We've been delving into the twisted mind of Sigmund Freud lately, and I would not be completely truthful if I didn't say that I was disturbed. I know that I'm not as smart as he was, and don't really understand what I'm talking about, but I don't agree with him on a lot of points.
It becomes obvious very quickly reading "Civilization and Its Discontents" that with Freud, everything is about sex. He's obsessed with it. Not that we all aren't, on some level, but he really is. Unfortunately, his obsession doesn't extend to include love. I don't like the way that he seems to think being in love is the same as being exclusive sexual partners. I believe that not all exclusive sexual partners are in love, and not all those in love have sex. His Oedipus complex idea (basically that all men subconsciously want to kill their fathers and marry their mothers) doesn't make sense to me. What about those kids that didn't have dads in their homes? Their chances of seeing a father figure naked and then making the connection that he should respect men more than women don't seem high.
However, there are also points that I agree with him on. For example, these quotes from "Civilization and Its Discontents":
"We are never so defenceless against suffering as when we love, never so helplessly unhappy as when he have lost our loved object or its love." -page 33
"The enjoyment of beauty has a peculiar, mildly intoxicating quality of feeling. Beauty has no obvious use; nor is there any clear cultural necessity for it. Yet civilization could not do without it." -page 33
"He made himself dependent in a most dangerous way on a portion of the external world, namely, his chosen love-object, and exposed himself to extreme suffering if he should be rejected by that object or should lose it through unfaithfulness or death. For that reason the wise men of every age have warned us most emphatically against this way of life; but in spite of this it has not lost its attraction for a great number of people." -page 56
"A love that does not discriminate seems to me to forfeit a part of its own value, by doing an injustice to its object; and secondly, not all men are worthy of love." -page 57
"When a love-relationship is at its height there is no room left for any interest in the environment; a pair of lovers are sufficient to themselves, and do not even need the child they have in common to make them happy." -page 65
Friday, October 22, 2010
Sunday, October 10, 2010
"A Doll's House" Characters
We just watched the movie "A Doll's House", a film adapation of the play by Henrik Ibsen. I found it to be an interesting play. However, I didn't like any of the characters, except for maybe Krogstad, which makes it difficult to really enjoy.
Nora, the female protagonist, came across as annoying and naive, seeming to think that every problem has a simple solution and no real consequences. However, I excuse her those faults and blame them instead on her husband, Torvald, who viewed her, and women in general, as too delicate to deal with life. If Nora's children are the toys in her dollhouse of a life, she is Torvald's. When she wants him to do smoething for her, she resorts to begging like a child. She isn't viewed as an equal adult, she is somone to be sheltered and protected. Men who treat women like that really get on my nerves, and Torvald's sentiment that he wouldn't want Nora to get anywhere without him or his permission irked me. He turns on Nora as soon as he finds out that she has done things behind his back, and then expects everything to be okay the moment he "forgives'' her. He refers to Nora as his squirrel, bird, or other small animal, inferring that she isn't even the same quality of human as he is.
Kristine Linde, the other main woman in the play, aroused some dislike as well. Both in the present time in play and the past, her only bargaining chips seem to be sexual. First she gives up her love for Krogstad in order to marry for money. After her husband has died, she goes to Krogstad and tells him that she still cares for him, but this is only after learning that Nora needs help, and it seems very fake to me. She also strikes me as deceptive. Nora goes to her for help, telling her that she forged her father's signature in order to borrow money from Krogstad when Torvald was sick, and now Krogstad has sent a letter to Torvald telling him all this. Kristine promises to persuade Krogstad to change his mind. As aforementioned, she tells him that she still loves him, and he is quite willing to demand his letter back unread. However, Kristine tells him, basically, to let Nora ride out the storm. I'm not saying that this wasn't a good choice, as it did open Nora's eyes to Torvald's true colors, but it wasn't what she said she would do.
Dr. Rank, a friend of the family, is an extremely creepy man. He admits to Nora that he is in love with her, and seems very obsessed with her throughout the story. Nora doesn't know how to deal with this. She is a very innocent person and had never thought that he would view her as more than a friend, especially since she is young enough to be his daughter. I can't help but think that the doctor should have gone for Kristine. As long as he's got money, I doubt she'd have a problem with it.
Krogstad is the only one to me who genuinely comes off as trapped by his circumstances, and didn't annoy me to death. I didn't particulary like him, but he didn't annoy me.
So there ya have it. I somehow manage to like "A Doll's House" without liking any of the characters, and despising most of them. Life's weird.
Nora, the female protagonist, came across as annoying and naive, seeming to think that every problem has a simple solution and no real consequences. However, I excuse her those faults and blame them instead on her husband, Torvald, who viewed her, and women in general, as too delicate to deal with life. If Nora's children are the toys in her dollhouse of a life, she is Torvald's. When she wants him to do smoething for her, she resorts to begging like a child. She isn't viewed as an equal adult, she is somone to be sheltered and protected. Men who treat women like that really get on my nerves, and Torvald's sentiment that he wouldn't want Nora to get anywhere without him or his permission irked me. He turns on Nora as soon as he finds out that she has done things behind his back, and then expects everything to be okay the moment he "forgives'' her. He refers to Nora as his squirrel, bird, or other small animal, inferring that she isn't even the same quality of human as he is.
Kristine Linde, the other main woman in the play, aroused some dislike as well. Both in the present time in play and the past, her only bargaining chips seem to be sexual. First she gives up her love for Krogstad in order to marry for money. After her husband has died, she goes to Krogstad and tells him that she still cares for him, but this is only after learning that Nora needs help, and it seems very fake to me. She also strikes me as deceptive. Nora goes to her for help, telling her that she forged her father's signature in order to borrow money from Krogstad when Torvald was sick, and now Krogstad has sent a letter to Torvald telling him all this. Kristine promises to persuade Krogstad to change his mind. As aforementioned, she tells him that she still loves him, and he is quite willing to demand his letter back unread. However, Kristine tells him, basically, to let Nora ride out the storm. I'm not saying that this wasn't a good choice, as it did open Nora's eyes to Torvald's true colors, but it wasn't what she said she would do.
Dr. Rank, a friend of the family, is an extremely creepy man. He admits to Nora that he is in love with her, and seems very obsessed with her throughout the story. Nora doesn't know how to deal with this. She is a very innocent person and had never thought that he would view her as more than a friend, especially since she is young enough to be his daughter. I can't help but think that the doctor should have gone for Kristine. As long as he's got money, I doubt she'd have a problem with it.
Krogstad is the only one to me who genuinely comes off as trapped by his circumstances, and didn't annoy me to death. I didn't particulary like him, but he didn't annoy me.
So there ya have it. I somehow manage to like "A Doll's House" without liking any of the characters, and despising most of them. Life's weird.
Saturday, October 2, 2010
Men, Women, and Yellow Wall-paper
We've had some interesting discussions on gender/sex roles in class lately. When we were asked to come up with adjectives to describe masculine/feminine. One would think that the "stubborn", "barbaric", "proud" men and the "emotional times ten", "controlling", "expensive" women hated each other. I think it shows how much of an issue sexism continues to be even today by our debates about the capability and appropriateness of women to be in the military. I personally believe that if a woman wants to be on the front lines and can pass the physical tests that the men can, no one should be able to tell her no. Not when she will do her country more good than a man who doesn't want to be there. And don't tell me that she won't be able to fight as fiercely-- I would remind you of the Mother Bear Instinct we women have. When we fight about something we care for, hell or high water aren't going to get in the way.
Also, we read Charlotte Perkins Gilman's short story "The Yellow Wall-paper" (TYWP) along with watching a portion of the movie. It is a creepy little story, that's for certain. I can't imagine getting stuck in bed for three days, let alone three weeks. I would go crazy without something constructive to do, which is obviously the realization that Gilman wants me to come to.
I think the two subjects (women in the military and "The Yellow Wall-paper) have a similar theme. Women are seen by men as being less capable than themselves, and so they feed it to us until even other women start believing it. In TYWP, the unnamed narrator often says that she feels ungrateful, because she knows how hard her husband and nurse are working to help her. I think that we as women today are sometimes supposed to have the same level of gratitude towards the people who want to keep us down. We're being 'protected' from the reality of war, not being told that we can't do it. It's for our own good. In my mind, it's thinking like that that will make it difficult for us to gain the full equality with man that we completely deserve.
Anyway, that's how I see it.
Also, we read Charlotte Perkins Gilman's short story "The Yellow Wall-paper" (TYWP) along with watching a portion of the movie. It is a creepy little story, that's for certain. I can't imagine getting stuck in bed for three days, let alone three weeks. I would go crazy without something constructive to do, which is obviously the realization that Gilman wants me to come to.
I think the two subjects (women in the military and "The Yellow Wall-paper) have a similar theme. Women are seen by men as being less capable than themselves, and so they feed it to us until even other women start believing it. In TYWP, the unnamed narrator often says that she feels ungrateful, because she knows how hard her husband and nurse are working to help her. I think that we as women today are sometimes supposed to have the same level of gratitude towards the people who want to keep us down. We're being 'protected' from the reality of war, not being told that we can't do it. It's for our own good. In my mind, it's thinking like that that will make it difficult for us to gain the full equality with man that we completely deserve.
Anyway, that's how I see it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)