Within the Mind of Porphyria's Lover

          “Porphyria’s Lover” by Robert Browning is a poem in which the tables are turned on a woman by her demented lover. Our view of Porphyria and the situation is through the eyes of her lover and in his mind we are treated to his thoughts and his twisted logic. The beginning of the poem tells us a lot about how the speaker is feeling since he projects his feelings into describing the nature around him.

The rain set early in tonight

The sullen wind was soon awake,

It tore the elm tops down for spite,

And did its worst to vex the lake,

                                                                      (1-4)

            By his personification of nature, we can tell that the rain is meant to symbolize Porphyria and how her early arrival wakes up the “sullen” wind. The way she tears the “elm tops down for spite” could indicate the emasculating effect she has on him. Elm tops could be seen as a phallic symbol and the speaker sees her as tearing it down to spite him. The “rain” also vexes the lake, indicating how the man is annoyed by her actions.

And, last, she sat down by my side

And called me. When no voice replied,

She put my arm about her waist,

And made her smooth white shoulder bare,

And all her yellow hair displaced,

And, stooping, made my cheek lie there,

And spread, o’er all, her yellow hair,

Murmuring how she loved me-she

Too weak, for all her heart’s endeavor

To set its stuggling passion free

From pride, and vainer ties dissever,

And give herself to me forever.

                                                                                                            (14-25)

            In these lines, we continue to see his perception of her daring nature. She initiates the actions by first sitting by him and calling him to her. When he doesn’t respond to her, she takes his arm and places it on her waist and also places his cheeks on her. She begins to seduce him by showing her “smooth white shoulder bare (17). Her hair is free and flowing, indicating the freedom she possesses. She murmurs “how she loved” him, yet because of her “pride, and vainer ties” she cannot give herself to him forever. She is the initiator in their relationship, she goes to him, controls his actions and by the end of it, she is able to leave and he cannot posses her. Such actions by a woman of this time period can be emasculating to a man.

            In his twisted mind he comes to imagine that since she had “come through wind and rain” (30), that “Porphyria worshipped me:” (33). He makes it justifiable in his mind that since she has gone through all that trouble, she must truly love him with a deep passion. With his mind set on this idea, he devises a way so that they could be together forever. His insanity is highlighted as he sets his plan to motion.

A thing to do, and all her hair

In one long yellow string I wound

Three times her little throat around,

And strangled her. No pain felt she;

I am quite sure she felt no pain.

                                                                                                            (38-42)

            Irony strikes poor Porphyria as the very symbol of her freedom leads to her downfall. Her free-flowing hair is used as a weapon to take her life. In her lover’s twisted mind, he comforts himself by stating that he is “quite sure she felt no pain.” (42) In this, he believes that Porphyria wanted to be murdered and that she even enjoyed the pain that he has inflicted upon her.

            Once her life is gone, he now takes control of her and the tables are turned as it is he who moves her limbs. He “oped her lids” (44) so that he could look into her eyes and that in her eyes, he is the only man being reflected on them. He “…propped her head up as before,/Only this time my shoulder bore/Her head…”(49-51).  He untangles her hair from her neck and kisses her, in his mind he imagines that she “Blushed bright beneath my burning kiss:” (48) He imagines that his kiss alone still makes her blush, though in reality her flushed appearance is due to being strangled.

            His delusion goes further in that he sees her “…smiling rosy little head,/So glad it has its utmost will,” (52-53). In reality, Porphyria is dead, no longer have any will to defy him or to leave him. In his mind, he sees that she chose him and that “Her darling one wish would be heard.” (57); for them to be together. He rationalizes that his murder of her is justifiable since “God has not said a word!” (60) In his mind, he believes that God condones his actions because nothing bad has happened to them as they “sit together now/And all night long” (58-59).  

A Theory of Personality: Analyzing the Characters of Oscar Wilde’s Picture of Dorian Gray using Freud’s Perspective

A Theory of Personality: Analyzing the Characters of Oscar Wilde’s Picture of Dorian Gray using Freud’s Perspective

 

Oscar Wilde’s literary masterpiece the Picture of Dorian Gray is not only a good read but holds many different interpretations which allow you to learn from it. Once given the chance to study the theories of Sigmund Freud, I had come to realize a connection between his personality theory and the three main characters of the novel: Basil, Henry, and Dorian. Looking at the characters through this perspective has helped me understand their motives in the story and it makes it easier to understand how and why their characters developed as they did.

 In order to understand this theory, it is first important to know the three characters analyzed. Dorian Gray is a young handsome man who seems in the beginning of the book to be pleasant, beautiful, and follows Henry's aunt's lead on taking part in her charitable endeavors. It is clear when Dorian is so upset by Henry Wotton's remark of how he will have nothing once his beauty has been taken by age shows that Dorian knows nothing about his own self. Living under the rules and moralities of his aristocratic society has not allowed him to find or express who he wants to be in life, which has diminished the opportunity for him to create his own moral code to live from. Dorian in a sense is a blank canvas, waiting to be molded into anything desired. Just as his portrait first appears, Dorian seems innocent and pure. Looking at Dorian’s childhood history proves that he has lived through strife and has experienced the darker sides of life. It’s impossible to believe that none of his past experiences put any psychological damage on him. Dorian keeps all of his terrors inside, not confiding in anyone. On the outside he seems to be a pure and beautiful being, which could be nothing but perfect. On the inside he fights to find an identity for himself while needing to cope with everything he has been through, this takes a toll on his mind, making him even more vulnerable to be manipulated by others. 

In Freud’s theory of personality, Dorian’s character identifies deeply with the ID. The ID is a component of personality that is completely unconscious. It is driven by pleasure, and wishes to satisfy any need that we want. This could range from basic needs like eating, sleeping, and drinking. The range also goes as far as unrealistic pleasures, or pleasures that are defined as immoral by society. The ID has no mortality, if every person was controlled merely by the ID; we’d all live lives like Dorian. The ID has no personal identity just like Dorian. It is manipulated by the pleasures that we desire, not caring weather these pleasures are good or bad for us. Dorian’s character is the ID of the three main characters; he lives a life of pleasure and becomes obsessed with living his life without moralities or worries.

Henry Wotton a witty intellect that preaches unconventional theories and the right ways of living, in which he doesn’t necessarily follow himself. Henry believes everyone should live a life of pleasure, as well as be themselves. We should not be ruled by what other people think is right. Eventually Henry’s words sink into Dorian and change him completely. Henry is the influence of change in Dorian. In a sense Henry becomes Dorian’s Superego. Although the superego is usually defined as a good thing, in this story, it is not so good. The superego deals with our own moral codes and what we believe is right and wrong. It allows is to make judgments based on what we feel is right in connection with our conscious and what he know is right by society. In Henry’s case, he doesn’t believe what society preaches is right, and a life of pleasure is the only real way to live. As the ID Dorian originally has no morals so Henry’s theories of living life by being yourself and indulging in your own pleasures becomes his moral. What Henry did not know is that he gave Dorian free reign to live by his ID. With no help to define what is right or wrong by his superego, Dorian felt he could do anything, including murder.

Basil Hallward is the talented painter who fell in love with Dorian’s beauty. Throughout the book, he attempts to keep Dorian as pure as he is in his painting. Basil urges Dorian to not believe anything Henry says, hoping to protect his soul from being tainted. Although Basil’s attempts are futile, his character resembles the ego. The ego’s job is to mediate the superego and ID to shape the pleasure or idea met into a realistic manner. The ego shapes our actions so that they are appropriate in means of societal rules. On countless occasions Basil tries to keep Dorian in check and to diminish Henry’s theories as something Dorian shouldn’t take wholeheartedly. Even when Basil realizes that their friendship has completely dissolved he still tries to save him.

Sucking the Life out of England: Problem with Authority, in Percy Bysshe Shelley’s “England in 1819”

Very often in poetry, the assumptions and opinions of the poet show through. In the case of “England in 1819” Shelley’s opinions are seen throughout. Percy, who was against authority in more ways than one, has written a poem expressing those views in isolated incidents.

           

 [4] Rulers who neither see, nor feel, nor know,

[5] But leech-like cling to their fainting country cling,

[6] Till they drop, blind in blood, without a blow –

In these first few lines of Shelley’s poem, he expresses the lack of caring by the ruler’s of the time period. Those “who neither see, nor feel, nor know” expresses that the authority does not understand or see how their actions are affecting the people. England, which was under the rule of King George III at the time, was in a dark state.

In this poem, especially these few lines, the reader can envision a country that is falling apart. There is no unity and England is a “fainting country”. The antagonistic views of authority, the rebellious nature of the people against their government in the rest of the poem suggests that Shelley’s voice is being written down and expressed wholeheartedly.

He leaves very little room, for improvement in the authority of England. Calling the rulers “leech-like” suggests that these rulers are sucking the blood and life out of their country.  The rulers, or leeches of society rely on others to maintain their rule for them. Leeches were very common during this time, used to help pull out bacteria and illnesses through the leeches’ sucking of blood. However, the overuse of the insects was known to cause death and even more illness. Instead of maintaining a healthy limit on what happened and what was done in society, the rulers clung to society and “sucked” out the resources, the supply and the hope. This is shown to be very crippling on society, as England is seen as “fainting” from a metaphorical loss of blood and life.

In line six of this poem, Shelley exposes the role the ruler truly has. He expresses that the leech is then full of blood, and then merely drops off, no longer able to hold on, due to reaching its capacity. However the last part of that line suggests the “without a blow” the leeches release their prey. Shelley suggests that no one is swatting these predators away. No one is successfully rising against the authorities that have been “sucking” everything out of society. These leeches receive many attempts to stop their domination over the society however, as Shelley explains later in the poem, the armies that are under the thumbs of the rulers/leeches put down the rebellious society. 

Through this comparison of the rulers to the leeches, Shelley tries to explain how terrible the authorities are, and how difficult society is during this time. Shelley shows the reader that leeches will come and go, and they will take what they want or need and then come back whenever there is a need for more. This pulling of resources, and suppression of society’s strength will soon show to be England’s downfall, and that the amount of power that the monarch or ruler is too large. Due to this fact, the people of England have very little success going against the government of their country.

Shelley gives the reader a very matter-of-fact view of the government. It sounds at some points in the poem that he is speaking in an informative way, giving facts and explanations. However, the poem also suggests Shelley’s frustration with authority. As touched upon earlier, Shelley had many problems with authority and control during his life. He was never without radical views. This poem however shows that his views had logical basis and that there was cruelty and despair in England, and that the rulers of the country were the ones causing the destruction, of the country around them.

            

Only God Knows: An Argument Against Various Interpretations of Hood's "The Bridge of Sighs"

             Through Hood's "The Bridge of Sighs," the tale  of a fallen woman (a prostitute, most likely) who had made the decision to take her own life by leaping off of a bridge and into a river to drown. is told But when her body is recovered, the shamed, fallen woman is "purified" and is actually lamented by the narrator - an act that was greatly against general societal feelings toward this type of woman. As I was going through the pages of the blog, I couldn't help but notice that nearly everyone interpreted the fallen woman's suicide as an act of cleansing and redemption. If you examine in a little bit closer and contextualize it, this cannot be true. Let's take another look at both the penultimate and final stanza of the poem:

Perishing gloomily,                  (95)
Spurr'd by contumely,
Cold inhumanity,
Burning insanity,
Into her rest.--
Cross her hands humbly,          (100)
As if praying dumbly,
Over her breast!

Owning her weakness,
Her evil behavior,
And leaving, with meekness,    (105)
Her sins to her Saviour! 

          To begin, the woman did not jump off of the bridge to purify herself, a fact that Hood explicitly states in lines 96-99. He says that she was "Spurr'd by contumely" (Contumely is insolent or insulting language or treatment), cold inhumanity, and burning insanity into her rest. Society's hatred of her forced her to her death, she did not have any sort of righteous thoughts behind it. She could not handle the stress or hate.
         But what's the most curious to me are lines 100-106. As established earlier in the poem, this woman committed suicide. In most faiths, this is a huge sin. As England, Hood's homeland, was Christian, we'll take a look at what Christianity has to say about suicide. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, suicide is "seriously contrary to justice, hope, and charity. It is forbidden by the fifth commandment" (Paragraph 2325). The fifth commandment states that "Thou shalt not kill." By her suicide, she isn't cleansing herself in the face of God, she's condemning herself. If you look closer at the  final 7 lines, it isn't the woman that is crossing her hands to pray, but either the narrator or someone in the crowd. They're attempting to try to give her some form of faithfulness to God, some reason that her soul may not be condemned to hell for her mortal sins that went beyond prostitution and even committed murder. She isn't actually "owning her weakness" or her "evil behavior" and leaving "her sins to her savior" -  they crowd only wishes that for her. According to traditional Christian faith, her soul is already condemned to Hell. The narrator's action is just a feeble attempt to save her.
         But Hood doesn't leave the woman with just this small shred of hope of her corpse's hands fashioned for prayer; earlier on in the penultimate stanza, he mentions "burning insanity" (98). Assuming he's saying that the woman was insane, there is hope for her, although not too much. Paragraph  2282 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church mentions that "grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide (my italics). If this woman was truly insane, she has the chance of having a lesser punishment for her sin. Although the chances are implicitly slim, there's still a shred of hope for her. Is Hood really saying that the fallen is redeemed, or is he just casting an illusion? Only God can know.




References:
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2325.htm
http://www.olrl.org/Lessons/Lesson38.shtml
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2282.htm
         

"Art for Art's sake"

“Art never expresses anything but itself. This is the principle of my new aesthetics.” Wilde

As I was reading “The Picture of Dorian Gray” I became curious to know more about the aesthetic philosophy and the literary movement that was in effect in late nineteenth-century Britain. I found many interesting articles that showed me the direct influence that aestheticism had on Oscar Wilde. With the influence of his poetry and plays, Wilde was known to be “a major spokesman for the Aesthetic Movement”.

The term “aestheticism” derives from Greek, meaning “perceiving through senses” A doctrine which holds aesthetics or beauty as the highest ideal or most basic standard. According to the Aesthetic Movement, art justifies its own existence by expressing and embodying beauty. Aestheticism was in complete opposition to the prevailing Victorian mentality, with its emphasis on hard work, moral earnestness, and material success, aestheticism on the other hand emphasized the fleeting nature of life and argued that the most important thing was to relish the exquisite sensations life brings, especially those stimulated by a work of art. The aim was to be fully present and to live vividly in each passing moment. (Anderson )

In the novel Dorian Gray a young, innocent, beautiful boy is introduced and corrupted by Lord Henry Wotton’s introduction of the principles of hedonism and aestheticism. His corruption starts with the extreme admiration of Basil and fuel is set to the fire by Lord Henry who tells young Dorian Gray that “youth is the only thing worth having” and that ”Beauty is a form of Genius- is higher, indeed than Genius, as it needs no explanation” basically saying that when beauty and youth go, by natural age, he will discover that there will be nothing left for him. This put immense fear into Dorian, which caused him to make the wish of him staying always young and the painting to age.

His search for pleasure and obsession with esthetics ruined his soul and some of the lives that he encountered.   

Anderson , Anne. "Oscar Wilde and the Aesthetic Movement, and the Cult of Beauty in Art and Design." Cranleigh Decorative & Fine Arts Society.

"The Ruined Maid" - Not So Ruined, After All.

  Thomas Hardy’s “The Ruined Maid” deals with the topic of fallen women - women who deviated from the path of righteousness and had sexual relations out of wedlock. This doesn’t just apply to prostitutes, but any sort of women who engaged in this sort of activity; it didn’t necessarily have to be a repeated offense, a one time occurrence was enough for a woman to take a fall. These women were disgraced and ousted from society’s social structure, as no one truly respected these “ruined” women.

In this poem, Hardy attempts to show that fallen women (in this case, a prostitute) are not what society makes them out to be, but rather depicts them as classy, refined individuals. I interpreted the poem as an argument against the accusations that society made on these women. 

  “The Ruined Maid” is comprised of a conversation between a farm girl turned upper-class prostitute, Melia, and an unnamed girl that is implicitly from Melia’s old country home, possibly a close neighbor. Each stanza begins with the unnamed farm girl making some sort of explanation of how much Melia has changed since she left the farm life; she presents a previous memory of Melia followed by the Melia in the time of this poem. For example, in the second stanza, the girl remarks how Melia left them “in tatters, without shoes or socks (5),” but now she has “gay bracelets and bright feathers (7).” Each stanza follows the precedent made from the first, always expressing the change from one of lower-class or melancholy feelings to one of wealth, prosperity, and happiness. Melia’s repeated explanation is that it all comes with one’s ruin. 

          Hardy expresses through this poem how much better off  “ruined” women are - they are more prosperous, more educated, more refined, and more lively - than the average women. Hardy presents an entirely opposing view of what was typically thought of these kinds of women. He claims that these women aren’t down-trodden, dirty, unintelligent, and rough, but the direct opposite. 

When the unnamed farm girl in the sixth stanza (Beginning on line 21), expresses her want and desire for everything that Melia is - her polish, her wealth, and her attitude - Melia responds in a manner different than the rest of her previous answers. She says:

“‘My dear -- a raw country girl, such as you be,     (23)

Cannot quite expect that. You ain’t ruined,’ said she.” (24) (My italics)

  Melia says that the country girl can’t expect to have everything that she does, as it is something that comes when you are “ruined.” But more interestingly, she calls the girl “raw” (23). This choice in wording is curious; according to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary, to be raw is to be unprepared or imperfectly prepared for use; not being in polished, finished, or processed form (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/raw). By stating that the country girl is “raw,” Hardy is implicitly stating that Melia is beyond this stage. He’s implying that Melia is past this stage -  she’s prepared and perfectly prepared for use, she’s polished, finished, and processed. Clearly, Melia is in a better form than the country girl, and this form, as said by Melia, comes when one is ruined. Hardy says that she’s the better of the two.

  Is being “ruined” as bad as the word implies? Clearly, Hardy doesn’t think so. It doesn’t look like everyone was against these fallen women. 

The Ruined Maid

Thomas Hardy’s poem “The Ruined Maid” is an example of a dramatic monologue, which features a conversation between two women in late Victorian England. One is a farm girl and the other is a former farm girl who moves to the city. In the poem the farm girl speaks to Melia, the city girl, and notices how she has changed since her move to the city. The first girl—unidentified by name and yet living on a farm—addresses the other girl, named Melia, who answers in all but one stanza, the last one. The first girl has three lines of the quatrain, and Melia is given a one-line response in which she uses the word “ruin” in a couple of different ways.  Melia explains in each of the six stanzas of the poem that these changes indicate how she has become a “fallen woman.” The term fallen woman in Victorian culture applied to woman who were considered prostitutes, unmarried women who engaged in sexual relations with men, victims of seduction, adulteresses, as well as lower-class women who broke the rules.  

At this time there is a thin line between high prostitutes and well kept women. The poem clearly shows the freedom that is gained from being a prostitute compared to a factory worker that may work 15 or more hours of very hard labor that ruins the body. This work was also very dangerous since no protection was really offered in the factories. Despite all of the hard work and long hours, factory jobs could barely provide someone with proper amount of food and a livable sleeping area.

The country girl shows envy when admiring the prostitute and shows desire to escape to the city. Melia shows that her life used to be old fashion and full of work that was way too hard on a woman. She has replaced her old job for a different kind of labor called “sex” and she states that it has many advantages, like more food, more money, comfortable place to sleep at night, beautiful elegant clothing, etc. Melia seems to have an easier life from the “honorable” farm girl and Melia seems to enjoy her life even though she is doing something that is considered totally wrong and a sin in her society. Why is it that the respectful hard worker lives a much problematic life full of struggles, compared to a prostitute that is sinning and going against all the rules of being the ideal “Victorian woman”?

At this time a Victorian woman, or the “angel of the house” was defined by her role within the home, because the family served as a sanctuary for the "preservation of traditional moral and religious values" ("Victoria's Past").  The qualities valued by Victorian society in the ideal female were submissiveness, innocence, purity, gentleness, self-sacrifice, pa t i enc e, modesty, passivity, and altruism.  T he middle - class Victorian woman was to have no ambition other than to please others and care for her family. A woman was to be "a monument of selflessness, with no existence beyond the loving influence she exuded as daughter, wife, and mo t h e r"  ("Victoria's Past") .

The woman of the nine tenth century occupied a position of “duality” within Victorian culture, she was either “Madonna or Magdalene”, pure or ruined, familiar or foreign.  If a woman disobeyed the rules of what the ideal Victorian woman was, whether by sexual misconduct or criminal act, she was viewed as deviant and unnatural. She represented an “unsettling anomaly that both repelled and fascinated the Victorian.” Society viewed these woman as fallen, but in reality these women were victims of seduction and poverty.

The Victorian man, similar to the woman was only allowed to have sex within marriage, but a woman had to help men control their instincts and not have sex. Even though men were urged to control their sexuality, the Victorians believed that heterosexual desire was in a man’s nature. Therefore the society pleaded ignorance about a man’s inability to control his sexuality!! A man was allowed to seduce women, and in fact it was in their “nature” to do so, but all the responsibility fell upon the women to reject this seduction or else they were damned!

In my opinion the prostitute of Victorian times had a lot in common with the poor women trying to make a living in the urban job market. Many orphans on their own or extremely poor women became prostitutes out of necessity or a means to survive. Most of these women were desperately trying to survive in a world of very few opportunities. In “The Ruined Maid” we clearly see the appeal of becoming a prostitute compared to the living of the factory worker. 

What is very interesting is that Victorian women were not judged solely by their behavior but also by the way that they looked, a woman’s poor appearance could make her seem “fallen”. But at the same time, a woman that once used to be poor, now dressed in overly elaborate clothing and beautiful appearance could be labeled as “fallen”, since prostitution was the only way to buy such clothing from a woman of a poor background. The Victorian Era was extremely judgmental on women, in fact women had only two options; she was either a virgin or she was a mother, anything other than that was subject to critique and ridicule by the society. 

 "To the Life of the Victorian Woman." Victoria's Past. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Apr 2012.     http://www.victoriaspast.com/LifeofVictorianWoman/LifeofVictorianWoman.html