In a world in which Gender is pre-dominantly binary it is difficult for society to accept the possibility of a third gender: the intersexual individual. Gender is used as one of the key features of an individual to assume a definition of the behavior codes, ethics, psychological traits and any other personality attributes that one individual may possess. It is a nature of habit in the most innocent of behaviorisms to attempt to categorize an intersexual individual into male or female. So when presented with the narrator of Written on the Body, the reader automatically searches to identify all associated features of the narrator, therefore gender identification is usually placed near the top of that list. For several reasons, we as readers will, when reading a novel, or as spectators watching a film, attempt to identify with a character, specifically the main character in an effort to obtain a better understanding of the material in front us.
It is not uncommon for women to identify with other female characters due to the society we live in. Certain prejudices and gender role conformism presented to one woman maybe the experience of another. An example of this is being the less dominant partner in a relationship, or the one that stays home with the kids, or the one that works while solely simultaneously maintaining the home in a wifely manner. Likewise it is not uncommon for men to identify with a male character for several shared seemingly gender oriented behavior. How well an individual fits to the stereotypical determines societal appreciation levels of a person they don’t even no. A man can either follow the gender code and be a Manly Man or actively disregard it and be called a Girly Man. Women can do either of the same and be labeled Womanly or Tomboyish.
Based on the behaviorism of the text, the Genderless narrator would more likely be male than female based on societal standards for acceptable male behavior against acceptable female behavior.
In his or her relationship with Louise, as many have pointed out, he or she is the dominant partner. Louise is a static character without much say in her own life throughout the novel. She is usually under some form of manipulation by either the Genderless narrator or by Elgin. This is not to say that Louise herself did not have any say when it came to what partner she wanted or how her sex life was to be regard both persons, however everything regarding Louise is placed in the realm of physicality. Historically women were treated as objects, their body not in their possession, although being able to have feelings and infatuations the liberties taken with her body were not usually of her choice but that of some male figure. Likewise descriptions of Louise usually pertain to her physical form, the red of her hair and the burning scar under lip, the paleness of her skin. Even the issue of her health was an issue trying to be controlled by both Elgin and the Genderless narrator, illustrating dominant roles in a relationship usually that of a man.
Promiscuity and a high sex drive can stereotypically be associated with men. When a man has a high sexual appetite and sleeps with a large amount of girls he is thought of as a ‘Player’ or ‘the Man’ or some positive term. A woman in that role is called a slut or a whore and viewed in negative light. The narrator’s sexuality hasn’t really been marred extensively in the novel by other characters on the grounds of being slutty or whoring.
The fight between Elgin and the Genderless narrator can also be regarded as sexist in the sense of Elgin being so brutal in fighting a man or a woman. Most viewer would find the fight appalling on the grounds of a man beating up a woman as Elgin did to the narrator, however if it were two men fighting the scene is less appalling. In most situations men are less inclined to even enter a fight with women let alone be so brutal unless they are an abuser, something that has not been explored in Elgin’s character. Conclusively if a gender were to be found in the novel based on the previous information the narrator would most like be male, however all of these gender traits maybe applied to either sex hence the ability to write about a Genderless narrator.
I am glad that at least someone agrees that it is just as equally a male. I saw some similarities between thinking it was a female at first but then I had more of that "instinct" that if they were written for a gender it would most likely be male. Exactly how you put it is how I thought of it in terms of gender. All of those gender traits are applied to each sex and can be interchanged. I absolutely could not have said your words better myself: "Gender is used as one of the key features of an individual to assume a definition of the behavior codes, ethics, psychological traits and any other personality attributes that one individual may possess." We pick and choose certain characteristics to explain the behavior of a gendered person but when the gender is not clear we see that we can apply those same characteristics to both males and females. This in itself completely makes the assumptions we have been reading for invalid. We can try as much as we want but that is not the real idea behind the book. We are meant to understand the exact opposite of searching for a gender, which is realizing that it's not important at all.
ReplyDeleteThat is what I think is so great about this book, you must think in order to get something from it. The novel took me beyond my own issues with gender and allowed me to look behind the veil so to speak. I don't think either gender is a bad thing, I think when we are looking to denote a gender we put the other gender down. I have seen people with both traits listed in this novel and they be the opposite sex of the trait. I have seen myself included, argue with a couple of men in my life and would have fought had it come to that. I did not think about it, it was just what it was. There are loads of men who will walk away from a fight and loads of women who won't.
ReplyDeleteIn trying to give the Narrator a gender, we are in fact doing what people normally do, look for certain traits that say conclusively male or female when perhaps the individual is neither or both. Rather than close the box looking for gender, open the box and set both male and female free. It means we have to begin to look at people as human beings rather than what sex. As we are reconstructing the world, we have to reconstruct ours.
When presented with gender, people do try to categorize where the person fits in be it in the category of male or female. I found myself through out the book, Written on the Body, trying to desperately put the narrator in one of these categories so I could “identify” with them. When writing papers on this book, I had to be very conscious of making sure that I wrote “the narrator” every time I was referring to the main character. It was quite a struggle to write “the narrator” or something non-gender like, it or they every single time the narrator was referred to. I several times had to back track because I had written he or she. I desperately want to know if it was a man or woman, again so I could identify with the character. However, even more so that I could paint an imaginary picture of the narrator of the story. It was very hard for me to read with out a gender association, as that is how I identify with the characters in a book. To not be able to have an image of the narrator made the narrator a one dimensional character to me as were most of the characters in the book.
ReplyDeleteTsk tsk... Ashaki I see that the factor of a genderless narrator plagued you as well I am so happy I am not alone. Why do you think this bothered us so much? In your blog you picked out characteristics that were typically associated with a male as well as stating that the narrator was dominated which I got that vibe to. However I do not agree with you that the if men decide to disregard social stereotypes they are considered a girlie men I would just consider them more educated than most men and there is nothing wrong with that . I think the issues come in when people are trapped in perceptions for example promiscuity being associated with men I think that is just as false as all men who like to smell good and dress nice or even get manicures are gay. I believe that it is impossible to ignore the obvious and gender does shape are society and that is what it is. But educated people like ourselves Ashaki can be apart from the ignorance and point it out. However I don’t see myself becoming a activist on gender equality and putting the human back in a person no time soon.
ReplyDelete