We'll soon be coming to the ending of Silence which, I'm going to assume, will frustrate a lot of people. I'm not sure what I was expecting regarding Silence's end as I read through the text but I know that I was not expecting the ending we got. Prof. Wenthe noted that I argued in my presentation that the ending of Silence need not be a statement that the restoration of gender categories wins at the end of the day and I hold by that statement which puts me at odds with Sharon Kinoshita. But I don't know if I would say that I am optimistic - as Prof. Wenthe puts it - about the ending. The ending to me just represents one of the many ways that gender can manifest itself in the text and need not represent THE way - hence, possibility as opposed to limitation. Otherwise, Silence's end would be a major letdown.
I think the text practices a form of contained subversion which would address why the text seemingly seems to reinforce traditional conceptions of gender while, at the same time, reinforcing a less conventional, more unstable one. In order for the text to "pass" it must conform to normative values and ideologies but underneath this layering is one that threatens to plunge these same normative values and ideologies into disarray. And, so, Silence's end is just a ruse (I hope) in order to deflect attention away from those aspects of the text that might be deemed too controversial or revolutionary.
It's unfortunate that we have no record of its reception in the thirteenth century because I think such information would really help us determine what may or may not be happening in the text.
Aia, I agree, the end is frustrating! For me, perhaps this is because I was given much hope throughout the poem that Silence could be someone who transcends gender lines--could both be a valiant and respected knight and the most beautiful woman Nature ever created. And while Silence does achieve this, I was most disappointed that, in the end, the poet pointed to her as a sort of anomaly. The poet goes of the way to say that women are not usually this loyal, and we should really celebrate this instance; for me it was the poet's attitude that deflated Silence's achievements.
ReplyDeleteAia, I apologize if I mischaracterized your reading with the term "optimistic"; I appreciate the clarification here on the blog.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the "contained subversion" you describe, I'm reminded of the ending of the book of Job, which looks at first like a similar case where a conventional belief (good behavior is rewarded) gets the last word despite much compelling evidence to the contrary (in the sufferings inflicted on Job despite his goodness). I agree that it's too bad we don't have a record of the poem's reception; on the other hand, it's also possible that it would have been misunderstood in its own time.
Thanks for your comment, Prof. Wenthe. I hadn't thought of the book of Job in that way before but, yes, I do see now the similarities with Silence.
ReplyDeleteI actually had George Eliot on the brain when I was thinking of Silence, particularly Middlemarch. Dorothea's end is a conventional one for women - she is an "unsung Theresa" or however Eliot puts it - but there's still something in the fact that Dorothea tries to move beyond gender expectations and do "noble" work that is worth keeping in mind, even after the novel's end.