Magical Creature As Orality Threat Against Ontological Security Through Children's Desire

                Literary works have not only used as a medium of entertainment, but can also be used as a medium to convey ideologies or doctrines which are often implicitly inserted into the story she told so unconsciously, the reader will gradually follow the doctrine/understanding/ideas that are embedded in it. This is where the criticism is needed.

                According to Frye, “One obvious function of criticism is to mediate between the artist and his public” (in The Function Of Criticism At The Present Time, p. 34) the unique thing is, delivered a critique of a work or a policy, tradition, politics, etc. can be done via any medium through including novels such as 'Five Children And It' by Edith Nesbit.

               

With magical being named Psammead, sand-fairy that can grant any wishes that is spoken by people who find it though each of those wishes can only be granted until sunset. And there are also figures of five children humans who find Psammead near their house.

                Based on the brief description above, the novel Five Children And It is a fantasy genre novel (Magical Realism)

“Fantasy is a fiction evoking wonder and containing a substantial and irreducible element of the supernatural with which mortal characters in the story or the readers become at least partially familiar terms.” (Manlove, 1975, p. 1 in Exploring Children’s Literature – Teaching the Language and Reading the Fiction, p. 100)

because there are magically being and human beings whom interacts with each other in the story. In addition, from its setting, this novel can also be put into the category of 'low fantasy'

“In low fantasy, non-rational happenings occur in the rational world.” (in Exploring Children’s Literature – Teaching the Language and Reading the Fiction, p. 102)

In addition, any of the content of the story of this novel can be classified into fantasy for children that their wishes, which are always granted by the Psammead always brought problems that make children learned a valuable lesson. It is similar to Gamble and Yeats:

“A fantasy story in which magic is used to educate the children to think more carefully about what they wish for as wishes may well come true.” (in Exploring Children’s Literature – Teaching the Language and Reading the Fiction, p. 102)

Interestingly, Edith Nesbit interpreted evidence that the lesson or wisdom can only be obtained if we try not to be tied to the concept of good and bad which is taught through a variety of advice which used to stick to "they said...". If understanding in each chapter of this novel is matched with a concept that is already known to us on a daily basis, it seems to be quite difficult because here Nesbit precisely conveys her message by inverting understanding / existing doctrine.

This method is similar to the theory of deconstruction that is being stated in Miller's:

“Derrida, […] argues that we lead to think and express our thoughts in terms of opposites. […] these dichotomies, […] contain one term that our culture views as being superior and one term viewed as negative as inferior. Sometimes the superior or positive term seems only subtly positive […], whereas sometimes we know immediately which term is culturally preferable […]. But always the hierarchy exists.” (in Deconstruction, p. 200)

Among childhood, the understanding of good and bad or right and wrong come through imitate the adults or the advice they get from their parents. Even so, they (the children) just follow all doctrines, unconsciously, they are not becoming obedient because they want to be obedient but because they have to obey.

An understanding of good / bad and right / wrong that children primarily obtained from adults and the environment is their “comfort zone” because they know it is inherited from generation to generation so that it can assume that if it all obeyed, then their lives will be safe and peaceful Giddens refers to this as "ontological security" which is

“… a basic needs of individuals for a state of continuity and order in events, including those not directly within the perceptual environment of the individual. (in “State Personhood in Ontological Security Theories of International Relations and Chinese Nationalism: A Sceptical View”, p. 243 in Chinese Journal of International Politics Vol.2, p. 111)

In Five Children And It, the children are always faced with problems which aims to give them a real experience of the dichotomy of 'good-bad' as they bear the risk for any request that they ask on the only magical being character in this novel.

Psammead, magical figure being presented as the main axis of the story in this novel is a sand-fairy in charge of granting any request made by children (Robert, Anthea, Cyril, Jane, Lamb) who discovered it while their requests are often unreasonable and impossible to be realized within a short time by humans.

This figure seems to be the originator of the ontological security threatening causes for children because if this figure does not appear, then the kids will continue to follow the mindset of the 'good-bad' based on what they've heard from parents and the environment only. In short, they will be taking the ideas about good and bad for grantedness because they do not give it a try first. The understanding obtained in such a way that finally makes children misjudge their own environment.

Through Psammead, children earlier (excluding Lamb) alternately, asking for their wishes ranging from the reasonable wishes like wealth to unreasonable as having wings and growing up in a single day. Some of the chapters in this novel, even imply a somewhat political message and it seems a bit strange if delivered to children, such as a gendered issue to determine the power and powerlessness.

Since the days of the Prophet have been described and emphasized many times regarding the position between men and women were women always were below men. This doctrine eventually evolved in societies, passed on orally, and unwittingly, either adults or kids end up feeling comfortable with the existing gendered patterns and living trapped inside.

Nesbit interpreted the evidence in trying to criticize these things in different ways. Not with had called for feminist action, as what was done in Mohanty’s essay which eagerly declared that women should not stay silent

“But first she would have to speak, start speaking, stop saying that she has nothing to say! Stop learning in school that women are created to listen, to believe, to make no discoveries.” (in Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses, p.50)

He even criticized by insinuating men who supposedly have greater power to slowly follow the flow.

Although there are some parts that look underestimate / degrading to women as when the narrator says Anthea aspires to be 'a good servant' (p. 28); When the narrator says "You can always make girls believe things much easier than you can boys." (p. 30) as saying that women are easier to believe something, more innocent, and easier to and more easily manipulated than men; and decisions taken by Anthea on the appointment of Robert as spokesman when they want to buy a horse (p. 56).

But it's all just for the satirical notion that men have higher degrees/power than female if viewed the fact that Anthea, who find the Psammead and she is also the first finally decided on their 'contract' with Psammead. Women here act as a portal for all magic that happens, men do not contribute anything, they just pretend to have a role.

In addition, gender issues also arise when there is time they are dealing with a problem or confusion, one of them there are just referring to their father's advice by saying 'father say ...'. Although the children in this story experienced magical events, their parents were both absent, but the kids were just remembering what was said of her father, her mother is not at all involved.

Highly appears that the role of fathers has successfully shifted the role of the mother supposed to be the closest to the children But again, this is a satire that says “where is your father when the entire of his family need him?” When the mother came home, discovered the diamonds in her room, feeling the peculiarity that occurred while she was not at home, and then because she feel unsafe situations, nimbly without commanded by anyone she immediately secured her children at home and went to the police station without her husband (the last chapter).

In the Portals of Power explained that "the Nesbit's children's stories usually contain at least an underlying political concern." (in Portals of Power: Magical Agency and Transformation in Literary Fantasy, p. 71). This also applies to the novel Five Children And It when the four children were discussing servant’s habit after seeing Martha, the servant, would bring Lamb to meet her relatives.

“Servants never dream anything but the things in the Dream-book like snakes and oysters and going to a wedding-that means a funeral, and snakes are a false female friend, and oysters are babies.” –Anthea (p. 41)

“Servants do like taking babies to see their relations, […]; I’ve noticed it before-especially in their best things.” –Cyril (p. 42)

“Inspect they pretend they’re their own babies, and that they’re not servants at all, but married to noble dukes of high degree, and they say the babies are the little dukes and duchesses. –Jane (p. 42)

“She won’t enjoy herself most frightfully carrying our infant duke to Rochester, […] not if she’s anything like me-She won’t” –Robert (p. 42)

Thoughts which they say is the comments/responses are commonly made by adults to the servant who likes to invite children to their employers when they meet up with family or relatives.

The way children perceive about the servant seem to be opinions which stated dishonestly by themselves, they just re-stating what have been taught among their surrounding environment, as expressed by Manlove:

“We have to emphasize that hegemony is not singular; indeed that its own internal structures are highly complex, and have continually to be renewed, recreated and defended; and by the same token, that they can be continually challenged and in certain respect modified.” (in Base And Superstructure In Marxist Cultural Theory, p. 458)

Which is applied when the children were arrested on charges of committing theft because they brings a lot of gold pieces from Psammead, they met Martha, their servant, who ultimately defend the children so they do not arrest by the police.

 “If you’re quite done a-browbeating of the innocent children, […] I’ll hire a private carriage and we’ll drive home to their papa’s mansion. You’ll hear about this again young man - I told you they hadn’t got any gold, when you were pretending to see it in their poor helpless hands. It’s early in the day for a constable on duty not to be able to trust his own eyes. As to the other one, the less said the better; he keeps the Saracen’s Head, and he knows best what his liquor’s like.” (p. 61)

This makes the assumption about the servant that they get from the adults and their environment proved to be wrong. In fact, the maid is not as bad as the description given by adults and/or their environment.

                Issues regarding the stereotype that "inherited" from generation to generation as it happens to the class differences were also occurring amid race issue as it happened when Robert unintentionally ask for the third wish:

“Anybody would want him, indeed! Only they don’t; Martha doesn’t, not really, or she’d jolly well keep him with her. He’s a little nuisance, that’s what he is. It’s too bad. I only wish everybody did want him with all their hearts; we might get some peace in our lives.” (p. 71)

At the location where the Psammead usually appears as Martha as let Lamb while they themselves do not want to bring him wherever they go. Until this request dragging them into a big problem; Lamb was kidnapped by Lady Chittenden and ended up with four brothers struggle to escape from the Gipsy and bring him back home.

                But that appears here is precisely the Gipsy then constituted as the majority (master) and children (white) became minority (slave) which experienced pressure from the Gipsy as they would accuse of acting rude towards their group.

“Oh Yes! […] and then fetch the police with a pack of lies about it being your baby instead of ours! D’jever catch a weasel asleep?” (p. 82)

Even after sunset even the kids were still ignored by the Gipsy; treated as if their presence is not at all expected. Only Amelia, who still care about them even after the Psammead’s magic is gone, he still shows his attention to them

“Let me give him a kiss, miss– I don’t know what made us go for to behave so silly. Us gipsies don’t steal babies whatever they may tell you when you’re naughty. We’ve enough of our own, mostly. But I’ve lost all mine.” (p. 87)

And the gap between them seems to disappear after Lamb kissed Amelia (Gipsy woman) with dry lips, not wet as that of babies in general.

                Nesbit ways that reverse the situation between whites and colored it as if to affirm that racial difference is not important anymore. As in the following quote:

“In a society like ours, where most people take their race to be a significant aspect of their identity, it comes as a shock to many to learn that there is a fairly widespread concensus in the sciences of biology and anthropology that the word “race”, at least as it used in most unscientific discussions, refers to nothing that sciences should recognize as real.” (in Race, p. 277)

                Things threaten ontological security of these children also appeared in Five Children And It on page 90 that begins with their desire to write a letter to his mother, but eventually the plan is arguably failed because of things that sounds very silly. The four of them write letters but there is not one single letter that is managed well written.

                A letter written by Anthea exposed to spills ink and there’s no time to re-write or to fix it; Robert did not even know what to write, he finally just had to draw a ship in the paper; Cyril was already finished writing the letter, but somehow, the letter is lost when he was trying to trap slugs; Jane is the only one who almost succeeded but failed also because she takes a long time to think about the proper spelling for "Psammead" so it is not clear what she really wanted to said through the letter.

                Although these ideas don't come as one of their wishes to Psammead, but their ontological security would be threatened / annoyed by the absence of their letter which managed to convey their feelings and stories about the Psammead. The failure of these letters, implicitly states that children should not be voicing their arguments/opinions/problems/stories/guts to outsiders, as if they were silenced. Prohibited from written language, whereas orally, they know want they wanted to say.

                Instead of they are not able to write, they could have written all their guts, but it seems to be used to criticize the written culture and literate people, Nesbit switches the things around so that readers are aware that written language/literate culture is not everything because there's still an oral language as the former of written language.

According to the cases which I read in the Five Children And It (some I've mentioned and explain a little bit above), almost all requests on Psammead children will end up with a severe, mild, big and/or small problem. In addition, the Psammead’s position could relate gratitude as a trigger for an explosion that could cause problems, orality is also very involved to ontological security threat to children because all of their requests to Psammead only be granted if it was stated by using oral language.

                Five Children And It by Edith Nesbit was published in 1902 when the Victorian era had just ended and entered the Edwardian era (1901). Through this novel, Nesbit criticized the Edwardian era by creating a story that is contrary to the traditions/practices/policies/norms/regulations on Edwardian era as evident gap between the children of working-class group with a group of upper-class from what they can and cannot read, the game should and should not be done by girls and boys, regularity/subservience to older people, manners, until the location which usually used for upper class’ residences during the Edwardian era.

Through orality that can grant children, Psammead actually petrify children to be a robot, an automaton, without personal autonomy of action, an it without subjectivity as follows:

“The ‘magical’ act whereby one may attempt to turn someone else into stone, by ‘petrifying’ him; and, by extension, the act whereby one  negates the other person’s autonomy, ignores his feelings, regards him as a thing, kills the life in him.” (in The Divided Self: An Existential Study in Sanity and Madness, p. 46)

This is what is actually done by the Psammead. No matter what is being experienced by the children, they must make a wish every day. Initially this may be an opportunity that seems very nice, but after a long time, it makes the children become like a cyborg who routinely did that not because they really wanted to, but because it must be forced to.

References:

Appiah, K.A. (1990). “RACE” in Critical Terms for Literary Study,. ed. Lentricchia, Frank and McLaughlin, Thomas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

 Arnold, Matthew. (2004).“The Function of Criticism in Our Present Time” in Critical Theory Since Plato, Wordsworth

 Campbell, Lori M. (2010). Portals of Power: Magical Agency and Transformation in Literary Fantasy. North Carolina: McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers.

 Gamble, N. and Sally , Y. (2002). Exploring Children’s Literature – Teaching the Language and Reading the Fiction. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.

Krolikowski, A. (2008). “State Personhood in Ontological Security Theories of International Relations and Chinese Nationalism: A Sceptical View” in Chinese Journal of International Politics, Vol. 2, (pg. 109–133) downloaded from: http://cjip.oxfordjournals.org/

Laing, R. D. (1964). The Divided Self: An Existential Study in Sanity and Madness. London: Penguin Books.

Miller, J. Hillis.1989. “A Deconstructive Critic at Work” in Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness: A Case Study in Contemporary Criticism ed. Murfin, Ross C. (1989). New York: St. Martin’s Press  

Mohanty, Chandra .T. Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses. downloaded from:  jemym.no-ip.com/uwe.pdf

Nesbit, E. (1993). Five Children and It. Wordsworth Classics

Thompson, P. (1922). THE EDWARDIANS: The remaking of British society (2^nd edition). London: Routledge.

Williams, Raymond.(1994). “Base and Superstructure” in Contemporary Literary Criticism ed. Con Davis, Robert and Schleifer, Ronald. New York and London: Longman Publishing Group.     

Human Identity and Their Sims

Cissy Tri Aninditha

180410110045

Response 1 (Draft 4)

On the discussion about "Structure" I'm still a bit confused with the essence of ideology if at the end, each ideology that was built by a person, will also be demolished or deconstructed by the same person and it will continue to be repeated as the phase of life lived by the subject / individual. Then why subject painstakingly shaping their ideology and identity of each?

That question seems to be answered through group discussion last week about the “Desire and Self”. The identity of a subject consciously and unconsciously done through the processes of mimicking / imitating / mimetic / mimic / mockery that explained by a quote from Samuel Weber's formulation of the marginalizing vision of castration in Bhabha’s “Of Mimicry and Man: The Ambivalence of Colonial Discourse”

“Colonial mimicry is the desire for a reformed, recognizable Other, as a subject of a difference that Is almost the same but not quite.” (p. 126)

Regarding the issue of “the same but not quite” discussed in Bhabha's essay by describing people of India who tried to fit in with the surrounding environment so that they can be recognized as a European / English people. The same is clearly illustrated in the novel “A Backward Place” by Ruth Prawer Jhabvala where some characters which obviously Indians are trying hard to adjust themselves to the lifestyle and culture of Americans even though in the end they still are Indians.

Examples of other cases regarding the mimetic discussed in our group is the game titled "The Sims" which is a simulation of human social life. In the game, each player is free to give a name to their virtual characters, build their character’s home, set the number of its family members, physical appearance, sex selection, emotions, skills, weaknesses, nature, emotions, things like, etc. so that virtual characters played really resemble real humans. Interestingly, almost everyone I know who play this game creates a virtual character with physical appearance similar to their appearance in the real world, while there also people who create their virtual characters on the Sims by adding the properties that purposes is to tend to be ideal and different from their (the Sims players’) natural character in the real world .

I see this is quite interesting because through the actual process of mimicry, subjects who did that looks like as if they having a half identity as the A (original Identity) and a half identity as the B (Identity of which they tried to imitate) in one physical body. After all, if such thing happens then the subject don't have an identity? Because even though there are two kinds of different identities, but each only a part of it; instead it just like throwing his own identity? So what they want from the mimetic process? Referring to Lacan in “The Mirror Stage as Formative of the Function of the I as Revealed in Psychoanalytic Experience” mimetic processes that exist in the two cases above are part of the “Mirror Stage” "to form the "Self" by imagining the figure of the "Ideal-I" to be imitated.

Regarding the figure of the "Ideal-I" which was used as a target or object mimicry/mimetic, Lacan in "The Instance of the Letter in the Unconscious or Reason Since Freud" said that

“The desired object is a substitute for the real unattainable object (the mother’s body; the original lost unity) whose residue in the unconscious provokes desire. Such desire can only move from one desired object to another; it never attain its goal of restoring that lost unity of the self.” (p. 447)

Furthermore, Lacan also mentioned that

 “What the psychoanalytic experience discovers in the unconscious is the whole structure of language.” (p. 447)

 This is because the signs are emerging from Self's unconscious can also be regarded as a language, though not written, nor in oral form. The entanglement between the “Self” which is formed by the desire of the subject's unconscious is also reaffirmed by Lacan that

“The elementary structures of culture reveals an ordering of possible exchanges which, even if unconscious, is conceivable outside the permutations authorized by language.” (p. 448)

Back to the problem of the 'Mirror Stage', in Lacan's essay (The Mirror Stage as Formative of the Function of the I as Revealed in Psychoanalytic Experience) explained about the functionality or the background of the occurrence of the imitation/mimic phase,

“The mirror stage is a drama whose internal thrust is precipitated from insufficiency to anticipation and which manufactures for the subject, caught up in the lure of spatial identification, the succession of phantasies that extends from a fragmental body-image to a form of its totality that I shall call orthopaedic –and lastly to the assumption of the armor of an alienating identity which will mark with its rigid structure the subject’s entire mental development.” (p.444)

 The usage of the word "armor" as having an implicit meaning that mimetic or mimicry or mockery is performed as an effort to establish identity, but really it's just a business for people who do want to feel safe / protected in an environment because by imitating other people (who are in the same or different environments) then the perpetrators of mimicry would assume that he is equal to those as the imitated object and it could be used to avoid social sanctions such as excluded or considered odd if he is different from his own, is not the same / similar to people who exist and share the same environment with).

However, the mimicry has consequences to be borne either by the person who does it as well as by people in the surrounding areas, such as the Bhaba adopt from Weber's that,               

“The effect of mimicry on the authority of colonial discourse is profound and disturbing.” (p.126)

Because besides mimicry is the sign of a double articulation, mimicry also a sign of the inappropriate so, however, they were made efforts to get recognition for an identity that they fethisised, it will not happen. On the contrary, it will only make his identity more complicated because the process of mimicry/mimetic arising from the existence of a variety of ambivalence that tried, but could not be removed because its nature that cannot be changed / permanent. 

WORK CITED:

Bhabha, Homi. 1984. “Of Mimicry and Men: The Ambivalence of Colonial Discourse” in October, Vol. 28, Discipleship: A Special Issue on Psychoanalysis (Spring, 1984; pp.125-133). The MIT Press retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/778467

Jhabvala, Ruth Prawer. 2005. The Backward Place. Great Britain: John Murray (Publishers)

Lacan, Jacques. 1957. “The Instance of the Letter in the Unconscious or Reason Since Freud” in Literary Theory: An Anthology ed. Rivkin, Julie and Ryan, Michael (2004, 2nd edition; pg. 447-460). United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing.

Lacan, Jacques. 1966. “The Mirror Stage as Formative of the Function of the I as Revealed in Psychoanalytic Experience” in Literary Theory: An Anthology ed. Rivkin, Julie and Ryan, Michael (2004, 2nd edition; pg. 441-446). United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing.

Forming “Real” Ideology By Criticizing Every Ideology

Earlier in my response, entitled “The Critical Necessary of Literary Studies”, I mentioned that:

----------------------------------------

Horace in “Art of Poetry” looks so supportive necessity of poetry through a variety of rhetorical words such as

“All mortal things shall perish; still less shall the currency and charm of words always endure. Many words that have lapsed in use will be reborn, and may now in high repute will die, if custom wills it, within whose power lie the judgement, rule, and standard of speech.” (in “Art of Poetry”, p. 80)

Because of the arbitrary nature of language has words that can continue to grow and develop. However, Horace emphasizes

“Neither proper words nor lucid order will be lacking to the writer who chooses a subject within his powers.” (in “Art of Poetry”, p.79)

Starting seen that in writing too, there can be social inequalities because each person has the habit to write, but the writing that they make should be in accordance with their level / degree of social and experiences.

It seems intended to avoid mistakes that occur when a writer tries to avoid monotony in his work in a manner that does not insert his usual part, or by inserting the section is completely foreign to him (possibly just by inserting his story, or experimenting with an experience that he himself had never experienced it). When something like that happens, there is the possibility of emotion as well as information about the things that he wanted to convey to his audience could not be delivered because the audience failed or was misrepresented so that the emotions were not as it should be.

It is also common to the mimetic. Many writers are forced to imitate a figure, but ultimately failed when the audience realizes that what it was being done only ‘imitate the real action.’ The point of urbanity is “…the ideal of poetic style is to mould familiar material with such skill that anyone might hope to achieve the same feat” in “Art of Poetry”, p.82)

When orthodoxy codifies unorthodox, just as in Schole’s English Apparatus, unorthodox may become worse when new information or new events require adaptation and adjustment. As a result, the letters are mostly located in the stronghold of unorthodox undergoing some sort of clash due to their initial belief that suddenly affected by the codes of the orthodox. This will further problematize our understanding of the place of literature in everyday socio-cultural activities.

Especially, if orthodoxy can codify unorthodoxy as in the following quote

“Orthodoxy replies by codifying an orthodox behavior, setting  aside times and places for approved Saturnalias, designating certain attire as the jester’s special clothing, and telling poets they have a “license” to be odd” (in “The English Apparatus”, p.2)

I thought the point of “telling poets they have a" license "to be odd" is a threat or at least a warning that with the influence of the Orthodox in this manner does not remove the creativity of poets but thus blurring the creativity itself.

One of the aspects that could be affected is the genre. As an element that formed from the composition of the various codes, genres must be able to unite the diverse similar code into a masterpiece. This will be difficult if the codes are popping up in a work/writing is a mixture of two camps-orthodox and unorthodox.

On the one hand, the unorthodox want codes are retained, but on the other hand, the orthodox also sets its own codification on the same paper Finally, both codes will eventually bump into and out of sync so that when 

“Orthodoxy replies by codifying an orthodox behavior, setting  aside times and places for approved Saturnalias, designating certain attire as the jester’s special clothing, and telling poets they have a “license” to be odd” (in “The English Apparatus”, p.1-2) 

means that it might further problematize our understanding of the place of literature in everyday socio-cultural activities.

Through some comparison between the literature of various sciences such as mathematics, psychology, biology and physics, I often see Frye defend literature or Linguistics in “The Function of Criticism in Our Present Time” because as one of the fields of science, literature has a trait that is not absolute as an exact science. Linguistics or literature in this regard is very likely to be included in the critical review. However, that's what so troubled Indonesian in our contemporary social and economic discourse.

In Indonesia, apparently questioning, argumentative, and/or denied a variety of general theory which is already rooted in society and is believed to be the right is a statement that could be considered taboo and not allowed to criticize such a theory publicly. This is a problem because if everyone who studies the cultural studies can criticize various writing/opinion/theory using a variety of reference then the results will be considered subjective.

The arbitrary nature of language, too, which then makes the English studies and cultural/literary studies in Indonesia became more complicated, as stated by Scholes

“The reason for this is that research is ancillary to criticism, but the critic to whom the researcher should entrust his materials hardly exist” (in The English Apparatus, p.39)

Meanwhile, in "The Resistance to Theory", De Man explained about the truth (warnheit) that can be used as a tool for pursing warheit became a foregone conclusion. But, as in the excerpt

“The local manifestations of this resistance are themselves systematic enough to warrant one’s interest” (in “The Resistance to Theory”, p.1320)

During the convergence process is very likely to arise Warheit resistance to theory, if it's not in line with the method.

When this happens, resistance to theory could arise due to a variety of arguments and references used to warrant one's interest, pointing out things like the following

“It upsets roots ideologies by revealing the mechanics of their workings; it goes against a powerful philosophical tradition of which aesthetics is the most prominent part; it upsets the established canon of literary works and blurs the borderlines between literary and non-literary discourse.” (in “The Resistance to Theory”, p.1322)

On the other hand, Schole in “The English Apparatus” seemed to support the resistance of theory through this citation:
 

“In an age of manipulation, when our students are in dire need of critical strength to resist the continuing assaults of all the media, the worst thing we can do is to foster in them an attitude of reverence before texts” (in “The English Apparatus”, p.16)

the rest of the reverential attitude, Scholes found that

“…what is needed is a judicious attitude: scrupulous to understand, alert to probe for blind spots and hidden agendas, and, finally, critical, questioning, skeptical.” (in “The English Apparatus”, p.16)

Thus, I conclude that literary studies, have an important role in our society as a human being, considering we are all inseparable from literary studies and language proficiency becomes important because it includes not only linguistic but also can sharpen our logic, teach us to be skeptical, and prevent the habit of "taking for grantedness". Literary studies can also increase our sensitivity to the conditions surrounding and among other societies.

---------------------------------------------------

Actually, although I would argue that the language has an important role in every aspect of human life, when I wrote that, I still have a question about “if everyone has a different opinion, If every person has a different opinion, then which is the most acceptable, or at least the closest opinion of what is regarded as true?”

But the question seems to be answered through an understanding of the ideology expressed by Althusser in Belsey's "Constructing the Subject: Deconstructing the Text" that

 “Within the existence of ideology it appears ”obvious” that people are autonomous individuals, possessed of subjectivity or consciousness which is the source of their beliefs and actions. That people are unique, distinguishable, irreplaceable identities is “the elementary ideological effect.(ibid., p.160)” (in Belsey’s Constructing the Subject: Deconstructing the Text, p. 356)

previously, also said that “Ideology has no creators in that sense, since it exists necessarily.” (in Belsey’s “Constructing the Subject: Deconstructing the Text”, p. 356). If the ideology called "has no creators" then how could nearly every inhabitant of the world today know even stated different ideologies that belongs to each of them?

Althusser refers to Marx's opinion regarding ideology, argued that the definition of Ideology is

“not the system of the real relations which govern the existence of individuals, but the imaginary relation of those individuals to the real relations in which they live” (Althusser 1971, p.155 in Belsey’s “Constructing the Subject: Deconstructing the Text”, p.355)

Above mentioned that ideology has a relationship with human life either in real as well as imaginary. This happens because humans are maintaining relationships between each other and that they gain an understanding of the various norms that they must be adhered to and to live within the norms themselves eventually they can conclude what is believed by them as something that must be adhered to in living their life. However, the relationship between ideology and human life can also be said to be imaginary because by observing the surrounding conditions, they can understand what they should think and behave; It will all be able to form their respective ideologies.

“It is important to stress, of course, that ideology is in no sense a set of deliberate distortions foisted upon a helpless working class by a corrupt and cynical bourgeoisie (or upon victimized women by violent and power hungry men). (in Belsey’s “Constructing the Subject: Deconstructing the Text”, p.356)

It seems that this phenomenon occurs in the work of feminism. With so many pressures and justifications issued by male writers, as revealed by GilbertGubar in “The madwoman in the attic” where some fictional women have roles that are vague or even had no role at all.

 The issue of representation that previously I discussed the “Political Facts Behind Its Appearance” Also seemed to be still related to the ideological issue.

(The following discussion)

-----------------------

It would be very difficult for me to determine whether the critical study and literary text can serve to support each other or even both would be contradictory because as in the previous draft response Critical study not only can be used to support the literary text, it can also be used also as a tool to refute a statement contained in a literary text depends on who is doing that.

If he has an opinion that is in line with that expressed by the owner of the text or if that person is a "fan" of the owner of the text, then the results of the critical text of the study will reach an agreement on the issue that is discussed as a topic of discussion. But, if that was otherwise, then the results of a critical study of the text will have a disagreement and instead of reaching an agreement on the issue being discussed, it will only add to the list of questions for the topic being discussed.

One example is the patriarchal representation submitted by Sandra Gilbert and Susan Gubar in essays entitled “The madwoman in the attic”, they mostly discuss the difference of power between men and women through solving some of the figures that used as the symbol of women in several works such as Aurora in the character of Elizabeth Barret Browning's "Aurora Leigh" who looks at her mother as "a Ghost, fiends, and angel, fairy, sprite, and witch”.

Moreover, in the same essay, Gilbert and Gubar also saw the development of a symbol such as “Virgin Mary” in women during the middle ages and the “angel in the house” for women in the Nineteenth Century.

Interestingly, although women often symbolized by a figure who has angelic qualities and as if they play an important role, but in fact quite the contrary, women are not even allowed to have a role that can stand alone.

As it happens with the notables Honoria in Patmore's "The angel in the house"

“No happier post than this I ask,

To live her laureate all my life.

On wings of love uplifted free,

And by her gentleness made great,

I’ll teach how noble man should be

To match with such a lovely mate.”

(In “Madwoman in the Attic, p. 815)

which implies that her virtue makes her man 'great'.

An anxiety which then appears and the big question in this essay is if the woman is symbolized as a sacred figure who has angelic nature, then why the nature of existing angelic figures among women in the paper written by a male author thus turning instead suppress and opposing the existence of the female character itself?

Even the angelic properties commonly inserted by the author as a soul for the female character in his work, if you take more precisely those qualities were even transformed into a monstrous female figure because it's often the nature of the angelic will end up as a figure who is depressed because of its nature it should be used for serving, satisfying, and fulfilling cravings/desires of male character.

Meanwhile, if the heroine was created to finally meet all the desires/wishes of male character, would not that was the angelic nature of their lives will be transformed into one of the 7 deadly sins? And if not so, then women will be seen as a monstrous figure?

This is thought to be fictional political supporters of patriarchy as described in Simone's Beauvoir's thesis that:

“Woman has been made to represent all of man’s ambivalent feelings about his inability to control his own physical existence, his own birth and death. As the Other, woman comes to represent the contingency of life, life that is made to be destroyed.” (in “Madwoman in the Attic” p.822-823)

Besides, Beauvoir also argues that

“It is the horror of his own carnal contingence,…which [man] projects upon [woman]” (in “Madwoman in the Attic” p.823)

Gilbert and Gubar also concluded that the sentimental fiction of the woman could be politically influenced by patriarchy as 'Lilith' in the Biblical story that was originally thought that men and women have equal roles, he then lied to Adam. From there, Lilith is the first wife of Adam chose patriarchal marriage as punishment for his actions.

Gilbert Gubar interpret figure Lilith as a reflection of how difficult for a woman to have a role for herself,

“cursed both because she is a character who “got away” and because she dared to usurp the essentially literary authority implied by the act of naming, Lilith is locked into vengeance (child killing)which can only bring her more suffering (the killing of her own children).” (in “Madwoman in the Attic” p.823)

Just as the same with female authorship authority problems in real life women writers.

In addition, as quoted from Gilbert Gubar's essay, Anne Finch-a literary woman- capture the implicit message of the story of Lilith is that:

“A life of feminine submission, of “contemplative purity,” is a life of silence, a life that has no pen  and no story, while a life of female rebellion, of “significant action,” is a life that must be silenced, a life whose monstrous pen tells a terrible story.” (in “Madwoman in the Attic” p.824).

In addition, an example of a very unique representation can also be seen on Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak's "Three women's Texts" that attempted to put forward the argument that the critical analyses in psychoanalytical, economical, and literary sphere intersect through projection.

Spivak states that “The role of literature in the production of cultural representation should not ignored' (in “Three Women’s Texts” p.838), especially in the 19th century because it was arguably the golden age of English literature. The success of English literature in this century is inseparable from the success of the imperial government that works well in this century has not completely escape the influence of imperialism. Also the literary works produced in the 19th century were finally able to give birth to 'the third world' ('Worlding' the 

'Third World').

Somewhat different from Gilbert Gubar that discusses feminism in general, Spivak discusses feminist individualism started from Jane Eyre's unique imagination (in "Three women's Texts" p. 840) is shown when she turned her home with the uncommon architectural design— because the design she created is not recommended in any architectural book. Jane's unique imagination can be categorized as a psychological issue, while the displacement of the counter-class family became a family-in-law's (in "Three women's Texts" p. 841) can be categorized as an economic issue because such removals usually have something to do with material/financial needs. Then, after a psychological and economic problems contained in the earlier story, Jane Eyre as revived in Jean Rhys's "Wide Sargasso Sea" as Bertha Mason.

But I also found similarities between Gilbert Gubar with Spivak that when Christophine figure-a black native-Wide Sargasso Sea in the novel who have a desire to be able to have a character 

 by rebelling and saying

“No chain gang, no tread machine, no dark jail either. This is free country and I am  free woman.”

(in “Wide Sargasso Sea”, p.131)

to the guy who tease her. But, similar to what happened to Lilith, due to her tangentially to this narrative,

“No perspective critical of imperialism can turn the Other into a self, because the project of imperialism has always already historically refracted what might have been the absolutely Other into  domesticated Other that consolidates the imperialist self.” (in “Three Women’s Texts” 846)

Different from both the essay discussed earlier, to prove that in a work of literature, there can be a political imperialism representation United Kingdom, Edward Said first gives an overview of the history of European colonialism. Said’s way in the opening of this essay is quite confusing because in the beginning, instead of looking like someone who would convey literary criticism, Said it looks like a war veteran who wants to pass on the story of his experience in the colonial era to the reader.

But there is an important point in the preamble to explain the direction of this essay:

“Said drew on the work of structuralist historian Michael Focault in his examination of how Western academic described non-Western countries that were in the process of being colonized by Western Europe” (in “Jane Austen and Empire” p.1112)

Said considered that the works of Wordsworth, Austen, and Coleridge before 1857 which eventually led to the establishment of British government policy in India is a spatial impact (in terms of only non-Western countries only) on an error in the interpretation of literary works.

By heeding Raymond William's argument on "The Country and the City" which is related to "the interplay between rural and urban places in England" (in "Jane Austen and the Empire" p. 1113)

and

“From at last the mid-nineteenth century, and with important instances earlier, there was this larger context [the relationship between England and the colonies, whose effects on the English Imagination “have gone deeper than can easily be traced”] within which every idea and every image was consciously and unconsciously affected.” (in “Jane Austen and Empire” p.1114)

Said reveal the relationship between the text and the development of British imperialism through the published date and year and the points to be emphasized by the author.

To express his own opinion about the ideological and moral Affirmation, Said suggests that there is a relationship between literary works by British Imperialism in “Mansfield Park” (1814) by Jane Austen is to declare:

“To earn the right to Mansfield Park you must first leave home as a kind of indentured servant or, to put the case in  extreme terms, as a kind of transported commodity…but then you have the promise of future wealth.”(in “Jane Austen and Empire” p.1118)

I got to thinking that 'Mansfield Park' mentioned here is another manifestation of the 'plantation' which also has a characteristic more or less the same as it was; most people are used as native black slaves and /or treated as a commodity by the parties of other countries that have more power than them, the native.

Regardless of the outcome and somehow, represent a text can be classified as a political act 

 because:

• If we just see or hear a text but do not know the author of the text properly, I think it would be very difficult to be 100% right in represents the text.

• In addition, represents a text can also be referred to as a "political act" because although it is equipped with various reference sources, back again on the statement that the language has properties which arbitrary; a text can be interpreted in a variety of by everyone without exception. However, the results will depend on the privilege, experience, knowledge, as well as those who represent the views of representing topic and/or alignments represent the people against the author of the text to be represented.

• In this case it seems like no one can guarantee that the results of the activities related to representation of a work — in this case the writings are objective.

Each assessment of a work will remain valid despite of the many people who try to represent a masterpiece, some people could have been pro-cons of a text while the rest of the work is the same as the results will depend on the privilege, experience, knowledge, as well as those who represent the views of the represented topic and/or alignments represent the people against the author of the text which have to be represented.

--------------------------------------

Representations are then present as an overview of the subject from the viewpoint of others is arguably processed their own ideology on the subject that he saw. The issue that got me interested in the previous response “Political Facts Behind Its Appearance” concerning the representation of women created by male authors. There, a woman was presented as someone who not only has a vague role, but also women are manifested as a monstrous figure. Why does this happen for quite a long time? (At least until now, There may still be people who think that women are indeed worthy of being represented in a way like that, or even wonder why this thing could drag on)

Again referring to Althusser in Belsey’s “Constructing the Subject: Deconstructing the Text” ideology within an individual does not appear casually, ideology appears as formed or deliberately shaped by ISAs (Ideological State Apparatus) which

“prepares children to act consistently with the values of society by inculcating in them the dominant version of appropriate behavior as well as history, social studies, and of course, literature” (in Belsey’s “Constructing the Subject: Deconstructing the Text”, p.356)

Also further explained that

“Among the allies of the educational ISA are the family, the law, the media, and the arts, all helping to represent and reproduce the myths and beliefs necessary to enable people to work without the existing social formation.” (in Belsey’s “Constructing the Subject: Deconstructing the Text”, p.356)

If so, it means that a person's ideology will not be completely separated from "referral/dictation" that directly or indirectly established or transmitted by their environment. According to Saussure, this seems problematic because if the formation of ideology still arguably depends on the environment that directs it, then the language has become so important

“As well as being a system of signs related among themselves, language incarnates meaning in forl of the series of positions it offers for the subject from which to grasp itself and its relations with the real.” (Nowell-Smith 1976, p.26 in Belsey’s “Constructing the Subject: Deconstructing the Text”, p.358)

When you don't see the language and the sign used, the subject (individual) may  misrecognize themselves. Someone who does not understand the language can assume that what is said by people around him/her is something that should he/she apply as ideology, or he/she will accept whatever people say about them, so the misrepresentation originating from a failure in understanding their own ideology will take root and continue to be used as is the case in which a female character is represented as a monstrous figure and a minor in some literature works.

The interesting thing for me is, I often find there are people who dare to declare that its ideology will never change. Quite contrary to the concept of ideology in Belsey’s essay or less saying that ideology apparently always changing in accordance with the stages/phases of life that has been passed by the subject. An ideology that able to eventually change seems to fit with the fact that the language itself is arbitrary.

Saussure states that “language is a system of signs that express ideas, and is therefore comparable to a system of writing, the alphabet of deaf-mutes, symbolic rites, polite formulas, military signals, etc.” (in Saussure’s “Course in General Linguistics”, p.60)

 What happens to the subject and its ideology may be attributed to Saussure's opinion concerning synchronic (Everything that relates to the static side of our science) and diachronic (everything has to do with evolution).

Ideology-which I can understand from the sense of Derrida and Belsey- is an identity that arises due to the form of sign language, spoken or written language that provoke subjects to assess themselves. In Derrida's essay (the title) is also obvious that ideology (which he considers as the 'center') is part of the nature of the subject (diachronic).

“Thus it has always been thought that the center, which is by definition unique, constituted  that very thing within a structure which while governing the structure escapes structurality” (in Derrida’s “Structure Sign and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences”, p.1206)

Based on the above quotation, means the center, which according to my understanding is the 'ideology' can still be changed by decentering -a kind overturns understand that circulate in society- that the center has always set the structure, when in fact the center does not control the structure because the structure has its own center

“The center is at the center of the totality, and yet, since the center does not belong to the totality (is not part of the totality), the totality has its center elsewhere.” (in Derrida’s “Structure Sign and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences”, p.1206)

This can be done by reducing/deriving the signifier in submitting the sign to thought and/or by putting into question the system in which the preceding reduction functioned; first and foremost, the opposition between the sensible and intelligible. By doing so, the structures that form the ideology of the subject will also be changed and ultimately ideology will continue to undergo change.

But if following Derrida who states that overall, there is no so-called centers because each structure also has its own center, means the subject here will never find their own center, but what they found instead was a combination of structures formed by society, and the structure formed by themselves. Does it mean if someone says he has an ideology, the fact is that people has not obtained the ideology itself?

WORK CITED

Arnold, Matthew. 2004.“The Function of Criticism in Our Present Time” in Critical Theory Since Plato, Wordsworth

Belsey, Catherine.1994. “Constructing the Subject: Deconstructing the Text” in Contemporary Literary Criticism ed. Con Davis, Robert and Schleifer, Ronald. (1994). New York and London: Longman Publishing Group.   

De Man, Paul. 1986. “The Resistance to Theory” in Theory and History of Literature, Volume 33. Minneapolis, United States: University of Minnesota Press.

Derrida, Jacques. 1966. “Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences” in Critical 
Theory Since Plato ed. Adams, Hazard and Searle, Leroy. (2004, 3^rd edition; pg. 1206-1215). United States: Wadsworth Publishing.

Gilbert, Sandra and Gubar, Susan. 1979. “The Madwoman in the Attic” in Literary Theory: An Anthology ed. Rivkin, Julie and Ryan, Michael (2004, 2^nd edition; pg. 812-825). United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing.

Horace. “Art of Poetry”. 2004. in Adams, Hazard and Searle, Leroy. Critical Theory since Plato (3rd edition). United States: Wadsworth Publishing.          

Said, Edward. “Jane Austen and Empire” in Literary Theory: An Anthology ed. Rivkin, Julie and Ryan, Michael (2004, 2^nd edition; pg. 1112-1125). United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing.

Saussure, Ferdinand De. 1916. “Course in General Linguistic” in Literary Theory: An Anthology ed. Rivkin, Julie and Ryan, Michael (2004, 2nd edition; pg. 59-71). United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing.

Scholes, Robert. 1986. “The English Apparatus” in Textual Power. Yale, United States: Yale University Press.                                                 

Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 1986. “Three Women’s Texts and a Critique of Imperialism” in Literary Theory: An Anthology ed. Rivkin, Julie and Ryan, Michael (2004, 2nd edition; pg. 838-853). United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing.