Thursday, July 25, 2024

Two Mothers

 

 

 

 

 

TWO PEAS FROM THE SAME POD:

A Comparison of Two Eliot Mothers:

Lisbeth Bede and Mrs. Holt

 

Carolyn Hendry

Dr. Rogers

George Eliot Seminar

17 April 1995

     I have taught university level composition classes for the last ten years.  At the beginning of each semester, I emphasize the fact that writers must use solid, objective details in their writing so that the reader will be able to see what the writer is trying to communicate.  I ask each student to think of his/her mother and then I ask one student to tell me some details about the parent.  Sometimes the first mother described has short, blond curls, sometimes grey, straight hair.  Some mothers like tennis, others watch soap operas.  Some mothers work at secretarial jobs or as dental hygienists, others have doctors or lawyers for a mother.  Once in a while the mother is described as a person that the student likes to talk with and to be around, most of the time she is painted as a woman who nags and bosses and gets in the student's way of a good time.  Though the first list compiled always differs almost completely from the list of the second student who describes her/his mother, there is one element that remains the same.  My students are always amazed to realize that a word as familiar as mother means such specifically different things.  Just saying "my mother" brings a detailed, visual picture to each students' mind, but if those students wish to tell me what their mother is like, they must each use much more than that title "mother" to do so. 

George Eliot seems to have instinctively known this fact.  In two of her novels, she presents the reader with two mothers who have very much in common:  Mrs. Holt, from Felix Holt, and Mrs. Bede, from Adam Bede.  Eliot, though, uses her description to offer the reader insights into how these two working class, domineering women affect their sons, who form the main focus of each novel.  In allowing the reader to make unconscious connections between these two women, Eliot permits us to see both women in the same light without having to invest enormous amounts of descriptive space.  Just as my students learn how to paint a specific picture though the use of objective details, Eliot uses her details to create and echo two women who otherwise might come across to the reader as flat, boorish and stiff.

Though Eliot does not carry specific characters from novel to novel, she does repeat character types in the bodies of Mrs. Holt and Mrs. Bede.  They are scantily detailed in their adventures, and so looking to the attributes of one can shed significant light on the other and offer some insight into some of Eliot's apparent, personal beliefs:  Truth does not always come from the learned.  Someone to serve is as valuable as s/he who has resources to serve with.  Though neither mother is overtly sympathetic--both have their faults as mortals--Eliot's repetition of this same "mother-figure" in both Adam Bede and Felix Holt allows the reader to glimpse two, more fully-developed mothers, which gives both novels a richer background for the actions of the main characters.

We first meet Lisbeth Bede as she waits for her son.  Eliot paints a picture of a tall, spare, old women.  She has grey hair; broad, black eyebrows; "as firmly-upright an attitude as when she is carrying a pail of water on her head"[1]; and "work-hardened hands" (83) that knit unconsciously even as she stands at her doorway, watching for Adam to draw nearer.  He arrives, finds his father gone and the coffin promised for Tholer not yet made, becomes angry and then must endure his mother.  For

     if she had been wise she would have gone away quietly, and said nothing for the next hour.  But one of the lessons a      woman most rarely learns, is never to talk to an angry or a      drunken man (Eliot, 85).

From this we learn that Lisbeth, for all of her motherly love and devotion to Adam, is not a source of comfort or support to her son, but rather, an annoyance to be endured.  Even the sound of her wailing is "the most irritating of all sounds" (85) to Adam who faces a long, sleepless night of carpentry.  In fact, Eliot points out Adam's tenderness to his dog, Gyp, during this time and marvels "we are apt to be kinder to the brutes that love us than to the women that love us.  Is it because the brutes are dumb?" (86). 

     In this first meeting we also learn that Lisbeth is one of  a type referred to by Solomon:

     a good creature, who had no joy but in the happiness of the      loved ones whom she contributed to make uncomfortable,      putting by all the tid-bits for them, and spending nothing      on herself. . . . at once patient and complaining, self-    renouncing and exacting . . . and crying very readily both      at the good and the evil (87).

She is almost instinctual in her actions--a fact that Eliot underscores when Adam's automatic change to accomodate her as his speech falls "into his strongest native accent and dialect" (87) when he speaks with special kindness to his mother.  She is untutored in the ways of the socially elite and the scholar.  Her instincts are maternal, unbridled by artificial fetters.  Only a deep reverence for her son quiets her (87) and even then, only after a long opportunity to express her frustration and remind Adam of his debit to her as his mother.[2]  For the last twenty six years she has managed to handle two boys and a husband who drinks excessively.  She takes care of her appearance, always having a clean cap ready, and maintains a housekeeping routine that keeps Adam and Seth fed and decent.  She is skeptical of Seth's prayers[3] and proud of Adam's deep work ethic.  She seems to trust what she can see and be proud of what she can do. 

     Her world is small.  Before the novel began there was a point when Adam left, overwhelmed by the burdens imposed upon him by his dysfunctional father.  We discover that he returns the next day but "the misery and terror his mother had gone through in those two days had haunted her ever since" (93).  Few things happen to Lisbeth--but the affect of those incidents is magnified by their singularity.  Adam has to contemplate his acceptance of responsibility to his mother, "I'll never slip my neck out o' the yoke, and leave the load to be drawn by the weak 'uns" (93) but Lisbeth  has only her duty to her sons and accepts that obligation as automatically as she accepts the rising of the sun each morning--and the protecting shield her sons provide her as easily as opening her eyes.

     Adam protects her from the full blow of the truth when he tells her that "Father's tumbled into the water.  Belike we may bring him round again . . . Get a blanket, and make it hot at the fire" (97).  He gives her something to do and she does not argue.

     That comes in the days following the funeral.  The disorientation she feels after her husband's death is reflected in the "dirt and confusion" (149) that she sees in her usually spotless kitchen.  When something happens in her narrow world, it is an all-consuming thing.  Again Eliot presents Lisbeth as a universal type--for at the death of her husband "she had forgotten his faults as we forget the sorrows of our departed childhood" (150).  The memory that he leaves behind is some twenty five years old--building shelves, caring for the sick, carrying a year-old Adam for five miles without complaining.  In Lisbeth's mourning complaints, we hear the virtues of the man she married.  His recent faults are ignored.  Lisbeth reflects the instinctual desire in humankind to remember that which is pleasant and favorable.  She is as generous to the dead as she is critical of the living. 

     Though we do not get a full description of Mrs. Holt when we first meet her, there are details that call to mind the extensive elaboration that Eliot provides for Lisbeth Bede.  As Esther calls at Felix' house under the pretext of having her watch repaired, Felix' mother seems to be of much the same mind as Lisbeth.  She prattles on about the state of her house--"but what is there for her to come in to?  a floor worse than any public".[4]  Unlike Lisbeth, she is much put out by the way that her son provides for her:  "forced to take my bit of carpet up, and have benches, I don't see why I need mind nothing no more" (189)  but she is every bit as vocal about her feelings.  Indeed, Esther is so put off by Mrs. Holt's chatter that she feels awkward, desiring to leave but "not wishing to go immediately, lest she should seem to be running away from Mrs. Holt" (191).  As she interacts with Felix' mother, "she felt keenly how much endurance there must be for Felix!" (191). 

     The reader also senses some of the motherly devotion that marks Mrs. Bede.  Felix praises his mother's care of the orphan, Job Tudge.  He notes how she has "made him a little bed . . . and . . . gives him sweetened porridge" (191).  At this point, we are given a glimpse of Mrs. Holt:  Esther "saw that her eyes had lost their bleak north-easterly expression, and were shining with some mildness on little Job" (191).  Besides this motherly instinct, there is also in Mrs. Holt a little of Mrs. Bede's innate reasoning skills.  It is only natural to her that she should have those few things that she desires:  "grandchildren to look up to me, and be drove out in the gig sometimes" (192).  After all, she declares, didn't she give birth to three children and nurture that only one that lived?  This "masterfullest and the brownest of 'em all" (192) survived and thrived and, because of her determination, received more education than she did so that he could have a great career as a doctor and marry a "woman with money to furnish . . . spoons and everything" (192).  For all that she gave Felix, for the little that she asks of him, he does indeed seem to her to be an ungrateful son.  His decision not to marry and to remain a common man is an affront to her observation that he loves children.  He loves children--she wants grandchildren.  There!  It flows naturally that he should do as she recommends and marry a rich girl and provide her with the normal things that every mother deserves. 

    Like Mrs. Bede's world, Mrs. Holt's domain is small and close around her.  She cannot comprehend that the tonics that her husband sold to provide for their living could be of any harm to anyone.  Hadn't people taken them and declared themselves much better than before?  Felix' revelation that some of the elixirs are useless and others "are a drastic compound which may be as bad as poison to half the people who swallow them" (53) makes no difference to his mother who believed in the man who made them and so believes in them.  She wants Felix to conform--to dress nicely and take "some higher situation as clerk or assistant" (55}.  Her preconceptions of what is proper and fitting for Felix outweigh his determination to "stick to the class [he] belong[s] to--people who don't follow the fashions" (55).  She has a narrowly defined world and is distressed by Felix' decision to violate that microcosm with his own desires and beliefs. 

     When Mrs. Holt hears the commotion in the town center from the election conflict, she again retreats into her own heaven-sent environment.  Felix'

     mother came from her turnip-paring in the kitchen, where    little Job was her companion, to observe that they must be     killing everybody in the High Street, and that the election,      which had never been before at Treby, must have come for a judgment; . . . and that she thanked God in His wisdom for      making her live up a back street (254).

Mrs. Holt reflects the same self-centeredness that Lisbeth Bede does when she comes home from the funeral of her husband. 

     Like all complaining women, she complained in the      expectation of being soothed, and when Adam said nothing, she only was prompted to complain more bitterly. . . .      Lisbeth no sooner entered the kitchen and sat down than she    threw her apron over her head, and began to cry and moan,     and rock herself as before (153).

Both women react to grief in the same self-adsorbed manner.  Though Adam had lost his father in the same moment that Mrs. Bede had lost her husband, she does not possess the maturity to reach out to him and to comfort him.  Rather, she wears Adam out with her "querulous grief" (153).  Mrs. Holt, exhibiting this same, child-like unawareness of others around her, likewise thinks only of her own safety in the midst of the tumult.  Neither woman is censored for this innocent preoccupation with self.  In fact the selflessness of both Adam (trying to calm his mother) and Felix (going to Esther to assure that she is safe) is made more poignant by the contrast with their mother's behavior.

     As a last element of observation, it is interesting to look at the influence that these two mothers had on their sons as they choose and marry the women that they do.  Though more overt in the case of Mrs. Bede, Mrs. Holt's influence on Felix' desire to marry Esther is also discernable.

     It is Lisbeth, with her insistent chattering that finally makes Adam realize that Dinah Morris loves him and that he must do something about it.  She recognizes this truth when the men around her are still blind to it.  Seth argues with her about Dinah's feelings for Adam. 

     'What! has she said anything o' that sort to thee, mother?'           he said, in a lower tone.

     'Said? nay, she'll say nothin'.  It's on'y the men as have       to wait till folks say things afore they find 'em out.'

     'Well, but what makes thee think so, mother? . . .

     'It's no matter what's put it into my head:  my head's none           so hollow as it must get in, an' nought to put it       there.  I know she's fond on him, as I know th' wind's           comin' in at th' door, an' that's anoof' (539).

The reader is inherently drawn to Lisbeth's innate sense of what is real.  She needs no physical proof--the same force that prompts her to care for her sons also reveals to her the feelings of Dinah for Adam.  With the same child-like, self-absorption that allows her to ignore social opinion and change, she recognizes and trusts this inner source of truth. 

     She has enough faith in her inner voice that she confronts Adam with her knowledge and persists in asserting that Adam ought to marry Dinah.  When he objects, saying that she's "not for marrying; she's fixed her heart on a different sort o' life" (544), Mrs. Bede maintains that she is right:  "very like she's none for marr'ing, when them as she'd be willin' t' marry wonna ax her" (544).  Her observations of Dinah's trembling when Adam is near and the way that Dinah looks at Adam finally convince Adam that Dinah could love him--and act as the catalyst for his decision to go and speak to Dinah.  Though unlearned in the ways of the world, Lisbeth Bede knows the things of the heart.

     In a much less obvious way, Mrs. Holt follows Mrs. Bede's example and unknowingly encourages the relationship between Felix and Esther.  After Esther's first trip to the Holt house to have her watch fixed, Felix' feelings for Esther are focused by his mother's words as she leaves:  "She's a very straight figure . . . How she carries herself? . . . He'd need to have a big fortune that marries her" (193).  In response to this comment, Felix snatches up "little Job, . . . finding a vent for some unspeakable feeling in the pretence of worrying him" (193).  Mrs. Holt also plays a part in Esther's developing feelings for Felix.  As she leaves the Holt home, she decides

     there is something greater and better in him than I had     imagined.  His behavior to-day--to his mother and me too--I   should call it the highest gentlemanliness . . . if I had a      mind equal to his, and if he loved me very dearly, I should      choose the same life [as he has chosen] (193).

In a backwards way, Mrs. Holt's self-centered, lengthy chatter serves to highlight Felix' tolerance and compassion, offering Esther a much clearer view of the man that she comes to love.

     During Mrs. Holt's undignified appeal for help to Harold Transome when Felix is in jail, she highlights Esther's feelings for Felix.

     Everybody used to say you held yourself high.  But I'm sure      you never did to Felix, for you let him set by you at the      Free School before all the town, and him with never a bit of      stock round his neck. And it shows you saw that in him worth     taking notice of (438).

Esther reacts gently to the woman "who had dressed herself in a gown previously cast off, a front all out of curl, and a cap with no starch in it" (295).  Though Mrs. Holt does not present a face that would impress most of the world, she serves Eliot well as one who "had the maternal cord vibrating strongly within her" (348).  This strength strengthens her as she reaches beyond the boundaries of her accustomed world, finding political and legal aid for her son and reminding Esther of the man she loves.

     Both these women are individuals in their separate stories, but Eliot makes them enough alike that knowing one allows the reader to learn more of the other.  Both share an ability to irritate others with their complaining prattle, yet have the instinctive ability to know the truth about their sons' character and heart.  Both have known a life of work and privation, yet also know joy in interacting with their sons.  These are women who, historically, had no political influence or social power; yet, as they did their best to nurture and care for their sons, influenced the lives of those most important to them. 

     Eliot may not have purposely created these two women to be so much alike, but they seem to share many important attributes.  They are a source of Truth--though not well-educated in the scholarly sense.  They offer their sons a chance to serve--and in so doing allow Dinah Morris and Esther Lyons to better see the goodness in their sons.    As we approach these two novels, the likeness of these two women draws us closer to them--offering the reader a better chance to know them because we have met them, in different stories, before.

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 



     [1]All references from Adam Bede come from the 1980 Penguin edition.  This from page 83.

     [2]It is interesting to note that Lisbeth instinctively draws on the only authority she could have over Adam in recalling to mind "five an' twenty 'ear go, when thee wast a babby at the breast" (85) though her maternity has nothing to do with the subject being argued at the moment.

     [3]In fact Eliot tells us that Lisbeth, though usually negative about Seth's devotion, "had a vague sense that there was some comfort and safety in the fact of his piety, and that it somehow relieved her from the trouble of any spiritual transactions on her own behalf" (91).

     [4]References to pages from Felix Holt come from the 1988 edition from Oxford University Press.  This quote from page 189.

History of the Body Research Paper

 

 

 

DIFFERENT IS JUST DIFFERENT

 

History of the Body

Dr. Valerie Allen

12 April 1995

 

Carolyn Hendry

 

 

     Ian Maclean, in his The Renaissance Notion of Woman, details the various influences that shaped religious, ethical, medical and social commentary during the Renaissance years of Europe.  He quotes from writers of the time who sought to explain and explore how they felt and why they thought as they did.  Aristotle's influence is widely demonstrated as are the thoughts of Galen.  These Renaissance men described a social, theological and political attitude of intolerance toward women.  Questions about whether women were of the same species as men, whether women could be held morally responsible for their actions, and whether women were culpable for the sins of men--were all exhumed and debated.  It was assumed that the duty of woman was to get married and produce children--for they were written of as either virgins preparing for marriage or married mothers with children. The unattached woman--even the widow--was an enigma to men and, in some sad cases, persecuted as a witch. 

     It was startling for me to discover just exactly how dull and unobservant these writers appear to have been.  Their energy in rehashing old questions is undeniable, but there is no glimmer of original observation and discernment.  I am troubled as I read through Maclean's long chronicle of the most esteemed thinkers of the time to find that this intensely creative period in Europe's history saw leaders and philosophers who were content to simply reaffirm centuries' old prejudices.  Women were different.  Different was bad.

     My six year old son came in to watch me typing a few minutes ago.

     "What are you writing?" he asked me.

     "I'm writing a paper for my class," I answered, hoping that he would be satisfied with a minimal answer and leave me alone.

     "What is it about?" he continued.

     I paused a moment and looked over from my computer screen, "It is about how some men felt about their moms a long time ago."

     "Oh."  A short pause.  "OK, tell me."

     "What?  How they felt?"  I asked him.

     "Yes."

     "They thought that their moms could only be married and have babies and that they couldn't do anything else," I summed up my interpretation.

     "That wasn't very nice," he observed.  Another pause.

     "Mom," he asked, "Are boys smarter than girls?"

At this point I stopped trying to type and we reviewed the "everyone is different--not necessarily better, just different" talk that I have had with him and his two older sisters many times before.  He left to brush his teeth, and I was left to ponder why it is that DIFFERENT is not usually interpreted as DIFFERENT, but as BETTER or WORSE. 

     Several of the authors that Maclean reviews are noted as "feminist" writers--maintaining that women are not less than men, but their equal or, in rare cases, better than men.  By and large, though, there is a tacit acceptance of the fact that women are men's inferiors and destined by biology, theology and public policy to remain as prisoners of their womb and its product.  There are even virtues that are delegated to women, separate from those assigned to men.  Honesty is not honesty--it depends upon whether it is a woman being honest with her husband or a husband protecting his wife by hiding the truth about the world outside the home.  In the first case, dishonesty is called lying.  In the second, it is called beneficent protection.  Maclean relates that some virtues that are required of men, apparently, do not even matter in women:

     According to Tasso, each sex has a dominant virtue, one which both sexes need to practice, but which is more important to one than to the other. 

     The dominant virtue is chastity in      the case of women, and courage in the case of men.  The dominant vice for each    sex becomes the antithesis of the dominant virtue (lack of      chastity, cowardice), and the most excusable vice the antithesis of the dominant virtue of the other sex.  Thus     for men it is most unforgivable to be cowardly, and most    forgivable to be unchaste; for women the vice of impudicitia    is most to be abhorred, and cowardice the least      reprehensible vice.  Chastity and courage are seen,    therefore, in some sense as contrary virtues when   placed in a sexual context. (Cambridge University press,    1980, p 62).

Women have, apparently, been destined to possess different (lesser) virtues than men and, therefore, to occupy a different (lesser) role than men in the formulation of earth's mortal history.  Women could not inherit; they could not think or persuade.  Those few who did occupy places of power (such as Elizabeth I, Cleopatra) were held as laudable exceptions to the rule and as proof that women as a group did possess traces of some worthy, masculine traits.  These women were allowed to influence the world of men by being masculine--they were educated as men were and did not produce children.  They were different from other women--they were better, like men.  "The princess is . . . a man by virtue of her birth, and hence the masculine standard of morality applies to her" (p 62).  Men were encouraged to study, to travel, and to participate in physical, social and political life.  Women were taught that "if time cannot be spent in continuous household tasks of spinning, sewing and embroidery, they recommend only edifying reading and denounce novels and poetry" (p 65). 

     It is no wonder that the Renaissance writers considered women as "notionally the inferior of the male" (p 44) and themselves "naturally" justified in excluding her "from public, life, responsibility and moral fulfillment" (p 44).  She was different from men--weaker, more emotional, full of moist humors and a feeble intellect.  Woman was nothing without the man.     Without marriage a man might fight in battle, rule a country, administrate in the offices of the church, inherit his father's land and procreate (an action which, outside of marriage, was reprehensible in women because they alone bore visible manifestation of unchastity).  "In all practical philosophy, the female sex is considered in the context of the paradigm of marriage. . . . Marriage is subjected to much examination and discussion in the Renaissance . . . but they rarely suggest that it is subject to radical change" and it is "one of the strongest barriers to conceptual change concerning the status of woman" (p 66). Women were different from men and, therefore, less than man. In an odd quirk of reasoning, "Postel (1505?-1581) argues that woman's weaknesses and imperfections are advantageous to her, since she naturally strives after perfection (whereas man, when he courts woman, courts an object less perfect than himself)" (p 22).  So, not only are women less than men, but it is a good thing that they are thus.

     Anyway.  Maclean's documentation of man's ignorance of women does help me to understand where the deeply imbedded attitudes that currently surface in religious, political, social and medical dialogues have come from: 

     --Women were relegated to the status of a lower-life form   for centuries. 

     --Men were brave while women were chaste.                         --Marriage was an enlightening, necessarily limiting      institution that allowed women to join with their superiors      in a bond that produced further generations of men. 

I see now how "far" women have indeed come in this last hundred years.  At least on the surface, women are politically, financially, and religiously credited as existing on the same plane as men.  We are intelligent.  We can inherit property.  We can teach and think and reason.  We are morally responsible for our actions.  Above all, we have inherited the opportunity to fulfill that responsibility as we teach our sons and daughters that DIFFERENT is not WORSE or BETTER--it is, indeed, just DIFFERENT.


Madness From Without Paper

 

 

Madness From Without:  Foucault’s Flaw

 

Carolyn Hendry

For Dr. Allen

History of the Body

31 January 1995

 

 

     One of Foucault's more noticeable traits as an author is the certitude with which he displays his opinions.  His attitude does not postulate his thoughts as theories, but presents them as facts.  His writing, especially in his Madness & Civilization, is peppered with quotes from untold dozens of men who considered themselves authorities on the subject of insanity and the insane. His distance in time from these specialists lends his writing an unbiased, objective flavor that is deceptively sweet and agreeable to the reader.  The body of previous writers that Foucault cites, his own mastery of expression, and the general public's ignorance of what it is to be mad, all combine to allow Foucault's words to smoothly enter the mainstream of human discourse. 

     This should not be so, however.  Foucault's writing talent and researching abilities are not enough to allow him the confidence that he exhibits.  His writing about madness is just as valid as a mechanical engineer's (while depending upon his engineering training) technical analysis of Baroque music or a football coach's (while relying upon his coaching expertise) evaluation of a chess match.  The training and abilities that Foucault possesses fail him in this endeavor.  The best that he could do would be to report on what observers scrutinized the mad and how they explained what they saw.  Foucault does this and then asserts his powers of thought beyond their bounds.  He does not admit that what these "specialists" thought was merely from an outsider's viewpoint.  He does not postulate that the reality of madness could actually have been quite different from what the "sane" men of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries decided.  There is no mention of the fact that these men, like Foucault, suffered from the same deficiency as the engineer and the coach in the examples above:  Without the experience of madness, the language to describe it and guess at its causes is missing. 

     Foucault could not know the truth of what he was discussing for his "sane" status prohibited him from knowing the language and the world of the insane.

     Now, perhaps Foucault does not seek to get at the "truth" of madness but only to expound upon the surface, language reality of insanity.[1]  He does not seem to ever admit to an ultimate source of truth and, in my reading, seems captivated by the ebb and flow of society's philosophical discussions.  Even if the truth is not the aim of his discourse here, in other of his texts he is at least cognizant enough of the relativity of the subject he discusses to make note of the discourses’ deficiencies.[2]  He should do so when talking about madness also.

     Challenged by chemical imbalances in my brain, I have be diagnosed[CH1]  and treated for manic depression since 1982.  I speak from faint memories of my deepest depression—and know that my "mad" incidents share none of the motivations nor reality that Foucault's experts detail.  The closest that he comes to touching the truth of madness is when he sums up the knowing of the classical period:  "In the classical period, the man of tragedy and the man of madness confront each other, without a possible dialogue, without a common language" (p. 111).  There are no words in the spoken language to communicate the reality of madness.  Our social speaking relies upon the assumption that there are moral imperatives, that there are things and people we hold intrinsically valuable.  For the mad, this is not so.  When "sane" people function, it is to interact with the people and events that surround them.  The insane do not.  Their world is complete in itself.  Mad fits are not caused by evil and sin, as the religious of the eighteenth century proposed.  When the usual world of people and pressure triggers a fit, the mad recoils into his/her own microcosm, a peaceful and dependable environment.  This retreat from reality does not "[cancel] out both the day's chatter and the lying dark" (p. 111) but grants to the mad person a warm, safe realm in which to exist.  It is not a bad place, but rather a warm and welcoming place where no demands can be made nor promises broken.

     The men of the mid-eighteenth century believed that madness was caused, like leprosy, by disease.  It was an incorrect "moral myth" that madness was     

     "a mysterious disease that spread . . . from the houses of       confinement and would soon threaten the cities. . . .[I]t          was said that the air, tainted by disease would corrupt the residential quarters.  And the great image of medieval      horror reappeared, giving birth, in the metaphors of dread,    to a second panic. . . . 'Even the air of the place, which can be smelled four hundred yards away--everything suggests   that one is approaching a place of violence, an asylum of   degradation and infortune[sic]'" (p. 202). 

The insane were thought to be infested with "the corruption of morals as well as with the decomposition of the flesh" (p. 203). But madness is not something that can be caught or transmitted as can the chicken pox or the measles:  Unless one considers that social stress can force men and women to withdraw into madness.  Pressure to perform to an externally imposed standard has driven many people to withdraw from social interaction.  Their inability to communicate where they have gone to is frightening to those around them who still function on a social level.  This silence, too, has been misinterpreted by Foucault's sources.

     The classical period's insistence on silence as part of the treatment of the insane does not seem to make any logical sense when madness is seen as it truly is. 

     "Compared to the incessant dialogue of reason and madness   during the Renaissance, classical internment had been a    silencing. . . . Confinement, prisons, dungeons, even tortures, engaged in a mute dialogue between reason and   unreason--the dialogue of struggle.  This dialogue itself      was not disengaged; silence was absolute; there was no      longer any common language between madness and reason. .      . . And it is only at this point that a common language      becomes possible again, in so far as it will be one of      acknowledged guilt. . . . In this inveterate silence,      transgression has taken over the very sources of speech" (p.     152).

When one is enveloped in the certainty of insane silence, there is nothing that language can offer.  There is no need to communicate ideas with others, for they do not signify anything to the insane.  There is no need to gain knowledge from others, for there is nothing that one seeks to learn.  Silence is the reassuring shield that guards against intrusion and protection from penetration of the outside world.  This silence is not a frightening thing, but rather a sought-after companion.  It is not that influences from the outside do not matter, but they are relegated to the realm of the body and are easily disregarded until the spirit has had time to heal and has the energy to deal with the social world. 

     For someone that we love to retreat from the interactive realm, preferring the monotone of warm silence, is a threatening thing.  My husband and children tell me that they feel quite frantic when I withdraw from them into myself.  My chemical imbalance exaggerates a normal impulse to have time to be alone when healing and rejuvenation are necessary.  It is not a viral infection, a moral sin, or a punishment of silence that causes or "cures" my withdrawal.  When I am strong enough, I re-enter the social world to interaction with people.  Foucault errs in merely looking at the reports of those who saw the insane and then projected their own fears and feelings onto them.  From circus performers to moral transgressors to infected patients, the ages have traced a wide variety of reactions to the insanes' retreat from the social world.  In other instances Foucault is cognizant of the differences that exist in perspective--between men and women, between various cultures.  He should acknowledge here also that he is merely a stranger looking in on an existence that he cannot know.  He cannot explain madness as it really was or is.  He has not the language--for the language of the insane is not something that the rational public can hear or understand.  It is an inner language that has--and needs--no words.   



    [1]  Although Foucault himself refers twice in his final chapter of Madness & Civilization twice to the "truth":  while explaining the reality of Tuke's method of treating the insane (p. 243) and again while discussing Pinel's challenge in reducing the "iconographic forms" of religion (p. 256).

    [2] See especially his comments in The Use of Pleasure about the role and place of women on pages 203, 206, and his introduction of the Chinese society's reaction to the situation Greece faced on page 137.


 [CH1]  Diagnosed after my marriage, I had suffered depressed and manic episodes from my first memories.  When I was 10, I would lay on my bed and cry—without any understanding of the source of my sadness.  I understand now that there was no tangible reason.  It was my body’s reaction to a misbegotten signal from  a chemical misfire within my brain.  No outside thing caused or, at that time, could cure me.  All that I was felt was disconnected from the outer world.  3/2009  FL


Words of Christ Notes

 

 

 

I have been asked to give a talk on feasting on the words of Christ, or more specifically, reading the scriptures.  I know that reading the scriptures will help us become closer to him, and scriptures can also help us with our daily lives.  I know that when I’m not feeling good, or I have a problem, then I can turn to the scriptures and find an answer.  Several times in my life, I just flip the scriptures open, and there is a verse that can help me, so I have a strong testimony that the scriptures were given to us to assist us with our individual struggles. 

The scriptures also tell stories and accounts of the ancient people, like Noah and Daniel, the troubles they had, and what they did to resolve them.  These stories can help us learn what life was like back in Jesus’ day, and the things that he taught them can also be applied to our daily lives.  Like Noah and the Ark.  Noah had to build the ark, and get all the animals on board, and also make sure he had all the food he needed, while everyone else was laughing at them.  We learn that we need to be prepared, and that we need to trust in the Lord.  We can also learn from this story that we need to remain true to what we know is right, no matter what anyone else thinks of us. 

There was a poem in the latest New Era that I liked, called Words of Wisdom- 

 

I marvel

That throughout the centuries

Of great poets,

Sages, authors, philosophers,

Kings,

The wisest words

Ever spoken by man

Came from the lips

Of a humble

Carpenter.

 

Our seminary teachers have encouraged us to read at least 10 minutes a day.  Reading for that short time will not take away from our other activities, it will help us to be strengthened spiritually.  I personally know that it’s hard to read even a few minutes a day, because Satan doesn’t want us to do something that will help us to grow stronger.

Elder L Lionel Kendrick of the Seventy said---

One of the strong scriptures in the BOM is Moroni 10:3-5---

I have a personal testimony of the scriptures, that they are true and that they will help us and teach us, if we will read them.


Awakening in Edna Notes

 

 

Symbols of Edna NOTES

The Awakening by Kate Chopin

 

The Gulf of Mexico

learning to swim/swimming

piano/Mademoisille Reisz's piano playing

Pigeon House

her artwork

disgarding her bathing suit

her being looked upon as a possession by her husband

swimming the distance in the beginning of the book

ocean

her statement that she would die for her family   but not give up herself for them

walking

 

The awakening process in Edna:

 

p. 14     her beginning state

p. 16     what she was not

p. 18     she feels out of place

p. 22     Edna "tries herself on" Adele--tries to be her?

p. 25     she begins to follow her heart rather than her mind

p. 26     what Edna is--dual nature, lover of beauty

p. 29     Edna runs--water, wind, grass, religion

p. 33     Edna split--faced with reality

p. 35     Edna is "not one of us"

p. 44     Edna is ready to hear the truth

p. 48     Edna swims--"reaching out for the unlimited in which

               to lose herself

p. 49-51  Edna feels emotion, Robert understands, she discovers

               "desire"

p. 53     Edna asserts herself--she "awakens"

p. 55     Edna follows her instincts, her heart

p. 62     After leaving church, she awakens from nap to a new

               world and new self

p. 79-80  Feeling for Robert new, tells Adele that she would

               die for children but not live for them

p. 87     Edna throws off her wedding ring, tries to crush

               it (later accepts it back)

p. 92     Edna offers to paint Adele's picture someday

p. 94     Edna curious about "life's delirium"

p. 96-97  Edna is casting off public image and feeling extreme

               highs and lows of emotion

p. 107    Edna cries as she did when she heard Reisz' music

p. 110    Edna tells Leonce that weddings are lamentable

p. 116-7  Dr. observes new life in Edna

p. 126    Edna is ready for life to happen

p. 129    Admits fidelity for, love for Robert

p. 133    Edna only belongs to self

p. 135    Edna delights in telling Reisz of her love for Robert

p. 138    Reisz feels Edna's "wings"

p. 139    Edna takes off--she kisses Arobin and loves Robert

p. 140    Edna begins to fall--regrets her intimacy with Arobin

p. 150    The "last" dinner is spoiled by Victor's reminder of

               Robert's song

p. 153    Edna "snaps."

p. 156    Edna forsakes convention completely

p. 158    Her children delight her for only a brief moment

p. 160    Adele warns of the danger Edna is in alone

p. 163    "the same glance which had penetrated to the sleeping

               places of her soul and awakened them"

p. 173    Edna feels no meaning in her life

p. 175    Edna's reason melts at the sight of Robert--she still

               loves

p. 177    Edna finds that Robert loves her but we discover that

               he does not understand--he would "own" her as

               Leonce does

p. 184    Think of the children--Edna admits that her children

               should have a right to impose upon her--but

               disregards this responsibility

p. 189    Children are antagonists, Robert would someday leave--

               the water was her only way to escape loneliness.


Notes on Class Teaching and Final Paper

 

 

Attitude towards students:

 

Dr. B. also empathizes with the students.  One student wrote, "All of a sudden, my mind went blank," and Dr. B. said, "That's terrible if it happens up here."     Cloe, 9/1 notes

 

Students learn better when their interest is captured.  This translates into using literature as a major part of class text.  "[History]'s not as much fun to me . . . History just gives you the facts. . . . [F]iction is about something that's real . . . and it's interesting to read. 9/28 notes

 

She reflects her own feelings and emotions on sytudents.  If seh is not interested . . . really preoccupied and . . . rather be doing soemthing else, then they'll pick up on that.  They'll feel the same"  (6)  So she plans class topics and writing assignments to encourage interest and enthusiasm and encourages discussion to keep the students involved in what is being taught. (6)

 

Dr. B. did say that the classes did not get exactly the same quiz.  Cloe, 9/6 notes

 

Dr. B. says, "I'll try to bring things into class to lighten up the readings."--presumably because the book being passed around is funny while Jubilee is serious. Cloe 9/9 notes

 

We are listening to a tape. Dr. B. says, "Listen to the tape and pick out what is relevant on the tpae for the readings.  My last class didn't take notes during the tape.  Taking notes helps me to concentrate." Cloe 9/9 notes

 

 

 

 

 

Verbal cues:

 

Next, Dr. B. selects significant passages froma book to read a loud.  She reads and then clarifies the excerpt.  At one point Dr. b. says, "We are being so quiet; I'm suspecting there aren't any Southerners in here."   Cloe, 9/1 notes

 

Next, she suggests that the class look up words in several dictionaries, implying that meaning is not static and dictionaries differ in the way they define various concepts.  She goes on to discuss connotations and sound of words and a student says, "I'm getting confused.  Do you want us to define it as what it is or as what as I feel . . . think?"  Dr. B. replies, "Conventionally, the definition of 'lady' has a different definition."    Cloe, 9/2 notes                    

 

Dr. B. seems to offer wake-up calls when things are dragging such as, "You guys look puzzled," every few minutes.  She odes this either to try to get peoples' attentions or ot encourage a question. Cloe 9/17 notes

 

Body clues:

 

The class ends with students shifting in their seats and closing notebooks.  Dr. B. ends the class by saying, "I can tell you guys are ready to leave; it's almost a quarter after."  Cloe, 9/2 notes

 

The September 2nd class began with the students being quite talkative . . .As the teacher came in she said, "You guys have a lot of energy today.  Sometimes the teacher gives energy to the students, and sometimes the students give energy to the teacher." Cloe, 9/2 notes

 

 

 

 

Class use:

 

The last thirty minutes of the class is the quiz . . . Dr. B. begins the quiz, significantly I think, by saying, "Just show that you've read the abook."  She seems to want to make it clear that the purpose of the quizzes is not to test students critical thinking skills as much as it is to make sure they have read the book.  Presumably the paper, which ocunt for a much higher portion of the grade for the classs, will test the students' ability to think critically.  Cloe, 9/3 notes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goals:

 

One of her major goals as a teacher is to "get them to reason.  I think that's a lot of what we teach in all our classes.  How to think, you know, how to read."  She tries to get the students to move beyond their present ways of seeing and to see another world, another way of thinking.  (6)

 

The summary generates some discussion about mulattos and missegenation.  The black woman looks up, as if she is on guard now.  Dr. B. tries to be diplomatic.  She says, "You have to talk about very touchy issues with this topic.  These are good questions; this class is thinking." Cloe 9/9 notes

 

When asked what she saw as the best thing about her teaching style, she wrote "Students are forced to think for themselves.  This is very hard.  Some students will never be able to come up with their own interpretations of the material.  Writing is always hard. . . . The best thing about the way I teach is that it is AMERICAN STUDIES.  The personal is political.  It is also real."  13 Oct notes


     I was first captivated by Dr. Barn's personality when I first phoned and asked the receptionist of the American Studies Department to give me her office phone and hours.  "Here!"  she exclaimed, "She can give them to you herself!"  A voice still laughing from some shared joke welcomed me to sit in on her class in Southern Women.  When I went to her office to see her, I witnessed how sincere her welcome was.  With a disarming, unpretentious grin (yes--grin), she admittend me to her office and invited me to make myself at home while she described her Southern Women class and ate a ham sandwich--her lunch. 

     She sees herself as teaching from a broad theoretical approach that unifies her varied interests:  Americans writing about themselves, popular music, American regional differences, literature, portait photography and history.  She seeks to present to her American Studies students the inter-realtion of culture and social stucture.  She writes that one of the things she likes best about teaching her subject is that the "personal is political.  It is also real." 

     Her personal research is also very real.  Her publishing experiences and research studies are funneled into class content.  She researches blues and Country singers and writes about the affect that they have had on others outside their own personal circle of acquaintance.  

     She also encourages her students to reach beyond themselves and bring their lives outside the classroom into the class.  In a class discussion, "a student describes a South Carolina friend.  The friend belongs to the sorority described in the a book being passed around the class, and generally reminds her of the qualities being humorously described in the book.  Dr. Barns says, 'I like it when you have comments.  See, you can have some role here.'" (Cloe, 9/9 notes) 

     One of Dr. Barn's stated goals for teaching is to "emphasize critical thinking and effective communication, especially through dialogue and writing." (p 6)  In class she purposfully limits the scope of material covered in order to cover the present elements under discussion.  On the third day of class in her Southern Women class, she had brought a short tape presentation for the students to listen to.  "This discussion is really going good.  We can put the tape off until next class period so that we can finish talking about how you see the myth of the Southern Woman,"  she smiled at the class and then turned the rest of the time over to a guided discussion of the subject.  One of the five quizes planned for the semester was cancelled so that there would be time to finish talking about one of the novels that she had assigned.

     Because of the content of her American Studies classes, she frequently encounters conflicts between her students because of regional stereotyping and racial discrimination.  "I have specificaly designed my classes to work toward eliminating these problems.  Issues surrounding Southern mythology and Southern culture are particularly sensitive and need to be confronted and explored."

     She describes herself as an idealistic teacher who emphasizes communication and dialogue.  She is often disappointed by her students as they shrink from being self-critical and active learners in the college setting.  She does not pretend that she can force students to learn, but conscienciously tries to involve the students in her classes.  She nots that a sense of humor, class discussion, films and photographs and music all have been successful before in helping her to capture her students' interest.

     During one class she begins to introduce the subject of the day--a novel called Jubilee.  "How shall we say the name?  Vee-ree?"

     A few students chorus "Vi-ree!" 

    "Vi-ree it is then," she smiles at the class, involving them in the most elemental details of the class. 

     In another class she begins by reading outloud.  The pages of the essay she reads from reflect on the lower part of her glasses.  Framed in gold ovals, her bright eyes peer out at the class as she raises her head to comment on the text.  She plainly tells the class why she has chosen to read the class background material on the novel and author being studied:  "I think this is interesting."       She talks with her hands after that--covering her mouth in an involentary motion when she says "300" instead of "3".  "I like to exaggerate," she laughs with the class. "You know, to make sure that everyone's paying attention!" 

     She defers to a student who wants to add a comment to an ongoing discussion, "Deborah wanted to talk so I'd better be quiet!", and praises thoughtful additions to a discussion, "Sometimes students come up with new ideas that I haven't had before.  I think that's great."

     She also projects her own feelings and preferences onto her students, bringing to class books and papers that she enjoys and passing them around during class time.  She encourages students to take notes during a tape that she has brought for the class to listen to because "taking notes always helps me to remember."  If she is not excited about class, she sees no reason why students should look forward to coming.  "[I]f you let the students know that you're not interested, that you're really preoccupied and you'd rather be doing something else, then they'll pick up on that.  They'll feel the same, you know, 'Why should I be here if the teacher isn't interested?'" 

 

                         *****************

 

     Her attitude towards her students and her classroom teaching methods have been distinctly molded by what she has learned from her students.  She is idealistic, yet has learned not to trust her students implicitly.  She wants students to be idependent thinkers, but recognizes their relative immaturity.

     She has had students plagarize--not often, but often enough that she now keeps an eye out for the problem.  Once she recognized an article that she had read recently in a small literary journal and turned the student in.  Her eyes look sad as she tells about the indcident, but her sorrow is because a student decided to avoid an opportunity to learn rather than because a student got caught doing something that she knew was wrong.  She does not give the same quiz or test more than once.  Even though she evaluates with essay questions, she believes that a student in one section might easily share test questions with a friend who might be taking the class during a different time or different semester.     

     She is pragmatic about her expectations for her students.  She sees them as developing people rather than mature, independent thinkers.  "They're real self-adsorbed at this age.  So . . . if they're freaking out then the whole world must be freaking out. . . . There's another interesting thing I've learned about, that supposedly 20 year olds are at a certain stage of moral development . . . that everything is up to the individual, everybody has their opinion, . . everything is relative."  She sees one of the biggest hurtles in teaching is to challenge students to get over that stage and reach some kind of moral hyarchy for viewing the world.  She encourages students to see the people that they study from a vantage point that allows them to appreciate the circumstances and the limitations that exist in other cultures and times.

     She described herself as a "mother of 20 year olds."  She desires to nurture students by challenging them--and the students help her to find out how to do this.  "I adjust, like when the student asked about style, then I try to adjust for the next class to deal with that. . . . [I]n a sense they're always affecting the wya you teach. . . . I try to be responsive to them."

     When the student expressed a real concern about style requirements on the first paper that had been assigned, Dr. Barns took the entire next period to detail exactly what she needed her students to do for her.  She brought in handouts and went through each--with a surprising amount of humor.  At the end of the class, after someone had said something funny, she smiled at the class and told them "I don't think I've ever had so much fun talking about style before!"  

     She stresses discussion because she wants to know that students are "out there thinking about something."  When students become too aggressive during a class conversation, she asserts her form of "gentle authority" and distributes time to talk to less vocal members in the classroom.  "You really have to be on your toes with a class like that 'cause you have to come back at them--if they say something you think is wrong and they're aggressive, you hvae to come back at that.  Some people  . . . would think that was inappropriate student behavior . . . I don't think it's meant to be malicious . . . they're just being themselves."She doesn't revert to lecture because she doesn't feel that students learn from just listening.  When she lectures, the papers that students write for her show less thought and less attention to the subject. 

     She also pays attention to the body signals her students send. Dr. Barns offers wake-up calls when things are dragging and students are quiet.  "You guys look puzzled" solicits student attention and encourages student quesitons.  The class ends with students shifting in their seats and closing notebooks.  Dr. Barns ends the class by saying, "I can tell you guys are ready to leave; it's almost a quarter after."   Another class begins with the students being quite talkative.  As the teacher comes in she says, "You guys have a lot of energy today.  Sometimes the teacher gives energy to the students, and sometimes the students give energy to the teacher." Cloe, 9/2 notes