Satire in Persuasion

Jane Austen is an author who is quite fond of satire, often using it throughout her whole stories. Persuasion is one of her books that is filled with satire. From satirical characters, such as Sir Walter, Mary, and Elizabeth; to satirical situations such as Louisa’s fall.

                Several of the characters in Jane Austen’s Persuasion are deeply satirized. For example, Sir Walter is used by Austen to poke fun at the obsession many people of her time had with wealth and status. Specifically she uses irony with Sir Walter’s character, such as the fact that he is so obsessed with status, yet has to give it all up because he spends too much of his money. Mary, Anne’s sister, is another character that Austen satirizes. Austen uses exaggeration in Mary to represent the weak and needy characteristics that so many women in that time period had. Typically these characteristics shine through Mary’s self-centered and often self-pitying attitudes towards things, such as when Anne first came to visit her and some of her first words were “So, you are come at last!  I began to think I should never see you.  I am so ill I can hardly speak.  I have not seen a creature the whole morning…I do not think I ever was so ill in my life as I have been all this morning:  very unfit to be left alone, I am sure” (Austen 36). As you can see, Mary’s character does nothing more in the book than whine and complain, a perfect characteristic for satirizing the women of Jane Austen’s time.

I have only read two of Jane Austen’s books, but I have found an interesting pattern in the fact that she typically does not satirize her main characters. These strong, independent, female main characters, such as Anne in Persuasion, remain above all of the petty nonsense for which other characters are being satirized. Another one of Jane Austen’s satirical themes that appears throughout several of her books is the idea of the poorer characters being the wisest and most pleasant to be around. In the case of Persuasion, Ms. Smith embodies this poor and disabled, yet wise and kind character. Ms. Smith has lost all of her fortune, so many of the satirically pretentious characters such as Elizabeth and Sir Walter cannot understand why Anne would rather spend time with her rather than with the rich and powerful, yet quite dull, Lady Dalrymple.

                Jane Austen also uses situations in Persuasion as a satire for ridiculous aspects of her society. One of the best examples of this is when Louisa Musgrove stubbornly jumps off the stairs, only to fall and hit her head. Earlier in the book, Captain Wentworth talks of how he likes that Louisa is strong willed and not easily persuaded. This preference probably derives from Anne previously being persuaded by Lady Russell to leave him; however it is still ironic when her strong will is precisely what leads Louisa into a coma, and is the factor that allows Captain Wentworth to leave her in pursuit of Anne.

Works Cited: Austen, Jane. Persuasion. New York: Barnes & Noble Classics, 2003. Print.

An Unfilmable Conclusion: WAGYWHYB & Smooth Talk

Both Smooth Talk and Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been address the issues of sexism and racism, however, Sooth Talk takes a more revolutionary approach towards the issues.        

            Daly addresses the criticisms that both Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been and Smooth Talk have received for being a “cautionary tale” to women. She displays the opinion of B. Ruby Rich who is disgusted at the way that Chopra’s film seems to warn girls to “keep a lid on their sexuality” through the use of camera spacing. As quoted by Daly, “Every time Connie is on screen, she’s shot in close-up…every time Arnold is on screen, he’s in middle-shot framed against ample landscape” (Rich 148). Both Rich and Daly feel that this use of tight, close-up spacing is a way to show women as inferior and in the same token, “each time Connie crosses into new and larger spaces…she becomes increasingly more vulnerable” (Daly 148). I felt this sexism as I read as well, however it was quite subtle because, as Daly points out, Oates simply followed the formula of the too common horror story where the girl is trapped and helpless. I felt that Chopra’s Smooth Talk showed equal signs of sexism, however I noticed most of this in the dialogue and Connie’s reaction to male characters. I did not consciously notice the difference between the close-up shots of Connie and the properly spaced shots of Arnold, however this too could have been a result of my familiarity with such stories.

Daly goes further to say that Oates’s original story is revolutionary in its feelings towards women. Oates does not blame Connie, the victim of the story, for the attack, and in fact give her the last word, rather than giving that privilege to Arnold. This is quite revolutionary for the 1960’s, a time in which women were never considered superior. However, Smooth Talk provides even more empowerment to Connie, as it is set in the 1980s.

 This difference between the power given to Connie is most evident in the end of the movie, when Connie is shown returning safely to her home, seemingly unshaken by the events. This is quite a change from Oates’s book, in which the reader is left wondering if Connie will ever return at all, let alone return safely. Oates is quoted saying “Laura Dern’s Connie is no longer ‘my’ Connie at the film’s conclusion; she is very much alive, assertive, strong willed-a girl perhaps, of the mid 1980’s and not of the mid-1960’s” (Oates 149). Daly explains that the reason for this difference is most likely due to the fact that the 1960’s had not experienced the feminist movement, making women of the 1980’s much more “resisting readers” to the “smooth talk” of men around them.

As you can see, both Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been and Smooth Talk address the issues of sexism and feminism. However, Smooth Talk, due to its later time period, gives quite a bit more empowerment to Connie.

Works Cited: Daly, Brenda O. "An Unfilmable Conclusion: Joyce Carol Oates at the Movies." The Journal of Popular Culture 23.3 (1989): 101-14. Print.Oates, Joyce Carol. “Where are you going, where have you been?” New Brunswick, N.J: Rutgers University Press, 1994. Print.

WAYGWHYB & "Seduction, Space, and a Fictional Mode" Reaction

I found Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been to be a very fascinating story that highlights many of the insecurities and fears of our world, especially for a rebellious young woman. Gillis’ analysis was even more interesting and focused on several aspects of Oates’ story that were very abstract and insightful.

                For example, Gillis emphasizes the invasion of space that is displayed throughout Oates’ Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been. I found it fascinating how she points out the theme of invasion that is seen throughout the book. I had noticed the literal invasion of Arnold Friend into Connie’s home, but there were a few other symbolic invasions that I did not originally pick up on. For example, there was the symbolic invasion of her innocence by the new and seductive life of partying at the drive-in restaurant.

                Another point that Gillis made that I found quite fascinating was the idea that personal invasion has become a much greater issue in the more recent times in which has led to fictional stories dealing more with the “evil represented as that which threatens the privacy of self” (Gillis 134). I find this particularly interesting because it related to some of the other readings that we have done in this class. One example being Benjamin Barber, who explains in his book, Consumed, that in our day and age, people are becoming increasingly privatized. He explained that we are beginning to focus more on the individual, rather than the collective and postulated that that led us to be vulnerable to the invasion of consumerism into our lives. This vulnerability to consumerism parallels the way that Connie’s vanity and focus on her own wants and needs rather than those of her family leaves her vulnerable to be invaded by Arnold Friend. If Connie had not been so vain in feeling the need to stay home from the picnic to wash her hair, she would not have been home alone and not have needed to deal with Arnold Friend.

                Gillis also explains that in its own way, Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been is a coming of age story, which I find to be an interesting interpretation of the story. She explains that “the tale catches its main character at a passage point where, it is implied, the future may depend precipitously on the past” (Gillis 135). I can see how Oates’ story could be interpreted as coming of age story, what with Connie, at the young age of 15, separating from her parents and going to the drive in, experiencing things that she has never before experienced. However, most coming of age stories do not have the dark undertone that characterizes Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been. When Connie comes out into the world, while she is greeted with the common seduction and temptation that is found in other coming of age stories such as Gatsby (as Gillis uses for an example), her experience is much darker and unfriendly, guided by the most frightening of all, Arnold Friend.

                Overall, both Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been and Seduction, Space, and a Fictional Mode were extremely fascinating reads that touched on issues that were very engaging. I felt that Gillis’ critical essay was especially interesting because of her illustrative analysis of Oates’ story.

So Many Tangents, it Felt Like a Calculus Book

I must admit that “Consumed” was probably my least favorite book this year, for several different reasons. I was also relieved to observe today in our discussion that I was not alone in my feelings of confusion and frustration towards Barber and his book, “Consumed.” Overall, I feel that where Barber went wrong was when he went off on his first tangent at the very beginning of the book.

To be fair, Barber did make several very interesting points. For example, I found his chapter, “Infantilizing Consumers: The Coming of Kidults” to be fascinating. I have to say, I witness many of my peers falling prey to the common childish want of easy over hard. As Barber explains, adults achieve fluency, or “the seeming ease that comes with extensive learning, effort, and discipline” by choosing hard over easy (Barber 84). However, children (as well as the emerging kidults) are more frequently choosing easy over hard, and therefore lack fluency. My sister is a perfect example. Many times, especially when we were younger and the two year age gap made a bigger difference, Ruth would see me do something that I had practiced for a long time, assume it was easy, and try to do that activity. This course of events would be fine, if she didn’t have the mind set that the activity would be easy. After failing her first attempt, she would immediately give up. This behavior is not just a pattern in my sister, rather one that I witness in a lot of people around me.

I also enjoyed Barber’s use of psychologists such as Freud and Erik Erikson in his description on the proper maturation into adults, as well as the improper way in which adults are maturing today. As Freud theorized, and as Barber summarizes “infantile behavior is a consequence of a regressive process that offers itself as a defense against intimidating adult dilemmas with which a disordered ego is unable to contend” (Barber 34). I have always found Freud to be a fascinating (yet sometimes disturbing) psychologist, and I loved the way that Barber connected Freud’s idea of regression as a result of adults not being able to handle being consumers.

However, my biggest issue with this book is the fact that many of Barber’s points lack depth. This last point that I discussed, for example, is discussed for a few paragraphs, and then Barber quickly segues into another tangent. Although these tangents are at times equally interesting as the one Barber was previously on, his jumping from one point to the other still detracts from each of his statements. As he moves from tangent to tangent, Barber neglects to really finish any of his trains of thought by going fully in depth.

As I discussed in class, it seems that the several tangents allowed for the temporary appeasement of everyone by giving us each something that we related to and could enjoy. However, in doing this, Barber managed to annoy all of us by only briefly mentioning that which we each felt was interesting and deserved more attention.

Use of Rushkoff's "Time Binding" in West Wing's "Isaac & Ishmael"

One of Rushkoff’s most interesting points was the idea that humans are capable of what he described as “time binding.” “We can take the experiences of one generation and pass it on to the next generation through language and symbols. “We can still teach our children things like hunting or fishing in real time, but our lessons can be compressed into stories, instructions, and diagrams,” (Rushkoff 137). This idea of passing lessons down through generations is a tried and true habit of humans. From the orally passed teachings of Homer, which warn us against things such as hubris; to the written warning against strong government, such as that of Orwell’s 1984, humans have passed down their combined findings of the world to future generations. This has allowed people to learn from the collective knowledge of their society, rather than take the large amount of time required to learn each lesson through personal experience.

            Now, in the age of technology, this “time binding” has moved from the medium of writing to the medium of television. This use of time binding in television can be clearly seen in the show, West Wing, during their episode Isaac and Ishmael, a reaction to the events of terrorism. Many people in America had never witnessed such a large terrorist attack before, and therefore did not know how to respond. However, the combined information that the writers of West Wing had (undoubtedly passed down to them from other generations, even further removed), had the ability to give viewers a fresh perspective on terrorism. For example, Bradley Whitford is able to explain to the students he is talking to (and in turn the viewers of the show) that not all Islamic people are terrorists through the analogy: Islamic extremists are to the Islamic faith as the KKK is to Christianity. Although I have been able to realize through my own time binding experience that all Islamic people are not terrorists, I had never heard such an analogy, and was very impressed by this new perspective. This perspective is one that may not have been available to the terrorism-shocked Americans in the 21^st century, aside from those who were directly involved with the Islamic people, and only became available through the human art of time binding.

            On the other hand, John Spencer, the man who interrogated Rakim Ali, the Arab-American working in the Whitehouse, was not aided by time binding. When Spencer learned that Rakim Ali (a fairly common Arab name) came up as both the alias of a known terrorist, as well as one of the men who worked in the Whitehouse, he immediately began to viciously interrogate the man working in the Whitehouse. Throughout the interrogation, Spencer continued to antagonize Rakim, accusing him of all sorts of things, simply because he was an Arab-American. In the end, Spencer was informed that the man he was interrogating was in fact innocent, and had to apologize profusely. Unable, or at least unwilling, to rely on the time binding from past generations; Spencer had to learn from his own experiences that all Islamic people are not terrorists, which was a much more painful experience.

Work Cited:

Rushkoff, Douglas. Present Shock. New York: Penguin Group, 2013. Print.
"Isaac and Ishmael." West Wing. Writ. Aaron Sorkin. Dir. Christopher Misiano. Warner Brothers, 2001. Web.

End of Education: Law Of Diversity

Postman made several great suggestions as to "gods" that could serve to motivate both students and teachers to learn/teach. Some of these included the Earth as a spaceship that we all need to work together to protect; the theory of the fallen angel, which urges us to abandon the idea of absolute knowledge; the idea of America as an ongoing experiment for students and teachers to participate in; and the idea of humans as "world makers" because we are "word weavers." However, in my opinion, the most interesting suggestion of Postman’s was his idea of the Law of Diversity. Within this narrative, Postman has several different sub-categories in which he explains the different aspects in which students need to learn how the different cultural groups came together to form different traditions. The most fascinating of these categories that Postman uses to explain the narrative of diversity is language.

Previous to reading The End of Education, I knew that English was a language of many cultures, I just didn't know what how many! I found all of the history of the English language quite intriguing and wonder why this was left out of my schooling. For example, I was completely unaware of (nor had I ever though to question) the origin of the differences between the English words for meat before and after we cook it; let alone the fact that, according to Otto Jespersen, this difference was due to the fact that the Normans conquered the Saxons so the Saxon language was spoken only in the kitchen before the meal was prepared.

I found Postman’s suggestion to create a multilingual culture of America, as well as his postulations on why we have failed to do so in the past, to be equally fascinating. As Postman explains, “there are several reasons why we have failed to accomplish the task of teaching other languages, (one of which is) starting too late…” (Postman 149). This is an issue that I, myself have discussed on numerous occasions with just about anyone who will listen. There is significant evidence to show that languages need to be taught before children reach puberty (referred to in the world of psychology as the “critical period”), or else they will not be able to fluently learn that particular language. Why do most schools begin the learning of language in middle or high school when children of that age are well past the age of being able to learn that language?

Anorexia: Biological Disease? Or Just Psychological?

The year is 2075. Over one thousand people die each year for no apparent reason at all. A few brave souls try to claim that anorexia, a legitimate disease in their eyes, has taken all of these lives, but society rejects that ridiculousness. The popular opinion is that anorexia is not a disease at all, simply a poor self image that people bring on themselves. This behavior has been going on for several years.

Anorexia is not given the attention that it deserves. Mental illnesses themselves are considered by most to be far more controllable than say, diabetes. Anorexia is one that receives some of the worst criticisms, and also takes the most lives. According to the National Eating Disorders Association, in present day there are over 10 million people with anorexia and bulimia.
There are some people, such as the brilliant Dr. Laura Hill, who recognize that anorexia is a biological disorder, just as much as diabetes is. As Dr. Hill explains, anorexia is actually due to the malfunction of the insula (the portion of your brain that signals hunger or fullness). When a person with anorexia eats food, their insula does not signal to them that that food fulfills a hunger, which causes their amygdale to become alarmed and assume that there is something wrong with what is going on in this eating process. This causes a “noise” in the anorexic person’s brain causing them anxiety throughout the day. This noise is the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex trying to make sense of the lack of pleasure signals from eating. Maybe I’m eating too much? Maybe this food is bad? Maybe this food is making me fat? The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex is confused; it doesn’t know what to make of all of this, so it just goes on speculating, thinking, creating “noise”. To combat this anxiety, they refuse to eat in order to quiet this “noise” and proceed with their day.
As if this wasn’t tragic enough, one of the biggest obstacles with eating disorders is misinformation, especially to the general public. If you were surprised by that last paragraph, then you can personally attest to that misinformation. Unfortunately, the root of this information lies in misinformed scholars. Christian Nordqvist, for example, flippantly describes anorexia in Medical News Today as a person with “an irrational fear of becoming overweight-therefore (someone who will) deliberately try to lose weight.” If Medical News Today is even describing anorexia as an irrational fear, then how can we expect any lay person to take this disease seriously?
People all around the world suffer from this horrible disease, yet are increasingly told that they need to “just eat” and they will feel better. If this exponential behavior does not stop, anorexia will be ignored to the point of such accumulation that it will take more lives than ever before.

Cite:
TED Talks Video: Eating Disorders from the Inside Out: Laura Hill at TEDxColumbus.
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEysOExcwrE
Nordqvist, Christian. "What is Anorexia Nervosa? What is Bulimia Nervosa?." Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 3 Mar. 2009. Web.
23 Sep. 2013. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/105102.php>