I thought this passage was interesting for a number of reasons. In a lot of ways it seems to exemplify everything we've come to suspect about the main character, but through her attitude towards Anne's intercourse. Probably the first, most noticeably off-kilter thing about it is the terminology she uses to categorize it. To her sex seems to be some kind of hellish act - she correlates it with images like "desperate beggar," "praying to herself" and "pure pain," none of which are very sexy. Nowhere does the narrator use positive terms like "pleasure," "intimacy" or "boobs."
In some ways the narrator, like Marlowe, seems to be projecting her own fear of intimacy towards Anne's experience. While it's possible that the narrator is making an educated guess about Anne (who has her own horrible marital issues) she seems to be inferring an unusually personal level of detail. In earlier passages, the narrator has elaborated on memories and experiences she wasn't present to experience - is this part of her goal to create a past, and a world, that fits in more comfortably with her perception of it? In class we talked about the narrator having vivid recollections of her childhood, except through non-memories. The narrator seems to spend a lot of her time drawing experience from non-experience. In a way, her current job does the same - as an artist, she is drawing fantasy pictures of a children's novel. In every way, the narrator seems to be trying to separate herself from reality. The reason seems to be that for her, reality is too painful to embrace.
The image of one "praying to herself" seems to reinforce the narrator's tendency towards isolation. She views sex as sort of an entirely impersonal act. This could possibly fit in with her talking about how Anne, in the throes of a climax, is like an animal in a trap. It's as if the narrator views deeper intimacy as a trap. This fits in with her fairly detached view of what love is. There's also an explicit religious connotation to it - the narrator often brings up her dad's adamant atheism and her own memories of learning about God in the playground. For many people, religion is viewed as a way to cope with the painful realities of life. Does the narrator's struggle with religion parallel her own self-delusion? In addition, the last sentence is an especially morbid view of sex - references to death seem to constantly crop up as if she has residual guilt or fear from her brother's near drowning and her mother's funeral.
ESSENTIAL DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:
1. In passages such as these, is the narrator projecting her personal attitudes towards the actions of others? Or has her actual past experience caused her to have an extremely jaded view of intimacy?
2. What are some albums I should listen to?
3. THROWBACK: Did anybody else think that Joseph Conrad's literary technique of making the latter half of Heart of Darkness really confusing was sort of cheap? I know it was supposed to make us feel what Marlow was feeling, but the confusion one experiences from not being able to understand a passage seems to be a fundamentally different shade of confusion. Isn't it almost sort of gimmicky?
I think that this passage not only relays the narrator’s distorted sense of intimacy, but also highlights her fear of it as well. Looking back on the narrator’s past experiences with intimacy we as readers see someone who hasn’t been able to truly grasp the concept. Whether this be the result of her upbringing, insecurity and lack of self worth, choice of partner, fear, or her own internal struggle, it is pretty clear that there is a link missing in the chain. Does the narrator’s intimacy deficiency stem from the fact that she simply doesn’t believe that she deserve to enjoy it? Evidence of the narrator’s low sense of self worth is outlined on many occasions including her hesitance in opening up to her companions about her family and personal struggle as well as her reflections on her relationship with Joe. When ruminating over the dynamics of their relationship, the narrator equates the decision of living together with that of buying a goldfish, suggesting elements of convenience, evasiveness, and emptiness. If this serves as the means with which she justifies her relationship with Joe, it is almost no wonder that the narrator’s view on intimacy be equally askew. The narrator explains, “I’m fond of him, I’d rather have him around than not; though it would be nice if he meant something more to me.” This passage reveals that the narrator knows what she is looking for in a relationship or at least suggests that she desires more emotion, but for some reason does not pursue it further. It seems as though because of her dysfunctional past relationships the narrator has never really experienced true intimacy, is unable to view a pure example of it from the people around her, and isn’t entirely convinced that she deserves it in the first place.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that the narrator is necessarily projecting her opinion on this scene. Anna herself discusses in the book that her intimacy with David is often abusive and not pleasurable to her. It is possible that the narrator's combined distaste for intimacy and new found doubt of all marriage may be projecting onto her description of Anna's sex life, but I think she is honestly describing the scene how it is. You have to take into account that Anna and David have a highly dysfunctional marriage that involves infidelity as well as verbal and emotional abuse. It would not be too out of character for their sex life to be completely warped as well.
ReplyDeleteI think that much of her isolation from "civilization" and not having long lasting relationships with those around her has affected her view of intimacy. In many of the narrator's experiences and memories she is not part of the normal social group, similar to the passage we discussed in class where she was an onlooker at a birthday party. I feel that this lack of intimacy in many areas of her life may make her view sex as she does above. It may also be important to point out that she did have a child, the product of sex, and feels no attachment towards it. In all, I do think past experiences affect her current views.
ReplyDeleteI believe that in this passage we see some of the narrator's own issues with intimacy, but also as dnmatte wrote that we are learning more about Anna and David's relationship here. Clearly the narrator has lost some sort of grip or understanding of what love is. Earlier in the novel she speaks of her child as though it never really was hers and I think she even refers to the child as "it." If a mother cannot love her own child, something that is supposed to be the one of the most basic, instinctive, and powerful forms of love, doesn't it follow then that she would have issues with all forms of intimacy? Whatever events occurred in her past that we are unaware of that she is repressing have clearly cost her the ability to comprehend love. This becomes evident when she is deciding whether or not she loves Joe when she doesn't realize that if she has to make a conscious decision, she doesn't love him. If one cannot fully grasp love and/or what it means, it seems as though sex would certainly lose some of it's meaning and she would feel uncomfortable about it. As far as Anna and David go, the language she chooses with "trap" clearly describes how Anna feels in this relationship. Anna has no power and cannot escape her broken marriage, just like an animal cannot escape a trap.
ReplyDelete