is where Vidal’s revolutionary or visionary ideas emerge. Vidal “warns that the persistent denial of the dark side of human nature makes us vulnerable to dictatorship” (Eisner 256). Is this why Vidal exposes us to Myra this way? Does Myra embody “the dark side of human nature”? It seems evident in the rape scene. I don’t know if I am on to something. Any thoughts?

Here are some quotes that I think are worth noting:

 ”For Millet, sexuality was the key to understand the way power is exercised in a democracy: “However muted its presence appearance may be, sexual dominion obtains nevertheless as perhaps the most pervasive ideology of our culture and provides its most fundamental concept of power” (Eisner 257)

 ”Through the naturalization of theories of biological, psychological, sociological, and anthropological superiority of men over women, men’s sexuality is privelaged over women’s, and the exercise of male sexuality is always priveleged over the exercise of female” (Eisner 257)

 Eisner discusses Susan Sontag’s Essay, Notes On Camp.: Camp “incarnates a victory of ‘style’ over ‘content’, ‘aesthetics’ over ‘morality’, of irony  over tragedy” (Sontag 287). Looking at Rusty’s rape in this light Eisner sees it as comedy (261). It just occurred to me how this is one of the many ways Vidal is critiquing the le nouveau roman. Vidal is over the top in this scene, he forces the reader to see the humor in the rape of an innocent boy by a maniacal predator. This scene was brilliantly constructed to elicit humor rather than total disgust or outrage. Clearly if it were written according to the model of the New Novel (French) it would have simply been too upsetting to the reader. Vidal is reinforcing his contention that the use of ‘style , ‘aesthetics’ and ‘irony’ are essential to the novel.

Finally, Eisner’s take that ”Society will reinforce Normative Heterosexuality at all cost” to explain the ending is as Kim said in class defeatist (256). I read the ending as more of a mocking of Normative Heterosexuality by Vidal.

Woman Triumphant…

Please excuse the form of this post. It is a transcription of the quotes & some notes I took while reading the rest of the piece. Feel free to comment on any of these passages. Your insight will be soooo welcomed….

“You’re not trying to walk straight” (127).

Rusty…”sacrifice to some cruel goddess” (133)

Myra…”the Master Dominatrix”

“Myra is an anal erotic” (135)

“fleshquake”

“The process of diminishing was well begun” (137)

“Reducing his status from man to boy to child-oh the triumph” (137)

“the sense of power was overwhelming” (138)

“I was incredibly sunny” (143)

“have you ever been circumcised?” (143)

“all potatoes and no meat” (145)

“The penis, on the other hand was not a success” (143)

“That’s a boy’s equipment” (145)

Total humiliation.

“destroying totally, a man’s idea of himself in relation to the triumphant sex” (149)

Myra’s favorite view (149)

“Woman Triumphant” “To destroy the adored destroyer” (150)

“there was blood at the end” (150)

“not yet entirely complete” (150)

Sentences are left unfinished 128,156,162

“obtain uniqueness” Myra’s hatred for her mother (157)

“Raped his manhood, seduce his girl, ambition stops and godhood begins” (160)

Montag & Myra 164

If Rusty enjoyed being anally raped, that would have ruined it for Myra…”my life’s work has failed” (164)

The justification of Myron’s life (165)

“by acting out what was done to him, I exalt him-the idea of him anyways and also avenge him” (165)

After she completes her seduction:

“I shall be free of all guilt toward Myron & for Myron I shall be a new woman, literally new, something -unique under the sun” (165)

Ultimately ” freed of obsession & be like no one else who ever lived” (166)

The statue “worshipped but not loved, like me” (166)

“wanting to tame for all time the archetypal male, …created something ten times as masculine in the classic sense” (174)

Man must become “ceased to be confined to a single sexual role, to a single person…once he has become free to blend with others, to exchange personalities with both men & women” (177)

Myra is a visionary

“proper masculine behavior” (178)

Montag: “any explicit reference to the anal upsets me” (178)

“my new order for the human race the since the fluidity which I demand of the sexes is diametrically opposed to Mosaic solidarity” (179)

“Myron Breckinridge is not dead” (180)

“that is the woman’s role, to make the wound & heal it” (186)

“the last fantasy which is the first reality” (189)

Her next step (190)

“he has a head of his own”

“twice I have punished that head”

“lethal decapitation & torturing & making Rusty’s sex in order to avenge Myron for the countless times he had been made victim by that mitred one-eyed beast” (190)

“I existed totally” (190)

“change the last generation of man” (191)

“Woman Triumphant, exercising total power over men as man once exerted that same power over Myron & still do over women” (192)

“lost all interest in men”

“a new creation”

“A mutant diverging from original stock to become something quite unlike its former self or any other self known to the race” (192)

“I smashed the male principle, only to become entrapped by the female” (196)

No longer triumphant.

“the true mission to begin” (205)

Leticia: “a fulfilled woman” (208)