Friday, February 23, 2007

Pamela's hand, and perspective based "Truth"

After our discussion on Monday, I started thinking more about the idea of the "hand." We covered this theme pretty extensively, but I'm interested in the specific aspect of Pamela's hand in the context of authority. In essence, Pamela's hand (which really belongs to Richardson) is an omnipotent narrator. Her voice, or her hand, is the supposed voice of authority, or the "True" voice of the novel.


This is where it gets interesting, to me. I've been toying with a thought for a while now, and it seems to relate perfectly to my feelings about authenticity in "Pamela." See, I'm a post-modernist (romantic post modernist?), and I don't believe that there IS a "truth" in this novel. I know that this is NOT a post-modernist novel, or at least wasn't written as one, but I think that it touches on one of the central arguments of post modernism.

For the purpose of this posting, I want to consider the novel as not written by Richardson, but actually written by the young Pamela. (Disregarding authorial intent and the lack of experience Richardson had at being a young girl) Pamela has a version of events that she relays to her parents, and her parents respond to her described events. Now, why should we believe Pamela? What about her letters make her a trustworthy narrator? Personally, I've found a couple of examples of why she shouldn't be relied on for truthfullness. Specifically, Mr. B refers to her as manipulative!! Also, the constant mentions of her beauty and the descriptions of the praises others lavish upon her imply a vanity that is unbecoming to a "virtuous" woman. To me, these numerous glimpses of narcissisom and egoism completely contradict her purported goodness. There's a couple of other instances that I'd like to talk about in class. Also, Pamela's parent's reactions to her letters are only contingent upon what Pamela chooses to tell them, which I believe is important.

Getting back to post modernism, I think that Pamela could actually believe her version of events, but that doesn't make them "reality," or the "Truth." Perhaps Mr. B's actually believes his version of "reality," as well. One's perspective IS their reality, so who's to say that one "Truth" is actually real? Regardless, it's not our place, as the audience, to know the "Truth," not that there really is one in a fiction novel. Regardless, for the purposes of the story, I think that Mr. B should be given as much consideration as Pamela in this instance. Perhaps Mr. B is NOT a "bad man," but merely the victim of a "bad woman," Pamela. Who can say? But I would argue that Richardson leaves a few indications that Pamela is a little whimsical in the brain pan (more on that later, don't have the book with me to make page references!!)

OK, this argument will have to remain a little incomplete; this posting is getting fairly long. As I'm writing, more and more ideas are coming to me. Perhaps this is an idea for my final project: post modernism in the 18th century novel? Either way, I'd love to discuss this theory in class Monday, or continue my post later!

Read More...

Thursday, February 22, 2007

The (fe)male gaze and Pamela

Thus far, we've encountered dozens of apparent contradictions within the texts, contexts, and interpretation of the texts and contexts that we've been reading. Some apparently contradictory situations actually exist simultaneously, and
I'm interested in looking a little more closely at some of them. The germ of this thought actually started in my art history class, (this will seem like I'm going on a tangent, but bear with me) while we were looking at slides of Verrocchio's David. Our professor started discussing the homoerotic overtones of the statue, but this statement makes an implicit assumption that the gaze looking on the statue is male. Obviously, given Marymount's rather unique gender ratio, there were about four guys in a class of about 35 people. So, while definitely making a valid obseration about the qualities of the statue, the professor was implicitly dismissing the female gaze in favor of the implied male gaze. The idea of the "male gaze" has come up repeatedly in examinations of works of art or literature. Basically, it is the assumption that the "gaze" or the consumer of a certain work is male, and this interplay between the work and the maleness of the viewer's gaze raises some interesting questions. So, here we have something of a contradiction between what is assumed and what is real. By this I mean that while traditional examinations of literature are made from a male-oriented point of view, Watt reminds us that most readers of the burgeoning novel (such as Pamela were female. Here we have a work of literature created by a male author with a female protagonist, created for the consumption of a reading public that has a large ratio of female readers, yet at the same time examinations of these works often assume the primacy of the male gaze. This paradox repeats itself when we consider that our class is overwhelmingly female. As a reader, I make a conscious effort not to divorce myself from the work I am investigating. That is, I am conscientious of where I stand as a reader in relation to the text, both in consideration of my historical context and my gendered hermeneutic. I hope I'm not going too out on a limb here, but I am fairly certain that my interpretation of Pamela will be different than a male reader (even one in the same historical and educational context as myself) precisely because of the gendered nature of my interpretation. Obviously I am not attempting to post this as a question of opposing, "right or wrong" intepretations but rather making an observation that I feel is relevant to the contents of this novel. This implies all sorts of interesting developments to the ideas of power, property, sexuality, and male/female discourse as presented within the novel itself.
Before this post turns into me being a complete blowhard, I'm very interested in what my fellow readers think about this idea of the male/female gaze of the reader affecting the interpretation of the novel.

Read More...

Monday, February 19, 2007

Pamela; a story of letters

In reading Pamela, I must say that I could see the parallels between Richardson's style and the novel that is more familiar to us. When I first opened the book, I expected to be bored and exasperated at having to read a collection of letters. But as I read on, the story seized to be just letters to me, but became an actual story I could appreciate. Richardson used the style of narration he chose to tell this love (for lack of a better term) story very well, at least in my opinion.


The title of the story is very interesting to me in that it introduces the main character and also seems to give us a sneak peak of Pamela's fate. I was not exactly certain of what to make of Mr. B's manner of pursuit of the young Pamela. There were moments when I felt that she did have had reason to fear his advances and found myself empathizing with her, considering her position and apparent vulnerability. At other times, I felt that she might have been simply making mountains out of molehills, which probably came from "listening" to the other characters in the story like Farmer Monkton and Mrs. Jewkes. Beside the fact that I had already learned the manner in which the story would end in class, as I read, I could not help but continually worry and wonder along with Pamela, not quite knowing what to expect the next moment. If indeed she would finally lose her virtue to this powerful man we are taught to call Mr. B., and whether all would be lost so to say. But then I closed the book and read the title again, paying closer attention to it, and I could very well predict Pamela's fate.

I see Richardson's announcing to his readers that Pamela's story would not at all end gravely or heart-wrenchingly as a tact that is also used by modern writers today. He lets us know that the story is about "virtue rewarded" The average modern novel, or at least what most of us readers are familiar with usually has some sort of peak into the future, just usually not with as much precision and/or detail. For instance, the summaries of stories that are typically recorded on back pages of novels to stir up the reader's interest. Personally, I would never purchase a novel if I did not have some sort of idea of what it was about. I think this is the same tactic Richardson used to appeal to readers of his time, which shows an area of similarity between the expectations of his readers and of modern readers today.

Pamela also had a number of the common themes including control via power and affluence, the power of "love" and desire. Mr. B. seemed to me to not only serve as a character but as a representative of those who meet their needs by wielding the iron rod of power and control. However, with as much as I have read, I do not see Mr. B as one who merely chases Pamela to have his way with her, but because he desires her and wants to have her by all means. I see him as being so aware of his position and influence that he will not condescend far enough to speak to her as he would to a woman of class or means. This I got from the letters he wrote to her while she was captive, which seemed apologetic and even almost sincere (at least to my ears).

Summarily, in view of all the other works we have read, I see the most evidence of the modern novel in.

Read More...

Pamela, or writing in letters

First of all, I'd like to state (for the record) that I enjoyed reading "Pamela." Dr. Howe warned us about the language, but I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised. I did not have to resort to an audiobook to delve into this novel, but I do believe that the experience of using one with Defoe helped in the comprehension of Pamela.

Richardson's technique of writing with letters is very effective for me. I could be biased towards this technique; one of my favorite short stories is Stephen King's "Jerusalem's Lot" in Night Shift. In this semi-preface to the novel "Salem's Lot," King tells his story through letters and diary entries. I struggled with the technique when King used it, and found it very disjointed. However, as I read the short story more, and got used to the style, I respected the technique and came to enjoy it. Richardson, like King, uses personal letters as a way to add subtle nuances and emotion to the story. Like Defoe, Richardson is using a first person narrative, but in a highly stylized way.

With Defoe, even though "Journal" was portrayed as an actual journal/diary, I could never believe in it's authenticity. I know we aren't supposed to read for plot or "lose ourselves" in the work, but I believe that the inability of a reader to believe in it's proclaimed form is a failure of on the part of the author. I enjoyed Defoe (after much complaining!), but I was never able to accept it for it's intended form: an ongoing journal occuring at the time the event actually happened.

Richardson, on the other hand, seems to be more comfortable with his medium. Pamela's letters actually seem to be written by a young, confused girl. Her parents replies, as well, seem to come from concerned parents. The letters clearly shift in tone, leading the reader to clearly differentiate between the "narrators." As a reader of "Pamela," I feel like an outsider looking in, a sort of voyeur. With that voyeuristic feeling, there's a sort of dirty/train wreck feeling, where you can't look away, but you feel that you really should. I didn't get that with Defoe; his style was too journalistic. While both books give the reader an "in" to the narrator's state of mind, Defoe gives you the facts, but Richardson gives you the emotion. I hope that makes sense!

I'm really excited to discuss this work in class, especially the idea of an untrustworthy narrator. I'd love to hear what everyone thinks about the fact that Pamela is writing to her parents, and the idea of different masks we wear. Specifically, is Pamela telling her parents the whole truth? Is there a "truth" that we aren't getting in these letters? Is Pamela trustworth? Why or why not? I bring up a lot of these questions before class mainly because I won't be able to discuss them as well as I'd like to in class. I had mouth surgery on Friday, so please forgive the Jay Leno chin swelling, the lack of clear enunciation, and the fogginess that comes from pain killers...

Also, if anyone knows how to make text bold or in italics using a Mac with Safari as my browser, please let me know!

Read More...