Once again I’m back.
This week I’ll be changing it up. Instead of looking at the article and the novel in conjunction I plan on looking at the article first, to set the basis for my interpretation and analysis of the article.
So today I am going to be looking at the article “The Unhappy Marriage of Marxism and Feminism: Towards a More Progressive Union” by Heidi Hartmann in conjunction with The Twilight Series by Stephenie Meyer focussing especially on New Moon. With these two texts I want to show how women’s dependence on men for financial reasons could lead to their dependence on men in other ways. How this dependence is shown in New Moon, which is a book for tweens (girls starting around age 11) and why this is problematic. To have a book which has the main female character, who is no doubt a role model for young girls, absolutely dependent on a man for her happiness does not help with building strong, independent women. I could get into many arguments over which ways this book is bad and which ways it is good but this seems the most relevant right now.
Hartmann’s article is a fierce debate about how the ideological concepts of Marxism and feminism are not compatible and inevitably one takes over the analysis of a situation. In this blog we are concentrating our analysis on the ways that men have control over women. This starts with the definition of patriarchy as “a set of social relations between men, which have a material base, and which, though hierarchical, establish or create interdependence and solidarity among men that enable them to dominate women” (Hartmann, 322). Under patriarchy men are able to dominate women, which also make these women dependent on men for nearly everything. There are two parts to the material basis of patriarchy.
The first part of the material basis for patriarchy is “men’s control over women’s labour power” (322). Men are able to control when women work, where women work, and how much women work for. With these restrictions women become completely dependent upon men for their financial existence because women are not able to support themselves, or their children on the wage they make. “Despite women’s increased labor force participation ... the family wage is still ... the cornerstone of the present sexual division of labor” (326) which allows for women’s work to become secondary and unnecessary since men are able to earn enough money at their own jobs to support a family. As if making women’s work seem unnecessary through the family wage wasn’t enough there is also the wage difference that “will aid in defining women’s work as secondary to men’s at the same time necessitates women’s actual continued economic dependence on men” (326).
The second part of the material basis for patriarchy is restricting women’s sexuality. Since “[h]ow people propagate the species is socially determined” (323) the way in which people propagate as well as the reasons behind women’s role in the home are not natural. Instead there is “a need for men and women to get together for economic reasons” (323) because men will only be able to reproduce with women and women are dependent on men for their financial support. The sexual division of labour outside the home means that men are the ones in the family that are going to work full time while women will stay home with the children and do the unpaid reproductive work that is needed in the household. As women started entering the work force this reproductive work was still necessary. “The double day is a reality for wage-working women. This is hardly surprising since the sexual division of labor outside the family, in the labor market, keeps women financially dependent on men” (327).
This continued dependence on men for various reasons because of patriarchy is bound to leave some lasting effects on women. Those who become complacent enough to believe that their place should be in the home and that they need a man around to feel complete. That they should do things that they don’t want to because the man in their life believes they should be done. I want to show how the novel New Moon demonstrates this in Bella’s behaviour.
Bella Swan is a teenage girl who goes to live in a town called Forks and ends up falling in love with a vampire named Edward Cullen. This along with various adventures is the background behind The Twilight Series by Stephenie Meyer. The thing that I want to look into is Bella’s dependence on Edward. She once describes “[h]is touch [brings] with it the strangest sense of relief – as if [she’d] been in pain and that pain had suddenly ceased” (Meyer Eclipse, 17). This is not just a teenage crush, or so Bella insists, but she depends upon this one boy for her entire happiness in a way that is not healthy.
In New Moon Edward leaves Bella in what he believes is a move that will eventually save her life, being around vampires isn’t really all that safe. After he leaves and Bella finds out that he has taken with him every item that he had given her she falls into a deep depression and the book shows four months where nothing happens. Bella wants to do absolutely nothing for four entire months, simply because this boy left her, and she only keeps up the facade of being back to normal for her father. When Charlie, Bella’s father, wants to send her to live with her mother again Bella refuses and Charlie tells her “‘[i]t’s been months. No calls, no letter, no contact. You can’t keep waiting for him’” (Meyer New Moon, 97). At this Bella reacts defensively ending the conversation saying that she is not waiting for anything but refusing to move away from Forks.
After Edward leaves Bella attaches herself to other males in her life, the first of these males being Charlie. Edward leaves and the only time Bella can bring herself to pay attention to what is going on around her is when they mention Charlie. “Charlie mattered, if nothing else did” (75) to Bella. Bella finds it hard to function normally after Edward leaves but does so to the best of her ability so that she doesn’t worry Charlie. When Charlie confronts Bella about being a robot her thought is “[k]eeping Charlie from suffering was the whole point of this wasted effort” (95). Bella is willing to at least put on an act of being back to normal, if not actually feeling so, just to keep her father happy.
Bella attaches herself to another male as well, this one being Jacob Black. Jacob is a boy two years younger than herself who she had met and become friends with before she had started dating Edward. Once Edward leaves Bella goes down to see Jacob and find out that she’d “forgotten how much [she] really liked Jacob Black” (131), especially because she hasn’t gone to visit him since she started dating Edward. Once Bella finds out that Jacob is happy with her and she is moving towards happy hanging out with Jacob she is around him all the time, to the point of neglecting homework and not cooking for Charlie (164-165). Bella then becomes dependent on Jacob for her own happiness telling him at one point that she sees him as her own personal sun (In the movie and book, cannot find the page #, but I know it’s in there). Once Jacob leaves to become a werewolf, the whole werewolf thing kinda takes a lot out of you and you really need a break, Bella becomes as depressed as she was before. Thinking once as he leaves that she was “feeling a little sick [herself], but not for any physical reason” (218).
Bella has attached herself and depends completely on two other men for her own happiness once Edward leaves her. It is not entirely rational, she puts on an act to try and fool Charlie and it takes her four months to notice that it is not working. But she insists on trying to do so anyways. Bella tries to change how she feels and how she acts for Charlie, to save him from any suffering of watching his daughter in pain, and then becomes dependent on Jacob for her own happiness. She is even fickle enough that once Edward returns, again part of the plot that is not integral to this interpretation, she forgives him without a second thought, attaching herself to him just as she had before.
Thanks for tuning in again,
Lady Polly
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
Hermione Granger and the Patriarchal Paradigm
Hello again,
So to pickup from last time I am going to be using the same article to analyze the differences of Hermione Granger in terms of looks from the Harry Potter book series and the movie. The storyline of the novels does not matter all that much to my analysis but in case you haven’t read the books I’ll give you a link, even though I’d much rather you went out and bought the books and read them yourself. The only part of the story that matters is Hermione’s part which is fairly small. Hermione is a girl who goes to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry and she is the smartest girl of her year. That and the fact that she is not supposed to be the prettiest girl are the main points for Hermione.
There are four specific quotes from Sonja Eismann’s article “So Tired of Being Sexy: The Female Musician’s Body Politic.” I won’t introduce them here because then I will be explaining the quotes but it won’t make sense without the significance of the books but I will introduce them as I come to the beginning of each paragraph of analysis. Eismann’s article shows how hyper-sexualized women are and how women cannot always say that they are so sexual in the name of ‘empowerment.’ The reason that the Harry Potter books contrasts so well with this is because Hermione is not hyper-sexual. She is the average book nerd that people encounter all the time. Hermione is more than likely seen with a book rather than a mirror and she is the antithesis to the patriarchal paradigm that suggests that women have no mind.
The Harry Potter books are a world-wide phenomenon and if you haven’t heard of them I will go so far as to be undiplomatic and suggest that you have been living under a rock since 1997. They are wonderful for young girls because the author, J.K. Rowling, has managed to take one of the main supporting characters and write her as a strong female character. One who is not conventionally pretty but who is insanely smart and in the end of the series she ends up with the boy she has loved, well I want to say since they were eleven but more truthfully probably since they were around fourteen, maybe thirteen. J.K. Rowling may have been able to write about a strong female character but even she is not free from patriarchal pressures. When J.K. Rowling first was going to publish her book she was asked to “change her published name to her first two initials instead of “Joanne,” so that she didn’t turn off potential boy readers with her female-ness” (Melissa Anelli Harry, A History, 49). I wanted to bring this point up because it shows that even those who you believe would be able to act the way they wished are still under patriarchal pressure.
I’d like to start with the idea of the patriarchal paradigm from Sonja Eismann’s article. The quote is “that it is still the female body that is synonymous with sexuality, that women are all matter and no mind” (Eismann, 270). Hermione as we are introduced to her in the book is a girl with “a bossy sort of voice, lots of bushy brown hair and rather large front teeth” (Rowling Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, 79). It is quite clear that Hermione is not a woman that is without a mind but as the books progress there is no change in her personal appearance until the fourth book. In the movies however this is a progressive change in Hermione’s appearance. Played by Emma Watson the character of Hermione slowly becomes more of what we expect a girl her age to look like. There is no change in her behaviour because this would be too much of a change in the story line that is beloved by so many people. Yet the physical change in Emma Watson as Hermione Granger is very noticeable from Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone to Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince.
Hermione from Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
Hermione from Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
So to pickup from last time I am going to be using the same article to analyze the differences of Hermione Granger in terms of looks from the Harry Potter book series and the movie. The storyline of the novels does not matter all that much to my analysis but in case you haven’t read the books I’ll give you a link, even though I’d much rather you went out and bought the books and read them yourself. The only part of the story that matters is Hermione’s part which is fairly small. Hermione is a girl who goes to Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry and she is the smartest girl of her year. That and the fact that she is not supposed to be the prettiest girl are the main points for Hermione.
There are four specific quotes from Sonja Eismann’s article “So Tired of Being Sexy: The Female Musician’s Body Politic.” I won’t introduce them here because then I will be explaining the quotes but it won’t make sense without the significance of the books but I will introduce them as I come to the beginning of each paragraph of analysis. Eismann’s article shows how hyper-sexualized women are and how women cannot always say that they are so sexual in the name of ‘empowerment.’ The reason that the Harry Potter books contrasts so well with this is because Hermione is not hyper-sexual. She is the average book nerd that people encounter all the time. Hermione is more than likely seen with a book rather than a mirror and she is the antithesis to the patriarchal paradigm that suggests that women have no mind.
The Harry Potter books are a world-wide phenomenon and if you haven’t heard of them I will go so far as to be undiplomatic and suggest that you have been living under a rock since 1997. They are wonderful for young girls because the author, J.K. Rowling, has managed to take one of the main supporting characters and write her as a strong female character. One who is not conventionally pretty but who is insanely smart and in the end of the series she ends up with the boy she has loved, well I want to say since they were eleven but more truthfully probably since they were around fourteen, maybe thirteen. J.K. Rowling may have been able to write about a strong female character but even she is not free from patriarchal pressures. When J.K. Rowling first was going to publish her book she was asked to “change her published name to her first two initials instead of “Joanne,” so that she didn’t turn off potential boy readers with her female-ness” (Melissa Anelli Harry, A History, 49). I wanted to bring this point up because it shows that even those who you believe would be able to act the way they wished are still under patriarchal pressure.
I’d like to start with the idea of the patriarchal paradigm from Sonja Eismann’s article. The quote is “that it is still the female body that is synonymous with sexuality, that women are all matter and no mind” (Eismann, 270). Hermione as we are introduced to her in the book is a girl with “a bossy sort of voice, lots of bushy brown hair and rather large front teeth” (Rowling Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, 79). It is quite clear that Hermione is not a woman that is without a mind but as the books progress there is no change in her personal appearance until the fourth book. In the movies however this is a progressive change in Hermione’s appearance. Played by Emma Watson the character of Hermione slowly becomes more of what we expect a girl her age to look like. There is no change in her behaviour because this would be too much of a change in the story line that is beloved by so many people. Yet the physical change in Emma Watson as Hermione Granger is very noticeable from Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone to Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince.
Hermione from Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone
Hermione from Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
Hermione from Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
Hermione from Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban
Hermione from Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
Hermione from Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire shows a stunning transformation of Hermione. Even at the beginning of this book she has not been described as conventionally pretty. “‘Stunningly pretty? Her?’ ... ‘What was she judging against – a chipmunk?’” (Rowling Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, 277). The movie, being the photographic representation of the book, is not able to get the same reaction out of this transformation. Because the “biggest reward society has to offer all women ... is wanting to see them naked, thereby granting them the desperately needed ‘hot status’” (Eismann, 270) the directors of the movie has increasingly made Hermione less of the bushy haired chipmunk toothed girl that she was in the first movie, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. Now she has curly hair instead of bushy and she is wearing make-up, if only subtly. This takes away not only from her transformation in the book but from her empowered stance of being a main character that is not conventionally beautiful.
"But she didn’t look like Hermione at all. She had done something with her hair; it was no longer bushy, but sleek and shiny, and twisted up into an elegant knot at the back of her head. She was wearing robes made of floaty, periwinkle-blue material, and she was holder herself differently somehow" (Rowling Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, 360).
What is wonderful and horrible about Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is that Hermione’s transformation makes her unrecognizable. It is wonderful because it does mean that girls and women who do not make themselves up everyday still have the ability to be beautiful but it is horrible because of how people cannot picture these girls as beautiful or comprehend the transformation. I think this transformation would have been wonderful in the movies because the directors could have shown that Hermione, with her bushy hair and big teeth can be beautiful and that it is okay for girls not to wear makeup and spend hours getting ready every day.
Hermione’s very existence “undermines the harsh beauty discipline that keeps women continually occupied with their (always imperfect) bodies, making them too exhausted and insecure to take their place as active, dissenting citizens” (Eismann, 272). This is especially so after the Yule Ball in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire where Hermione is telling Harry how she managed to tame her hair the night before. “[S]he had used liberal amount of Sleekeazy’s Hair Potion on it for the ball, ‘but it’s way too much bother to do every day’” (Rowling Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, 377). This reinforces the fact that women can spend far too much time on their own bodies and looks and this leaves them unable to engage in other activities. The book even specifies that it took Hermione three hours to get ready for the ball (357) which is why she would not bother to do that every day.
The movie doesn’t draw attention to the fact that Hermione spent three hours getting ready or that she wouldn’t bother to do so every day because there isn’t as much of a change in the movie compared to the book. It would have been good for girls to understand that it is ok to make yourself up for special occasions but you don’t need to spend hours in front of the mirror every day.
Eismann’s article gives two opposites that society categorizes women in. “[S]ociety ... offers women only the opportunity to be the bimbo and thus be sexually desired by men, or to laugh at the bimbo and be one of the men” (Eismann, 268). Hermione doesn’t epitomize either of these opportunities and gives society the reason to consider this as a spectrum instead of a dichotomy. Hermione lands in the middle of the spectrum because she is obviously not a bimbo, being the smartest person in her year at Hogwarts definitely proves this, and she does not make fun of those who are bimbos much. There is one point in the books, I don’t believe it happens in the movie, where Viktor Krum enters the room and “[s]everal sixth-year girls were frantically searching their pockets as they walked – ‘Oh, I don’t believe it, I haven’t got a single quill on me -’ ‘D’you think he’d sign my hat in lipstick?’ / ‘Really,’ Hermione said loftily, as they passed the girls, now squabbling over the lipstick” (Rowling Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, 219). Proving that while Hermione may not be a bimbo as those sixth year girls are pictured she is not completely above the urge “to laugh at the bimbo and be one of the men” (Eismann, 268) which also shows how real her character is.
The last difference I want to point out is how much Hermione Granger in the books can be seen as a positive role model for girls. There are so many bad role models and “the effect this all-pervasiveness of porn strategies has on girls as early as their teenage years” (268) is startling so the need for positive role models is great. Emma Watson as Hermione in the movies does not do a bad job at being a role model, and I know it is the directors fault not hers, but to have portrayed properly Hermione as she was written in the series would have made such a good impact. It would prove to girls that girls who start out being described as a girl with “a bossy sort of voice, lots of bushy brown hair and rather large front teeth” (Rowling Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, 79) can be, not the hero of the novel, but someone who has a big impact. She impacts the people around her, especially Ron who in the fourth book is so self-centered and judgement that the following conversation can take place:
"‘We should get a move on, you know ... ask someone. He’s right. We don’t want to end up with a pair of trolls.’
Hermione let out a splutter of indignations. ‘A pair of ... what, excuse me?’
‘Well – you know,’ said Ron, shrugging, ‘I’d rather go alone than with – with Eloise Midgeon, say.’
‘Her acne’s loads better lately – and she’s really nice!’
‘Her nose is off-centre,’ said Ron.
‘Oh I see,’ Hermione said, bristling. ‘So basically, you’re going to take the best-looking girl who’ll have you, even if she’s completely horrible.’
‘Er – yeah, that sounds about right,’ said Ron" (Rowling Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, 344).
Which not only shows Ron’s immaturity but how much women are judged based on their looks. In the seventh book Ron has matured and is even openly complimenting Hermione though, as she says, “‘Always [with] the tone of surprise’” (Rowling Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, 119). To say it victoriously Hermione wins in these books. She manages to win over Ron without changing herself much, except loosening up in terms of school work, and proves to those who read the books that you don’t have to be beautiful to influence people or to get boys attention. Something that Eismann is trying to show in her article as well, just how much porn strategies have entered our society and have influenced all women.
Lady Polly
P.s. I didn’t even mention the blue dress/pink dress argument.
"But she didn’t look like Hermione at all. She had done something with her hair; it was no longer bushy, but sleek and shiny, and twisted up into an elegant knot at the back of her head. She was wearing robes made of floaty, periwinkle-blue material, and she was holder herself differently somehow" (Rowling Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, 360).
What is wonderful and horrible about Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire is that Hermione’s transformation makes her unrecognizable. It is wonderful because it does mean that girls and women who do not make themselves up everyday still have the ability to be beautiful but it is horrible because of how people cannot picture these girls as beautiful or comprehend the transformation. I think this transformation would have been wonderful in the movies because the directors could have shown that Hermione, with her bushy hair and big teeth can be beautiful and that it is okay for girls not to wear makeup and spend hours getting ready every day.
Hermione’s very existence “undermines the harsh beauty discipline that keeps women continually occupied with their (always imperfect) bodies, making them too exhausted and insecure to take their place as active, dissenting citizens” (Eismann, 272). This is especially so after the Yule Ball in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire where Hermione is telling Harry how she managed to tame her hair the night before. “[S]he had used liberal amount of Sleekeazy’s Hair Potion on it for the ball, ‘but it’s way too much bother to do every day’” (Rowling Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, 377). This reinforces the fact that women can spend far too much time on their own bodies and looks and this leaves them unable to engage in other activities. The book even specifies that it took Hermione three hours to get ready for the ball (357) which is why she would not bother to do that every day.
The movie doesn’t draw attention to the fact that Hermione spent three hours getting ready or that she wouldn’t bother to do so every day because there isn’t as much of a change in the movie compared to the book. It would have been good for girls to understand that it is ok to make yourself up for special occasions but you don’t need to spend hours in front of the mirror every day.
Eismann’s article gives two opposites that society categorizes women in. “[S]ociety ... offers women only the opportunity to be the bimbo and thus be sexually desired by men, or to laugh at the bimbo and be one of the men” (Eismann, 268). Hermione doesn’t epitomize either of these opportunities and gives society the reason to consider this as a spectrum instead of a dichotomy. Hermione lands in the middle of the spectrum because she is obviously not a bimbo, being the smartest person in her year at Hogwarts definitely proves this, and she does not make fun of those who are bimbos much. There is one point in the books, I don’t believe it happens in the movie, where Viktor Krum enters the room and “[s]everal sixth-year girls were frantically searching their pockets as they walked – ‘Oh, I don’t believe it, I haven’t got a single quill on me -’ ‘D’you think he’d sign my hat in lipstick?’ / ‘Really,’ Hermione said loftily, as they passed the girls, now squabbling over the lipstick” (Rowling Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, 219). Proving that while Hermione may not be a bimbo as those sixth year girls are pictured she is not completely above the urge “to laugh at the bimbo and be one of the men” (Eismann, 268) which also shows how real her character is.
The last difference I want to point out is how much Hermione Granger in the books can be seen as a positive role model for girls. There are so many bad role models and “the effect this all-pervasiveness of porn strategies has on girls as early as their teenage years” (268) is startling so the need for positive role models is great. Emma Watson as Hermione in the movies does not do a bad job at being a role model, and I know it is the directors fault not hers, but to have portrayed properly Hermione as she was written in the series would have made such a good impact. It would prove to girls that girls who start out being described as a girl with “a bossy sort of voice, lots of bushy brown hair and rather large front teeth” (Rowling Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, 79) can be, not the hero of the novel, but someone who has a big impact. She impacts the people around her, especially Ron who in the fourth book is so self-centered and judgement that the following conversation can take place:
"‘We should get a move on, you know ... ask someone. He’s right. We don’t want to end up with a pair of trolls.’
Hermione let out a splutter of indignations. ‘A pair of ... what, excuse me?’
‘Well – you know,’ said Ron, shrugging, ‘I’d rather go alone than with – with Eloise Midgeon, say.’
‘Her acne’s loads better lately – and she’s really nice!’
‘Her nose is off-centre,’ said Ron.
‘Oh I see,’ Hermione said, bristling. ‘So basically, you’re going to take the best-looking girl who’ll have you, even if she’s completely horrible.’
‘Er – yeah, that sounds about right,’ said Ron" (Rowling Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, 344).
Which not only shows Ron’s immaturity but how much women are judged based on their looks. In the seventh book Ron has matured and is even openly complimenting Hermione though, as she says, “‘Always [with] the tone of surprise’” (Rowling Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, 119). To say it victoriously Hermione wins in these books. She manages to win over Ron without changing herself much, except loosening up in terms of school work, and proves to those who read the books that you don’t have to be beautiful to influence people or to get boys attention. Something that Eismann is trying to show in her article as well, just how much porn strategies have entered our society and have influenced all women.
Lady Polly
P.s. I didn’t even mention the blue dress/pink dress argument.
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Females, Music, and Society
Hello again.
So today I’ll actually be getting down to the analysis. The pieces that I’ll be looking at today are: the article “So Tired of Being Sexy: The Female Musician’s Body Politic” by Sonja Eismann and the book Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist by Rachel Cohn and David Levithan.
I will provide a quick breakdown of the novel for the purposes of this analysis but there is a complete overview of the book here for those who have not read the book. Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist gives an synopsis of a night in Manhattan, New York. The clubs are the backdrop to the book, the bands account for the music tracks, and the girls are the biggest players in the book. The clubs are packed and open all night, the bands play loud, the musicians are into liquor, drugs, and girls and the girls are always beautiful. I’ll be looking at the beginning of the book where there is more than one girl to look at. The rest of the book resembles a messed up chick flick which very little communication between Norah and any other female.
The article by Sonja Eismann is very appropriate with the title “So Tired of Being Sexy: The Female Musician’s Body Politic.” This article looks at how pop music has always been obsessed with the female body and how groups of female musicians are being chosen today based on their looks rather than their talent. The article goes on to show how teenagers are affected by the “all pervasiveness of porn strategies” and how this leads them to compete for boys’ attention. At the end the article states that “[w]hen a female musician is up on stage, the audience sees a woman, whereas when there is a man, they see a musician” (Eismann, 273). Eismann gets across the idea that women, whether they are musicians, teenagers, or professors, are all being over-sexualized and objectified. As well that all of this, the stripping, the skanky clothes, etc. all of this is being done in the name of “‘empowerment’ feeling good and confident about oneself and one’s body” (269). I think we can extend many of the concepts in this article to all women because who hasn’t felt the pressure to be perfect and who doesn’t want to feel empowered. I want to look at how much of this book could truly be called empowerment and how much is peer pressure when empowerment would be to dress how you want and act like you want. This is portrayed really well within the context of the book, Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist.
There may not be female musicians in Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist but all the girls feel the pressure of having to look a certain way and act a certain way and if they don’t they will be ignored. When comparing all of the girls in this book it is easy to see where Norah places herself in this group. There is Caroline “beautiful Caroline with the long caramel hair, the big cherry Tootsie Pop lips, the juvenile delinquent arrest record... She’s the one, not me, who meets their expectation of what the daughter of an Englewood Cliffs-livin’, fat-cat record company CEI should be; wild” (Cohn and Levithan, 10). Then there is Norah “[p]lain Jane, comfy-flannel-shirt-wearing, tousled bowl-head-haircut-courtesy-of-a-$300-salon-visit-with-Mom-(Bergdorf’s)-and-a-$5-can-of-blue-spray-paint (Ricky’s), straight-edge responsible valedictorian bitch daughter” (10-11). The last girl who is a main part of Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist (and truly has a bigger part that Caroline does, at least in the book) is Tris. Tris is described as doing a ”strut with her big boobs sticking out in front of her, wiggling her ass in that way that gets the instant attention of every dumb shmo in her wake” (12). Tris is dressed in a “short black leather skirt with buckles up the side, mass-produced ‘vintage’ Ramones T-shirt, and piss-yellow leggings with some horrible pair of pink patent-leather shoes” (14). At least this is how Norah would describe her Nick on the other hand sees her as wearing an “H&M-meets-S&M miniskirt” (22). These girls areal competing for boys attention at these clubs, except for Norah who is there for Caroline and because she likes the music. The authors empower Norah by not only making her the main character of the novel but by also having Norah be the only character who at the end of the night has a serious relationship. She has managed to make this work despite being the plain character.
One of the things that I really enjoy about this book is how much the main character differs from the other two characters. Tris and Caroline are girls acting under peer pressure and social pressure. As Eismann states in her article there are two roads women can take they can either be “these highly sexualized ‘bimbos’ as the fetishized Other of a deeply misogynistic society that offers women only the opportunity to be the bimbo and thus be sexually desired by men [this would be Caroline and Tris], or to laugh at the bimbo and be one of the men [a.k.a. Norah]” (Eismann, 268). Norah doesn’t just reject being the bimbo, as Eismann puts it, but she takes an equally critical look at both women and men. She doesn’t exactly despise Caroline or Tris, the former being her best friend and the latter being her ultimate frenemy, but it can be taken that as she grows through the book she can start to feel sympathy for them when at the beginning of the night they feel sympathy for her. At the beginning of the night Norah recalls a conversation Caroline and herself often have. The conversation, which is done teasingly but rings true, starts with Caroline.
Caroline says I’m frigid. Sometimes I think she’s teasing me to repeat the party line of my Evil Ex, so I clarify: You mean I’m not easy? She clarifies: No, bitch, I mean you intimidate guys with a look or a comment before they can even decide if they want a change with you. You’re so judgmental. Along with frigid (Cohn and Levithan, 15).
This shows plainly what can be seen in Eismann’s article about how much peer pressure girls are under to become sexualized beings. Yet Norah resists this peer pressure for the most part. She defines herself as ‘straight-edge’ meaning no sex, no alcohol, no drugs. This is how she sees herself and is mainly proud of herself for this fact even though society is not. The thing that Norah loves, music, is something that she also sees only being truly good if it is just as ‘straight-edge’ as she is. “[N]o alcohol, no drugs, no cigarettes, no skanks” (Cohn and Levithan, 14). Norah sticks to her guns for the most part, there is one scene in the book where she almost loses control but is snapped back. Yet compared to Tris or Caroline Norah is a saint. She doesn’t engage in one night stands, she has only had one boyfriend etc. and she doesn’t compromise how she sees herself.
So today I’ll actually be getting down to the analysis. The pieces that I’ll be looking at today are: the article “So Tired of Being Sexy: The Female Musician’s Body Politic” by Sonja Eismann and the book Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist by Rachel Cohn and David Levithan.
I will provide a quick breakdown of the novel for the purposes of this analysis but there is a complete overview of the book here for those who have not read the book. Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist gives an synopsis of a night in Manhattan, New York. The clubs are the backdrop to the book, the bands account for the music tracks, and the girls are the biggest players in the book. The clubs are packed and open all night, the bands play loud, the musicians are into liquor, drugs, and girls and the girls are always beautiful. I’ll be looking at the beginning of the book where there is more than one girl to look at. The rest of the book resembles a messed up chick flick which very little communication between Norah and any other female.
The article by Sonja Eismann is very appropriate with the title “So Tired of Being Sexy: The Female Musician’s Body Politic.” This article looks at how pop music has always been obsessed with the female body and how groups of female musicians are being chosen today based on their looks rather than their talent. The article goes on to show how teenagers are affected by the “all pervasiveness of porn strategies” and how this leads them to compete for boys’ attention. At the end the article states that “[w]hen a female musician is up on stage, the audience sees a woman, whereas when there is a man, they see a musician” (Eismann, 273). Eismann gets across the idea that women, whether they are musicians, teenagers, or professors, are all being over-sexualized and objectified. As well that all of this, the stripping, the skanky clothes, etc. all of this is being done in the name of “‘empowerment’ feeling good and confident about oneself and one’s body” (269). I think we can extend many of the concepts in this article to all women because who hasn’t felt the pressure to be perfect and who doesn’t want to feel empowered. I want to look at how much of this book could truly be called empowerment and how much is peer pressure when empowerment would be to dress how you want and act like you want. This is portrayed really well within the context of the book, Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist.
There may not be female musicians in Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist but all the girls feel the pressure of having to look a certain way and act a certain way and if they don’t they will be ignored. When comparing all of the girls in this book it is easy to see where Norah places herself in this group. There is Caroline “beautiful Caroline with the long caramel hair, the big cherry Tootsie Pop lips, the juvenile delinquent arrest record... She’s the one, not me, who meets their expectation of what the daughter of an Englewood Cliffs-livin’, fat-cat record company CEI should be; wild” (Cohn and Levithan, 10). Then there is Norah “[p]lain Jane, comfy-flannel-shirt-wearing, tousled bowl-head-haircut-courtesy-of-a-$300-salon-visit-with-Mom-(Bergdorf’s)-and-a-$5-can-of-blue-spray-paint (Ricky’s), straight-edge responsible valedictorian bitch daughter” (10-11). The last girl who is a main part of Nick and Norah’s Infinite Playlist (and truly has a bigger part that Caroline does, at least in the book) is Tris. Tris is described as doing a ”strut with her big boobs sticking out in front of her, wiggling her ass in that way that gets the instant attention of every dumb shmo in her wake” (12). Tris is dressed in a “short black leather skirt with buckles up the side, mass-produced ‘vintage’ Ramones T-shirt, and piss-yellow leggings with some horrible pair of pink patent-leather shoes” (14). At least this is how Norah would describe her Nick on the other hand sees her as wearing an “H&M-meets-S&M miniskirt” (22). These girls areal competing for boys attention at these clubs, except for Norah who is there for Caroline and because she likes the music. The authors empower Norah by not only making her the main character of the novel but by also having Norah be the only character who at the end of the night has a serious relationship. She has managed to make this work despite being the plain character.
One of the things that I really enjoy about this book is how much the main character differs from the other two characters. Tris and Caroline are girls acting under peer pressure and social pressure. As Eismann states in her article there are two roads women can take they can either be “these highly sexualized ‘bimbos’ as the fetishized Other of a deeply misogynistic society that offers women only the opportunity to be the bimbo and thus be sexually desired by men [this would be Caroline and Tris], or to laugh at the bimbo and be one of the men [a.k.a. Norah]” (Eismann, 268). Norah doesn’t just reject being the bimbo, as Eismann puts it, but she takes an equally critical look at both women and men. She doesn’t exactly despise Caroline or Tris, the former being her best friend and the latter being her ultimate frenemy, but it can be taken that as she grows through the book she can start to feel sympathy for them when at the beginning of the night they feel sympathy for her. At the beginning of the night Norah recalls a conversation Caroline and herself often have. The conversation, which is done teasingly but rings true, starts with Caroline.
Caroline says I’m frigid. Sometimes I think she’s teasing me to repeat the party line of my Evil Ex, so I clarify: You mean I’m not easy? She clarifies: No, bitch, I mean you intimidate guys with a look or a comment before they can even decide if they want a change with you. You’re so judgmental. Along with frigid (Cohn and Levithan, 15).
This shows plainly what can be seen in Eismann’s article about how much peer pressure girls are under to become sexualized beings. Yet Norah resists this peer pressure for the most part. She defines herself as ‘straight-edge’ meaning no sex, no alcohol, no drugs. This is how she sees herself and is mainly proud of herself for this fact even though society is not. The thing that Norah loves, music, is something that she also sees only being truly good if it is just as ‘straight-edge’ as she is. “[N]o alcohol, no drugs, no cigarettes, no skanks” (Cohn and Levithan, 14). Norah sticks to her guns for the most part, there is one scene in the book where she almost loses control but is snapped back. Yet compared to Tris or Caroline Norah is a saint. She doesn’t engage in one night stands, she has only had one boyfriend etc. and she doesn’t compromise how she sees herself.
To compare the book with the movie now there have been a couple changes that have made the movie more palatable to the audience. Norah, played by Kat Dennings, is not quite as plain as she is described, or describes herself, in the book but compared to the other girls she still looks quite plain by today’s social standards. The biggest change in the girls is the Tris, played by Alexis Dziena, is dressed quite differently. There is nothing S&M about Tris in the movie, she has been made more mainstream sexy. Tris has been taken from being ‘sexy’ in an empowered way, by being sexy and being different, to be sexy like the Pussy Cat Dolls, something that every guy wants.
Norah has been sexualized as well for the movie. A scene that doesn’t happen in the book but does in the movie is where Norah goes to help Nick’s friends and one of them shoves a bra at her and tells her to put it on so that it looks like she has more than one breast. This just reinforces “the patriarchal paradigm that ... the female body ... is synonymous with sexuality, that women are all matter and no mind” (Eismann, 270). To take a strong and feminine character that is not sexual in the book and sexualize her, changing the story line in the process, just to gain an audience proves how much society wants these hyper-sexual women.
Just a quick overview of where we have been. Girls have come under “even harsher discipline of the female body to be more than perfect – unbelievably thing and unbelievably curvy at the same time” (267). Looking at the three girls in the book Caroline fits under this category unequivocally, Tris does but in a different way, and Norah does not because she likes to wear flannel among other reasons. Contrasted with the movie Caroline played by Ari Graynor, and Tris easily fall into that category and Norah, to be made more palatable to audiences, is nearly there as well.
There are many other aspects of this book that I could dig into in the context of feminism and this book but I don’t have pages to go through this and I’m sure you would all get ridiculously bored.
Lady Polly
Norah has been sexualized as well for the movie. A scene that doesn’t happen in the book but does in the movie is where Norah goes to help Nick’s friends and one of them shoves a bra at her and tells her to put it on so that it looks like she has more than one breast. This just reinforces “the patriarchal paradigm that ... the female body ... is synonymous with sexuality, that women are all matter and no mind” (Eismann, 270). To take a strong and feminine character that is not sexual in the book and sexualize her, changing the story line in the process, just to gain an audience proves how much society wants these hyper-sexual women.
Just a quick overview of where we have been. Girls have come under “even harsher discipline of the female body to be more than perfect – unbelievably thing and unbelievably curvy at the same time” (267). Looking at the three girls in the book Caroline fits under this category unequivocally, Tris does but in a different way, and Norah does not because she likes to wear flannel among other reasons. Contrasted with the movie Caroline played by Ari Graynor, and Tris easily fall into that category and Norah, to be made more palatable to audiences, is nearly there as well.
There are many other aspects of this book that I could dig into in the context of feminism and this book but I don’t have pages to go through this and I’m sure you would all get ridiculously bored.
Lady Polly
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Hello There
I would just like to explain a little bit about what I plan on doing here. I have noticed as my knowledge of feminist theory and practice has grown the number of problematic behaviours, portrayals, etc. as well as a number of behaviours and portrayals that need to be commended for their representation of a female character. I plan on focussing on mainstream children and teenage novels and will analyse the depiction of a certain aspect of the novel or a character with regards to a specific article. My plan for each entry for this blog is to start with an analysis of a different article that is relevant to the aspect I plan on considering in the novel. I plan on explaining the relevance of the piece to the book and then proceeding to explain how the article is represented, for good or bad, in the novel. As well, since most of the books I have chosen have already been made into movies, I intend on exploring the movie for the same aspect as well and looking at the changes that have been made to make the movie palatable for a larger audience.
I am sure there will be plenty of things you have never thought about here as well as a couple things that might make you feel uncomfortable or angry. But the portrayal of females in novels that are meant for children or teenagers is important because it is more likely to make young girls change aspects of themselves to align with what the novels are portraying.
Wish me luck,
Lady Polly
I am sure there will be plenty of things you have never thought about here as well as a couple things that might make you feel uncomfortable or angry. But the portrayal of females in novels that are meant for children or teenagers is important because it is more likely to make young girls change aspects of themselves to align with what the novels are portraying.
Wish me luck,
Lady Polly
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)