Sylvie trying to describe Helen to the girls

Sylvie knows Helen, but she really doesn’t. Most of Sylvie’s memories of Helen are from years back as teens and children, and it appears that she didn’t really have interactions with, none in fact, upon her marriage. Mr. Mitchell said in class that “memory plays a crucial role in the coming of age process”. But, it is important to keep in mind that memory, by its nature, is fragmented.  Be that as it may, I still believe that Sylvie tries her best to to describe Helen. But there are many problems due to which her answer to Lucille isn’t the most specific. First off, Sylvie doesn’t have an immediate answer because she wasn’t expecting this question: as Ruth says, Lucille asks rather “abruptly”. Then, of course, we have to keep in mind that since Sylvie wasn’t too close to her sister, she doesn’t really have much to say about her. And the little that she knows, it’s hard for her to talk about, since her sister committed suicide.

Lucille is obviously unhappy with Sylvie’s generic and vague responses. And the reason for that is because Lucille wants to know what her mother was “really like”. But, how is Sylvie supposed to know what “really like” means? And that’s the core of the problem. While Sylvie is Ruth and Lucille’s aunt she has never met them, and they haven’t met her. That’s precisely why Ruth’s plan to “wait [to ask Sylvie about our mother] till we knew her better]” is pretty solid: as Sylvie gets to know the girls better, she might have be able to better answer the questions as well.

This is where it gets interesting,though: Ruth isn’t as bummed about this as Lucille, in fact, she is somewhat amazed by this answer. Typical Ruth, she doesn’t really react to this. But let’s take that with a grain of salt, because Ruth doesn’t seem to react to much at all: whether it be talking about her “putative” father in parentheses or the death of her grandfather, grandmother, or mother as a small change in the world, Ruth always skids through emotional experiences as if they don’t really affect her. She is glad that Sylvie at least didn’t avoid the question (like all the other adults do when the girls bring up the topic of Helen) and that Sylvie tried to answer to the best of her ability.

Monday, March 30th 

Closing Thoughts on the Bell Jar

The Bell Jar was a fun book book to read. Full of all sorts of emotions from comedy to melancholy, there was one aspect of the book that I really adored: Esther as a character. Esther was the center of attention for the whole novel. In any book that I have read throughout my years not only at Uni but also for fun, no book has centered more on one character than The Bell Jar. Ok let me pause there, so that I can add one more book: The Catcher in the Rye.While there are multiple characters in the book, Esther is in every scene, as well as narrates the book (so I guess that’s a pretty big similarity with Catcher). The only difference is that when reading, it doesn’t seem that Esther is there, even though she is.

Moving on to something slightly different. The story ends with Esther entering a room to be once again evaluated by the board of the hospital, so that they can decided whether or not she needs to stay longer. First off, I must say that I liked this ending very much. I tend to like cliffhangers, because they yield to sequels. I’m not sure whether or not this ending can be classified as a cliffhanger, but what’s important is that it fits well as an ending. A bad ending would have been something along the lines of Esther feels really good and starts to get back to her normal life. And I feel that another author might have ended the book like that, but not Plath, because Plath actually went through this “depression.” I most certainly believe that this ending holds Plath’s main message: people with mental illnesses may recover, however, there is nothing as getting back to normal.  The bell jar analogy fits well: it might be gone for now, but somewhere it’s still looming, waiting to strike back at the (im)perfect moment.

In terms of Esther’s treatment, I would say that her cure stems from Dr. Nolan. The shock treatments and the panel of doctors observing her-- those things are obviously pointless. But Dr. Nolan has a powerful effect on Esther. Celia mentioned in class that one of the main reasons for that is probably due to the fact that Dr. Nolan is a woman. In the medical society at that time, at least in terms of Esther’s views, the field of medicine is male dominated (including the methods of treatments and the drugs). So in that society, when Esther sees Dr. Nolan, a woman who is in a position of power, who is keen and boldly opinionated, and a person who can connect her, Esther is amazed. I think that Esther sees a friend in Dr. Nolan and that’s what starts to heal her. In the end, Esther changes her attitude towards society and that’s what starts to make her happy. The big question that is left off at the end of the novel is not whether or not society is correct, but whether or not Esther will be able to survive in such a society without once again falling into a mental depression.  

Wednesday, March 4th

Esther’s Ideals in Bell Jar

This might be necessary before I start off, so here it is...

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are solely my own and are not meant to cause harm to one particular age, race, gender, or religion.   

In the Bell Jar, we see Esther constantly saying things along the lines of “this is so typical of a man” and you know what, examples would work:

“I thought it sounded just like the sort of drug a man would invent. Here was a woman in terrible pain, obviously feeling every bit of it or she wouldn't groan like that, and she would go straight home and start another baby, because the drug would make her forget how bad the pain had been, when all the time, in some secret part of her, that long, blind, doorless and windowless corridor of pain was waiting to open up and shut her in again,” and “Cal seemed pleased. "I've often thought of that. I'd blow my brains out with a gun." I was disappointed. It was just like a man to do it with a gun.”

In both these statements, I see Esther contradicting herself. Let me start with the second one first. “It was just like a man do it with a gun”. Girl, aren’t you trying to kill yourself? You’ve tried so many ways to kill yourself, why not give another one a shot. And you know what, let’s talk about the ways you try to kill yourself (now I understand that these passages where she is trying to kill herself are meant to be comedic, but I’m gonna.. I just wanna comment on them). You try to slit your wrists, but you can’t because your poor skin that’s so soft and mignon because it will hurt. You try to drown but you keep floating back to the top. You try to hang yourself, but you can’t cause you’re weak (let’s face the facts). At this point my head is down. Sigh. Moving on.    

Initially, I was against Esther, when she was hating on Buddy for having sex before marriage. But after re-reading the text I noticed the following line:

“Of course somebody had seduced Buddy, Buddy hadn't started it and it wasn't really his fault (57)”

This made me realize something: Esther wasn’t actually mad (at the beginning) because Buddy had sex, but because he lied to it about Esther, and didn’t tell her. But then the counter side to that is the fact that Buddy does gather up the strenght to tell Esther-- he tells her the truth! So, I don’t really know what to make of that. What I do know is that following this, Esther thinks about the double standards and decides to have “sex” with Constantin. However unpleasing and uninteresting that might have been, she still does it. Once again we’ve rounded back into a circle- what do you make of that?

While I may not agree with most of Esther’s decisions, I must say that some things are understandable. Society (a word that can be used to describe men of that era), at that time, had built a convenient wall of standards for/against women. Esther tries to stand up by rejecting these double standard qualities of society. In this process, Esther has a mental breakdown, and decides to commit suicide. While these numerous suicides show that Esther is not mentally well, we can safely say that society is to blame for them. So, while the Bell Jar does portray Esther’s insanity, it also portrays the “insanity” of the era that drove Esther to become insane. Counter argument: the overwhelming majority of women (aka. 10s of millions of women) didn’t actually go insane, so does society deserve a blame? My answer: Society wasn’t completely messed up at the time, but major reforms were certainly in need, as are today, but for different reasons.   

Monday, March 2nd

So, does Holden Come of Age?

Ah, yes. The question that we kept asking throughout the novel, hoping that at each step Holden would improve, only to see him fall/fail, again and again. But, as I mentioned in class, Thomas Wayne rightly asked the young Batman “Why do we fall, Bruce?... So we can learn to pick ourselves up again.” This is really an important part of Batman Begins (2005) because following this advice, Bruce learns that mistakes are inevitable, and what’s important is how you learn from a mistake to not commit that same mistake again. We see something similar in Holden. Holden has a set of ideals which he chooses to follow (and bend when it fits the situation). Often, however, we see these ideals get him into trouble and he ends up making mistakes, which he then tries to rectify/cover up in the subsequent running commentary/narration. Lots of slashes there, I apologize for that, I hope it’s not too confusing.  

But, we see a turnover in Holden in the last chapter of the novel. However late it might have taken him, we see an incredible growth in him. When Phoebe comes, Holden is slightly kinda shocked:

“She put the suitcase down. "My clothes," she said. "I'm going with you. Can I? Okay?" "What?" I said. I almost fell over when she said that. I swear to God I did. I got sort of dizzy and I thought I was going to pass out or something again .“

As soon as Phoebe says that she wants to go with him, Holden immediately refuses, without even thinking about it. Usually when Holden has to make a decision, we have a semi-long passage about Holden discussing his options, what he should do, or justifying what he is about to do. But here, we see a Holden who is firm on his decision. We see him taking leadership and responsibility for the first time.

What’s important here, is that Holden doesn’t act like coming of age. It’s not an act-- it’s something that happens automatically. He understands that there are some lines that must be drawn and cannot be crossed. But very soon into the scene, Holden recognizes what he’s done wrong. He quits arguing with Phoebe, puts a smile on his face, and like an adult with responsibilities, leads her to the carousel, where he watches her and admires youth. It is at that point that Holden also recognizes that he has crossed his age of youth, and is now an adult.

Sunday, March 1st