More On Beauty

WHAT IS BEAUTY??

The model beautiful
















The real beautiful







There are many different kinds of love and beauty in our world today. People who are in love may or may not turn their loved ones into objects -- of love, of passion, of physical beauty or of many other things. In our culture, beauty has been impoverished to include only things of physical, skinny, model type attraction. This beauty is only visual beauty, that which we see. However, real beauty is actually a juxtaposition of lines and contours.

There is a battle between objectified, conventional beauty and non-conventional beauty is present throughout On Beauty by Zadie Smith. For example, there are many differing impressions of Kiki's beauty in the novel. For example, Zora thinks that her mother has let herself go, while Mrs. Kipps calls her beautiful, and does not mean to offend her when she says she is a large woman but carries it well. Thus, we can see that Carlene Kipps focuses more on the non-conventional beauty while the majority of the Belseys focus on conventional beauty.
There are many other people who are objectified in the novel such as Carl, the man with whom Zora accidentally trades Discmans with at the Mozart concert, and with Claire, Warren's wife who Jerome and Kiki meet at the fair. Claire is also the woman with whom, we later learn, Howard had his affair on Kiki. Initially he lies to her and tells her it was with another random woman from Michigan but this is not true.

At the Mozart concert, we learn a little more about each of the characters. Howard sleeps through most of it, and the only comments he makes are facetious toward his wife's lower class, and of Mozart. Meanwhile, Kiki and especially Jerome are very moved by the music and point to its clear genius. This leads to another argument, as we discussed earlier about what is genius and how we can define it. Howard does not think it was moving and wants to know how to define genius. He is a parody machine, making fun of genius and high art. Meanwhile Carl is listening in to the conversation and thinks of how Mozart dies before it is completed and was finished by someone else. It is this section of the music that was not written by Mozart that Kiki finds so beautiful, and yet this actually redefines genius as collaborative. However, why does this matter to us so much? Perhaps it has to do with defining and understanding the structure but perhaps it is also that we wish to define the "great man." However, the "great man" theory is that which is plaguing our culture about what is art, greatness, genius, and beauty.

Later, we also find out about Howard's relationship with Claire. Claire is described as being much more "beautiful" and intellectual than Kiki. This is threatening to Kiki because these are things she has always worried about in her marriage, especially being of a lower social class than her husband. Kiki frequently feels that she is left out and made fun of for being less of an intellectual and this is one of the main reasons she is so upset when she finds out Claire is the person he had an affair with. She is also upset by the fact that it was more than a one night stand, it was three weeks.

On Beauty

In her interview Zadie Smith states that novels are both political and moral, but that we cannot hit people over the head with our morals. However, she believes that we can use art as an analogy for morals, and that being a good person helps us to make good art. Good art is moral in that it reflects the author's morals; it is someone being truthful in how they see the world. She believes that this is difficult due to self-deception, as the blind spots we have in life are the same that can blind us in art. Zadie Smith is a very relevant example of the "Culture Wars," where there is so-called reverse discrimination, authors and great artists are elevated simply because of their ethnicity and gender.

Zadie Smith vs. 'Zadie Smith'
There is a difference between the real author and the name brand author asked to stand as a symbol for their ethnicity. On the left, they say her first novel was the best book ever written about London. While the real Zadie Smith denies this, the right side claims that it is only the best novel because of her ethnicity and gender. This calls us to question what is great art and artistic genius. If a book is truly moral, it will show us what is moral, even if the author his or herself does not stand within this perception. If it is not moral, we may find that the very thing they criticize is the mirror image of ourselves. There is no totally good or totally bad people, there are only real deep characters. These deep characters, with whom we can identify, has both good and bad qualities. In order to get the full morality of the character, we need to see both the good and bad of a character, which is exactly what we need to do in real life.

In the novel, we encounter this same sort of multicultural dilemma. Jerome is the mediator between the left, his family, where they believe there is no great art, in that everyone can be an artists, and the Kipps family on the right, who believes that only a select few are great artists such as Shakespeare, and Bronte.

In the first part of the novel, we meet the two families the Belsey's who live in the States, with their children Jerome, Zora and Levi, who are very lenient, non-Christian, liberal, and very lax with their children. The eldest son, Jerome, leaves to go back to London to work for Mr. Kipps, a professor who lives very closely with his two children Michael and Victoria and his wife. They are very religious, family oriented, and conservative. Mr. Belsey is white, Kiki is black and their children are mixed but lighter skinned. The Kipps are all dark, from Trinidad.

There is also a big rivalry between Monty and Howard. Both are art professors of the Renaissance of Rembrandt, and while Monty has finished his book, which will be on the best seller's list, Howard's book will be a scholarly book that libraries buy and no one reads. In an interview, Howard criticized Monty's analysis of a painting publicly, but in response, Monty points out that Rembrandt had the wrong painting.

Jerome left to go work for his father's arch-rival, perhaps, according to Kiki, to get his father's attention. Furthermore, perhaps he does not respect his father as much because he had an affair and Kiki stayed with him. Perhaps also he is just different from the rest of his family, or he thinks that the Kipps' family is better than his. In his family, his father cheated, his mother is constantly upset, and he does not truly want his family at this moment. He wants to be a part of this other, "better" family, at least at this moment.

The Wrongs of Women: Mary Wollstonecraft

Mary Wollstonecraft and the Wrongs of Woman



This is another work that calls us to analyze what we value, whether that is with art, careers, family, or our own life goals in general. I liked this piece a lot better than her first part of the novel, "A Vindication of the Rights of Woman," because for me, Maria was much easier and more interesting to read. Wollstonecraft brings a fresh take to her theories as she gives a real life example of the "wrongs of women." In this second volume, the life of the main character Maria is filled with sadness, despair, and poverty due to her gender. She, as well as all the women around her is treated poorly and brutally by husbands, fathers, masters, and all other males in her life. This is also true of her good friend in the story Jemima.

This novella, in my opinion, was also probably much more interesting to write. As an English major, and thus obsessive reader and writer, I am constantly analyzing the words and works from the perspective of narrator and writer. For me, as for Wollstonecraft, it was much more interesting to prove her points beneath the surface, through the thoughts and actions of her characters than through the explicit criticisms of the treatise of Volume I. This is why I enjoyed Maria so much better than the Rights of Women. Wollstonecraft seemed to address the "wrongs of women" with satirical irony, in proving how these wrongs are the circumstantial fault of the wrongs of the men in their lives. And I love irony.

Art and Lies

AS A SIDENOTE: I really wish we had spent more time on this, I liked what we read of this novel! I think I would have preferred to do Mary Wollstonecraft in one sitting, and continued here with Art and Lies.

Homework for Friday: Do a close reading of a particular passage from Handel or Picasso. What question does it stimulate you to ask? What does it answer?

This is a passage from Handel's first section, towards the end, as he addresses British society's acknowledgment or lack thereof of the individual. Handel states,

"It's awkward, in a society where the cult of the individual has never been preached with greater force, and where many of our collective ills are a result of that force, to say that is is to the Self to which one must attend. But the Self is not a random collection of stray desires striving to be satisfied, nor is it only by suppressing such desires, as women are encouraged to do, that any social cohesion is possible. Our broken society is not born out of the triumph of the individual, but out of his effacement. He vanishes, she vanishes, ask they who they are and they will offer you a wallet or a child. 'What do you do?' is the party line, where doing is a substitute for being, and where the shame of not doiing wipes away the thin chalk outline that sketches Husband Wife Banker Actor even Thief. It's comforting, my busy life, left alone with my thoughts I might find I have none. And left to my own emotions? Is there much beyond a childing rage a sentimentality that passes for love?" (24).

For me, this passage stimulates a lot of questions. It seems as though the narrator, Handel, is not only questioning himself and his society, but his reader as well. This passage asks each of us to identify who we are in terms of something more than our actions and dreams. "Doing" as he less than tenderly explains, is not a substitute for being, it is an action associated with it, but they are not synonymous. We cannot be defined with the money we make, our by our friends or children or families, or jobs, or wants. In my opinion, and perhaps also in Handel's we are defined by our thoughts and emotions. In what we think and feel. It is THESE things that influence how we act and what we do. It is not the action that counts, but rather the thoughts, motivation, and intellect behind each action and each decision that define who we are and what we value.

Handel, as with the other two narrators in Art and Lies, has a name with an allusion. Our narrator Handel refers to the great George Frideric Handel, a famous English and German composer of the early 18th century. He, like our Handel, was a man who put things together in an uncommon way to make peace and harmony. Our Handel does the same thing in his ability to question us while soothing our minds. We as readers can easily read this passage and hear Handel's criticism of himself and of his society. We can sense his resentment at their shallow existence, none knowing who they are or what they truly mean. We can easily listen to the top most surface harmony of the song, hear only the chorus, and completely ignore the question to the reader. The passage does not give answers, not for himself or for his readers, regarding the path to Self-discovery. He later mocks this "path" in saying he gave a philosophical book to a friend only to have such friend say, "I'll try and fit it in." How shall I live? Is the question he repeats throughout this passage and chapter. As someone defined by their "wallet or child" or as something more.

Theories on Great Art

Now that's great art: The ordinary and extraordinary



Laura C. Mandell's Theory of literary art. The novel emerged in the 18th century, and the short story came about in 1800. However, the problem with literature and digital media is that now people are saying there is no more great art. The study of "great art" has been replaced by cultural studies, yet we still "worship the great art" of the alienated majesty that is in great art. For example, we project ourselves onto great art, giving credit to these artists and not to ourselves. The problem here is that we leave the great art to the past, without motivation or desire to continue art into the present. We are all artists, but we neglect our inner artists in refusing to consume it.

For example, right now, The Twilight Saga Series, which just came out (2005-2008), is one of the greatest works of pop culture and one of the greatest works of art in my opinion. This series was written by a middle-aged mother of three, an English Literature major who had a dream and wrote down her story. She is now one of the most popular best selling authors of the decade, comparable by many to J.K. Rowling. She's an amateur writer, and her works are by no account classics, but it's an easy read, easily to relate to by many generations, and is terrifically enthralling.

Like this example, as well as the Stand By Me worldwide song we listened to on YouTube, all ordinary people are artists. Instead of wanting to know what the great works of art are, we should dedicate the time, thinking and efforts, we can determine the great works of art for ourselves. Attention is a limited commodity so we want only the classics, only the greats and only the compact versions. However, now there's not enough left open. Now, we need to consider the possibility of considering everything great art, and deciding on our own.

"This painting has nothing to say to me became I have nothing to say to this painting, and i desperately wanted to speak." By saying that a piece of art is bad, without reason, without understanding, it is the same as criticizing the French for not speaking English. We need to be more open to understanding art, and all languages, especially of art.

Digitizing Texts: More on Different Analysis

A Child and Flowers by Mrs. Hemans




Page Image version

"For a day is coming to quell the tone
That rings in thy laughter, thou joyous one!
And to dim thy brow with a touch of care,
Under the gloss of its clustering hair;

And to tame the flash of thy cloudless eyes
Into the stillness of autumn skies;
And to teach thee that grief hath her needful part,
Midst the hidden things of each human heart!"

HTML version

Nature hath mines of such wealth--and thou

Never wilt prize its delights as now!

*For a day is coming to quell the tone

That rings in thy laughter, thou joyous one!

And to dim thy brow with a touch of care.35

Under the gloss of its clustering hair;

And to tame the flash of thy cloudless eyes

Into the stillness of autumn skies;

And to teach thee that grief hath her needful part,

Midst the hidden things of each human heart!*

TEI version


For a day is coming to quell the tone
That rings in thy laughter, thou joyous one!
And to dim thy brow with a touch of care.
Under the gloss of its clustering hair;

And to tame the flash of thy cloudless eyes
Into the stillness of autumn skies;
−

And to teach thee that grief hath her needful part,

Midst the hidden things of each human heart!


In our lines, 33-40, the speaker is talking about the inevitable day when the child will lose his or her innocence. The speaker is fearful for the child to see this, and to learn about grief and reality. It is a kind of superficial way of looking at children and innocence. Overall, this poem suggests that we should enjoy what we can while we can and not dwell in the past. The challenge is that the speaker is addressing a child, who could not read or understand its true meaning. This calls into question who the audience is. To me, the audience seems to be a child, but is meant to remind us of our own childhood, and to not forget our innocence and the little things that used to make us happy. In essence, the speaker is writing to and instructs us to analyze our own inner child. This poem calls us to appreciate the aesthetics in life instead of just going through life and letting the little joys pass us by.

The format of the poem does affect the meaning, but for me it does not necessarily help with processing what is going on and what is significant in the poem. It seems to me that the TEI version of the text does very little to help us understand the poem but it gives us as readers an interesting way of looking at it. Also the use of the different stanzas in the Page Image and HTML versions do help in changing the meaning because they give us different places to pause and focus. However, looking at these different versions is helpful because of both the visual tricks and the compilation of text and image. It allows us as readers to have a new, entirely different experience with the text even if, as frequently happens, we do not fully comprehend it.

And a Different Look at Frankenstein: Tagcloud

1. Create a tag cloud for each Frankenstein passage is small groups using www.tagcrowd.com.

My version was the 1818 Thomas Edition. My tag words were as follows:

admiration although appears believed confidence creature deep desire destroyed eloquence excites flow friend friendship gaze history hope interest life lost manner misery mortal neither night noble notices offended overcome pedantry plan pleased possible powers related respecting several silently speaks stranger succeeded suggested therefore throwing true trust utterly veil wise wish

There were several differences between our three versions of the text. My group found that the two different 1818 versions were much more similar than the 1831 version. Both 1818 editions had "friend" and "deep friend" as well as descriptions of the monster and of friendship. However the 1831 text was much darker, foreign, and brought up themes of conversation as opposed to the other two. Overall, the 1818 versions focus more on the emotions while the 1831 version focuses more on the action and motion.

My key bold words were "deep" and "friend." My key words were although, appears, believed, confidence, creature, desire, eloquence, excites, friendship, interests, misery, noble, powers, speaks, therefore, veil.

This helps to understand and visualize the text by providing different sources of emphasis. To me this is like reading a poem in different tones of voices with differing points of focus. Using this program helps to do so with less work :) .


2. Compare textual versions using JUXTA.
JUXTA allows you to compare two different versions side by side, in a much more detailed manner than tag cloud.

Did Mary Shelley write three different novels?
No I don't believe Shelley wrote three different versions of Frankenstein. I believe that in each revision of the novel, she realized something different about her own characters and adjusted the text and emphasis to support it. In this way, Shelley was able to insure she was portraying the characters to the readers in the way that we would best understanding. I think this is the point to revision: to make sure you explain, in the best way possible, which features and actions of the character are most important for the reader to understand.

In these passages, the stranger agrees to different things. Why do these changes matter?
In both 1818 versions, the stranger suggests that friendship is both desirable and possible to attain. However in the 1831 edition, the stranger explains the benefits of having friendship, and explains why it is desireable and necessary to have. These changes matter because, as stated above, they give us as readers differing insights into the thoughts and points of the author and the characters.

How does digitizing these texts help us think about the different versions?
Digitizing helps us visualize the important points in very different ways. In seeing these different versions we can see the different points that the author chose to emphasize each time she revised her novel. In this way we can get a better understanding of both the author's intentions and characterization of those she tries to portray.