Final Paper: Religion misused

Ben  Reigle

Dr. Howe

EN 290

May 10, 2012

Creating dominance and preserving dominance:  the roles of religious institutions and the ruling class

            In every social system with its particular political model, a class exists that rules above another, enjoying and consuming resources lavishly while a larger lower social class is allowed smaller amounts of means to live.  The powerful ruling class stays in their position of power, even though their actions seem morally unjust.  Ironically, it is religious institutions that allow these systems to continue and preserve them in a cultural context through manipulation.  Bishop argues, there exists a failure to identify and reject this moral hypocrisy amongst the mass populous.  Although it may be the ruling political class that creates status characteristics within a cultural system to establish economic inequality, religious institutions keep the population suppressed by maintaining such order.  We can see these cultural issues present in Bishop’s poems “A Miracle for Breakfast”, “Roosters”, and “The Hanging of the Mouse”.

In Bishop’s poetry there is an indication that a class holds power over another.  In “Roosters” the narrator identifies a group preserving their ruling power over others.  The narrator refers to them as roosters, and these roosters “planned to command and terrorize the rest” (24).  These roosters are then a group that supports each other while suppressing another.  The narrator further emphasizes that this group dominates other parts of their society by presenting imagery.  Symbols of the roosters preside “over” the beds of the dominated social class, “over” their churches, and that ruling class screams a “senseless order…all over town” (28-29).  The imagery of the roosters being elevated demonstrates that they are higher on the social and political order in their society.  The roosters are in control of the town’s political, religious, and even personal lives.

Bishop emphasizes a control over others through different ways in “Roosters” and “A Miracle for breakfast”.  In “Roosters” the ruling class takes a direct and obvious control over the suppressed class.  The roosters establish that the nation they preside in is theirs by shouting, “’This is where I live!’” (45).  The use of the exclamation mark shows that the roosters wish not to hide their dominance, they want to shout it out and assert themselves as rulers.  The narrator wonders what the roosters mean by such a strong assertion (48).  The roosters establish that they are in charge and the dominated class should remain in its place when they shout, “’Stop dreaming!’” (47).  In “A Miracle for Breakfast”, the ruling class takes a much more subtle approach.  They do not directly assert their dominance or hinder their subjects’ hopes or dreams.  Instead they let the ruled class believe that their disposition is normal.  The same way people in any social system feel as though their lives or normal regardless of being subjected to conditions, that when examined through a non-culturally biased lens, that are unequal and oppressive.  J

The ruling class establishes this order through enforcing status characteristics amongst the common people.  In Murray Webster, Jr. and Stuart J. Hysom’s article Creating Status Characteristics, they  write that status characteristics connote “social worth” as well as “wealth and power” (351).  Status characteristics then establish the social roles in which people fit into.  Furthermore, status characteristics cause people within a social system to accept their disposition by becoming “task focused” (353).  This means that once a person accepts their role in a society, their social actions and meetings center around “solving some problem or set of problems (rather than to address primarily social-emotional concern)” (353).  This acceptance within a unbalanced social system and disregard for social and emotional concerns is presented by Bishop in her poem “A Miracle for Breakfast”.  In the poem there is an oppressed group of people who wait to be handed bread and coffee by a ruling person who exists on a balcony above them.  The oppressed social group’s political resign is demonstrated when the narrator repeats several times that they are “waiting” instead of demanding their daily rations (Bishop 1).  Even when the common people receive only “one rather hard crumb” and “one drop of the coffee”, only a few “scornfully flicked [the crumbs] into the river”; but, they do not rebel or show outrage over the meek provisions they receive (Bishop 16-18).  This neglect to speak out against the ruling class who enjoys “gallons of coffee” shows a acceptance of status characteristics, in which the oppressed class deserves their disposition and accepts it as a norm (Bishop 30).

The ruling class successfully establishes these status characteristics that keep the masses oppressed and there selves enjoying bountiful amounts of resources by making the social reality seem normal.  Another way to express this kind of apathy towards social injustice and imbalance is calling the established social roles a tradition.  In Peter Konsenko’s political reading of The Lottery” he argues, “man sticks to tradition even though it may be irrational and all sense of logic may be lost” (5).  Traditions are systematic rituals that a cultural group finds normal.  For example, the traditional day for an adult, American citizen is to wake up from eight hours of sleep, go to work for eight more hours, then spend eight hours of leisure before repeating the process.  This lifestyle, although it may seem odd to a person existing in a primitive community that thrives on hunting and agriculture, appears as something that is “normal” to those who practice it as a daily routine.

In “The Hanging of the Mouse”, Bishop shows her reader that entities in power thrive upon this sense of tradition as a means of control.  In the poem, a mouse is being taken to the gallows where he is to be hanged.  The animals are anthropomorphized to make the events in the poem apply to society.  Along the way he is escorted by several other animals that are part of the social system he is a part of.  These entities are beetles who are guards, a raccoon who is the executioner, and the king’s messenger who is a bullfrog.  All of these creatures are described as either wearing “traditional” clothing of some type or carrying with them “traditional” objects (Bishop 10, 16, 29, 53).  There are other animals that are there to watch the hanging, but none of them are described as wearing traditional things or having traditional belongings.  Tradition, then, is associated with whoever is in power.

Like in “A Miracle for Breakfast”, creatures in “The Hanging of the Mouse” do not question the traditional system that is in place, even though the actions the ruling class do not make sense to them.  In this passage of “The Hanging of the Mouse” one sees the common people of the society forfeiting logic as they experience a speech given by the king’s messenger, a traditional member of the social system they exist in:

The scroll and the white plume on his hate made him look comically like something in a nursery tale, but his voice was impressive enough to awe the crowd into polite attention.  It was deep bass:  “Glug!  Glug!  Berr-up!”  No one could understand a word of the mouse’s death sentence. (55-59).

Even though the creatures do not understand the death sentence they allow the mouse to be hanged, and they fail to question the justice in the act.  One spectator, a cat, does weep at the hanging of the mouse, but decides that seeing the hanging is “an excellent moral lesson” for her child, who is also witnessing the event (75).  Even though the citizens within this social system do not understand the explanation for their traditional leader’s decision to take a life, they believe it to be morally correct.  They show irrational acceptance in their social system.

What would cause a people to accept the killing of person without understanding the reason?  Michael Ryan argues religious institutions play a large role in maintain obedience in a social system in his chapter “Political Criticism:  From Marxism to Cultural Materialism”.  Ryan example is the role of the Catholic Church during the Middle Ages.  He argues the Catholic Church, being the only means of education for the subservient lower class, provided “training in obedience and submission to authority from an early age” (116).  Religious institutions then, become the means for the ruling class to justify their status characteristics as rulers, while the lower class accepts their position of powerlessness within their societal system.

The relationship between the ruling class and the religious system of a society is shown in “Roosters” by Bishop’s choice to clump the ruling class and the church under one identity, that of the rooster.  Bishop shows the injustice towards Mary Magdalen’s sins, which are seen as worse than St. Peter (who, unlike Magdalen, directly betrayed Jesus), by saying:

Only holy sculpture

Could set it all together

In one small scene, past and future (55-57)

Bishop’s language implies that only the Catholic Church had the ability to construct an idea that one societal group (women) was inherently worse than the more politically powerful group (men).  The Catholic Church also, in Bishop’s opinion, has such a power over the people that its influence not only persuaded people towards its ideological outlook in the past, but will do so in the future as well.

Bishop reveals a religious group maintaining the tradition of cultural dominance of one societal group over another in “A Miracle for Breakfast” in two ways.  One is establishing the dominance of one cultural/political group over another as normal, the other is establishing a figure or group as holy.  First, the dominated class, while waiting for provisions, sees their waiting as normal as said before.  They are waiting for their food and coffee to come from a “certain balcony”(3).  The group sees this coming from a group they refer to as “kings of old”, which associates it with the previous idea of a tradition; but, this idea of tradition comes from the concept that the spreading of wealth will be “like a miracle”(4).  This is the cultural error that recurs throughout the poem.  As this presumably starving population waits for food they continually realize that to sustain the life of the people with such small amounts of food, a miracle must occur.  Kosenko and Ryan’s arguments on the trained obedience of religious conditioning come to life here.  In the spirit of Kosenko’s ideas the dominated class finds this to be the norm, as they do not show outrage, as stated earlier.  Their unsettled feelings must have been conditioned by Ryan’s argument about religious groups teaching obedience.

The dominated group in “A Miracle for  Breakfast” follows their ruler’s system because they see the ruler as a religious entity.  The man up on the balcony, who distributes the food is described as have his head “up in the clouds—along with the sun” (18).  The balcony ruler’s head being up in the clouds shows that he is physically and socially higher than those waiting for provisions.  This association with being higher up presents a connotation that he is closer to the heavens, making him closer to being deity than those on the ground.  His physical position relates to the position of the sun, the sole reason why life is possible on our planet.  These two indicators show that people see this person as a god on Earth, but more importantly, this man is the reason they have food and energy (coffee) thus they feed into the system of him being in charge.

This brings us to Bishop’s largest concern:  people in the socioeconomic lower class refuse to acknowledge hypocrisy within the actions of the ruling class, and therefore accept their conditions rather than enacting social progress.  In the last stanza of  “A Miracle for Breakfast”, the narrator says:

We licked up the crumb and swallowed the coffee

A window across the river caught the sun

As if the miracle were working, on the wrong balcony (37-39).

Here the reader sees the lower class noticing that the sun (representing life giving power and therefore religious power) shines upon those up on the balcony, the members of the ruling class.  But, these people only acknowledge it is happening, but once again refuse to show outrage or take action.  The people of this socially and economically corrupt system accept their status characteristics as lowly citizens instead of causing a rebellion.

Bishop’s strongest point is that religious systems may also see the moral hypocrisy of their actions but they choose become part of the corrupt inequality put in place by the political party in power.  Bishop demonstrates this in “Roosters” by identify the political and religious group as one entity, the roosters.  This implies that the religious group has forfeited a separate identity from the political group in power, therefore, the religious group does not have separate moral values or goals from that group.  The religious institution allowed itself to be consumed by the ideology of the reigning political power, and thus serves no purpose but the collective concern to stay in control.

In “A Miracle for Breakfast”, Bishop shows this by giving a holy persona to the person in charge, which shows the end product of a religious institution merging with a political power.  In “The Hanging of the Mouse”; however, the reader can see Bishop’s presumption that a religious power eventually loses its original identity and bleeds into being as brainwashed as the oppressed society.   The religious entity in “The Hanging of the Mouse” is the praying mantis.  The whole time he watches the mouse approach the gallows he “seemed to feel ill at ease”, and he approaches the mouse to console him; but his words come out in a “high and incompressible voice” (Bishop 33-34).  This suggests the praying mantis is so frantic he cannot properly explain salvation to the mouse.  He is too overcome by the socially constructed situation of execution.  Even though he is the religious entity in this fictional reality, he cannot retain his religious identity.  Bishop emphasizes this point as she explains the actions of the praying mantis following the hanging of the mouse “The praying mantic, with an hysterical fling of his long limbs, had/ disappeared in the crowd” (70-71).  In these lines we see the mantis losing its religious authority and becoming another cog in the systematic wheels of the constructed social system created by the ruling political class, the traditional figures of power.

In her poems, Bishop proved that there is, of course, a ruling class in a social system, and that they make their cultural/societal reality seem normal with religious justification; but, eventually the religious group becomes less an of a group of its own and instead becomes a reluctant piece of the ruling class.  Bishop’s message then, is that religion is a tool to make a socioeconomic class subservient, but they themselves become subservient in the process, losing their moral and ethically identity over time to become part of a tyrannical identity that their values never actually supported.

 

Works Cited

Bishop, Elizabeth.  “A Miracle for Breakfast”.  Poems.  New York:  Farrar, Straus and Grioux,     2011.  Print.

Bishop, Elizabeth.  “Roosters”.  Poems.  New York:  Farrar, Straus and Grioux, 2011.  Print.

Bishop, Elizabeth.  “The Hanging of the Mouse”.  Poems.  New York:  Farrar, Straus and             Grioux, 2011.  Print.

Kosenko, Peter.  “A Reading of Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery”.  New Orleans Review.  12:11(1985) : 1-5. Jstor. 15 April. 2012.

Webster, Murray Jr., and Stuart J. Hysom.  “Creating Status Characteristics”.  American   Sociological Review.63:3 (1998): 351-78.  Jstor.  April 10.  2012.

Thesis, annotated bib, and outline

Annotated bibliography, thesis, and outline

Thesis: Ruling political powers create subordinating status characteristics in their ruled masses in order to maintain their social dominance.  Bishop argues that the vehicle for these status characteristics are routed in the creation of a routine, an ideological and inherent superiority in the ruling class, and justification of action through religion.  She expresses an absurdity to faith in an political-ideological system through the perspectives of the oppressed, and by stating that measures must be taken to overcome established, broken systems.

Outline: The first course of action is to define status characteristics.  This will establish the concepts that keep a people supressed and how they are assimilated into general actions.

Second, Bishop’s poems will be examined for specific examples for status characteristics of the people.  An example of this is the rationing of food and coffee in “A Miracle for Breakfast”, the inherent dominance of a ruling power in “Roosters”, and the justification of capital punishment in “The Haning of the Mouse”.

Third, these examples of status characteristics will be strung together to demonstrate how they construct the concept that an oppressive life is simply a “norm” which people must tolerate.

Fourth, the ruling political powers will be identified and characterized through symbolism in “The Hanging of the Mouse, which disassociates the concept by attributing personal rulers with animals and insects.  “A Miracle for Breakfast” demonstrates the idea of inherent dominance and negligence of the people with a shift in perspective to a person apart of the dominant social class.  “Roosters” elaborates on this idea, with the symbolism of roosters appearing over a number of aspects of normal life.

Fifth, Bishop’s critique on personal perspectives of the oppressed towards other political systems in “A Miracle for Breakfast” will be explored, demonstrating the old saying:  “The grass is always greener on the other side.”  This will of course be elaborated upon.

Sixth, Bishop’s opinion on how the entrenched political systems of our time must be altered will be shown in “Roosters.”  Bishop’s opinions will be given and analyzed, but perspectives on the matter will be elaborated upon by Paul Guile’s beliefs on the “Oracle Effect” that poets develop in their work.

Annotated Bibliography

Guile, Paul.  “Decadent Aesthetics to Politcal Fetishism:  The ‘Oracle Effect’ of Robert Frost’s

Poetry”.  American Literary History 12.4 (2000): pp. 713-744.  Jstor.  20 April. 2012.

This article seeks to establish Robert Frost’s motivations for changing the manner rhetoric.  Frost rejects old Victorian ways to write poetry in an attempt to connect with his audience.  This connection leads to the masses (or those that read his poetry during the time it was written) to reflect upon Frost’s political and social criticism.

This is what is referred to as the “Oracle Effect”.  It is my belief that Bishop, conscious of it or otherwise, did such a thing with her poetry that stands out as political in nature.  She writes in a style that allows most readers to understand the language.

What is most important in this attribution of the “Oracle Effect” to Bishop’s poetry is that it proves she has the desire to influence the political status of the country she lives in.  She does this through defamiliarization and other writing techniques, but the rhetoric is accessible to the reader.  If the concept of Bishop adopting the “Oracle Effect” is valid, then her lines describing social/political injustice can be linked to her suggestions on reformation of the broken ideology of ideologies properly manifesting into political systems.

Webster, Murray Jr. and Stuart J. Hysom.  “Creating Status Characteristics.”  American

Sociological Review.  63. 3.  (1998):  pp 351-378.  Jstor.  April 19, 2012.

These two authors establish the concept of what a status characteristic is, and explore societally pertinent examples.  This is important because under a political system, there is a constructed social system.  In social systems there are different socio-economic groups.  Each group has status characteristics which reflect the values of dominant social class of the system.

Using these status characteristics, I can look into Bishop’s poetry for specific descriptions and general behaviors to identify social groups she is reflecting in her writing.  Bishop writes from different perspectives, giving their thoughts and feelings on their position wihtin their social system.  She also comments upon the opposing social group through these perspectives as well.  In “The Hanging of the Mouse”, Bishop’s narrator is removed from the situation and speaks in third person.  Here, the narrator identifies status characteristics of the characters without an apparent bias.

In “A Miracle for Breakfast”, Bishop identifies status characteristics created by the political powers in order to maintain power over the poorer, larger social class.  With the aid of Webster and Hyson, I can establish what these constructed characteristics are that create their social classes.


Post-colonialism and imperialism

As Ryan says in the chapter “Post-Colonial and Global English Studies”, Post-Colonial studies branches off into two separate fields of study.

First, P.C. studies examines the work of post-colonial writers.  These writers are generally people of a native land that is colonized by another country of greater power.  There writing not only reflects their suppressed native culture, but also the effect their colonizers had on them.  This meshing of cultures effects the language in which the natives learn to speak, their daily lives, the cultural pieces they produce, and how they begin to view their cultural situation.  An example of the mashing of language is “creolization” (197).  This term for a lingual shift in culture refers to the blending of a native language with that of a colonizing nation to form a new dialect unique to itself.

P.C. studies focus on cultural phenomena such as this, how it occurred, and what persisting effects it takes on the culture featured in a piece of writing.  Post-colonial writers represent such language and cultural shifts in their writing and provide commentary from the unique stand point of person changed by a colonizing nation.

The second point of interest of post-colonial studies is literature about and created during the process and effects of imperialism.  Focus centers around the effects of a world power’s attempt to “globalize” the planet (198).  This means the spreading of cultural ideologies as well as language and the will to bring all nations to a certain cultural standard.  Many pieces of literature comment on such a process and have been writing during such a thing.  P.C. studies aims to examine what a colonization nation does to approach imperialism and the effects it has on a colonized nation.  A careful study of imperialism leads a cultural theorist to see how one colonizing nation twists the native culture to meld with another.

Three poems and a common theme

Bishop’s poems “Roosters”, “A Miracle for Breakfast”, and “The Hanging of the Mouse” include a common theme of oppression of a group of people from an established institution.  The lens in which these poems can be best examined to extricate this theme is one of political theory.

Examining the representations of the ruling body in a literal and metaphorical sense, can reveal what Bishop believes to be the devices and practices the ruling group (with it’s particular tendencies and ideologies) uses to keep the subservient class on the bottom of the socioeconomic and cultural latter.

“Roosters” specifically reveals who Bishop thinks is the ruling group.  “A Miracle for Breakfast” shows the flaws in a political ideological system.  And “The Hanging of the Mouse” contains latent messages of the danger of such systems as well as the power the ruling class attributes to itself (religion) to enforce its power.

I believe by examining these poems through a political lens, I can reveal what Bishop believes to be the key flaws in political systems, what is unjust, and the consequences of submitting to such systems.

Where the Question First Popped-up

“In the Waiting Room” provides a scene in which the narrator struggles with the idea of deviating from the cultural sexual norm of heterosexuality.  We can identify this when we pay attention to what the narrator, a seven year old girl, chooses to pay attention to while she reads a National Geographic magazine, and her reactions to what she sees.

As the narrator sits in the waiting room she begins the read the magazine, which can represent a window into cultures outside of her own.  The magazine studies the world, and in turn, studies cultures with different values and ideologies of her own, where homosexuality is taboo.  It is almost as the magazine allows her mind to remove itself from the waiting room in Worcester, Massachusetts,  and embody itself in a unhindered position of thinking.

What she lingers on, after first observing a picture of the interior of a volcano that eventually spills over with “rivulets of fire” (symbolic imagery of a vagina) is tribal women of a foreign country that are topless (23).  After she mentions their “terrifying” breasts, the reader says she was “too shy to stop”(31&33).  The narrator finds this detail engrossing, and it stays on her mind throughout the poem; however, by indicating she is made shy by the sight indicates shame.  This feeling of shame comes from the narrator feeling something is sexually interesting when culture says it wrong or abnormal.

Soon after the narrator begins to confuse herself with her aunt Consuello, who presumably follows the sexual traditions of American women in the 1910′s.  The narrator is unsure of her sexual identity, and still feeling the shame and confusion previous, becomes enveloped (with her aunt’s identity) in the cover of the magazine.  This shows a retreat from sexual exploration to the standard image of hiding behind a “normal” appearance and sexual identity of a woman.  The thought of homosexuality represented by the exotic pictures of other cultures is closed, much like the magazine was closed.

The thoughts of the tribal women with breasts return, however.  This shows the narrator is conflicted with her sexual identity as a woman.  She bounces between thoughts of the norm and thoughts of the exotic, struggling to see where her identity rests.

Ultimately the narrator finds these curiosities overwhelming as she begins to describe the waiting room (the place where these feelings began to emerge) as “bright/and too hot” (90-91).  The thoughts and feelings of homosexuality, after beginning to feel overwhelming, begin to slide “beneath a big black wave”, which shows a retreat back to the “normal” sexual identity women are pressed into developing (92).

When the narrator steps outside, she is completely submerged back into her culture; and is pushed even further away from acknowledging her interests in homosexuality.  But, “The war was on”, which of course could be a reference to the WWI, as it was taking place at the time; but it could also be that this moment in the waiting room was the first time the narrator acknowledge the sexual confusion she experience, and now that she knows it’s there, a struggle between her actual sexual identity and the one she is supposed to pursue will be in conflict (96).

Gender Studies and Ethnic Theory

Gender studies basis itself around the idea that there is no norm when it comes to sexual identity.  This includes heterosexuality and homosexuality of any kind.  The reason any sexual orientation may seem odd or deviant is not due to a biological truth that sex is exclusively for reproduction.  Instead, the result of certain sexual orientation seeming deviant is due to the cultural context of where they take place.

Culture determines what is normal, there is no actual truth in sexual normality.  So gender studies focuses on how the sexes and participants in different sexual orientations are represented in books and other cultural works.  This means gender studies examines the place of progress of women in culture, and how they choose to write about something.  In a cultural work, what are the freedoms of women, and who is trying to repress them or support them?  Why are they trying to decide?  How does sex fit into their lives.

Gender studies also examines the experience of homosexuals in culture through cultural works.  How is it for them to go through culture?  Who supports them or degrades them?  How and why?

I think Ryan sums up gender studies when he describes the sexual norm as “Less a center that defines deviations than one deviation among many” (134).  Heterosexuality is not the basis that humans should compare other forms of sexuality and gender from, instead consider heterosexuality just another mutation from a broader concept.  Everything stems from sexuality, not from heterosexuality.

Ethnic studies follows the main concept of gender studies.  There is no norm a certain race is involved in, from which they can judge deviations from that norm on the basis that they are correct-or the “right” way of being.

Ethnic studies searches for the latent racism in literary works.  The purpose of doing so, is that certain authors may have been a part of a culture that promoted racism, and unknowingly (or otherwise) reinforced racist ideas in their works.  Ethnic studies identifies the evidence of such actions by using a lot of history in its analysis of a work.

The purpose of doing so is to obliterate the idea that there is a normal way to look at ethnicity.  This “normal” way is to attribute actions and thoughts to people solely on the basis of the skin tone instead of the culture in which they exist.  For example, when looking at an impoverished city neighborhood, a ethnic study theorist would say it is not the race that determines these people to act a certain way.  How could it?  There are people of other races in the area acting in the same manner.  It is then there socioeconomic status in this micro -culture that influences their behavior, not race.

People who are not white are never “Inherently less” than whites or any other race, for that matter (182).  In fact there is no inherent anything attributed to race, but a chromatic appearance.

Ethnic theory’s goal is to show this by lending an objective non-white exclusive eye to literary works in order to spot this type of attitude in cultural works.  A formation of a non-racial reading is attempted to be made, where any type of subversive racism can be spotted with the aid of historical knowledge.

It would take a miracle

In “A Miracle for Breakfast” Bishop criticizes a flawed social system attempting to mirror Marxism, much like communism actual functions.  The poem’s imagery includes several people waiting outside a large building for coffee and bread.  One man up on a balcony is responsible for distributing the coffee and bread.  The people below show disappointment when they receive tiny crumbs and single drops of coffee.  They reject the giving and throw it into the near by river.  The narrator ends the poem by saying the sun is shining across the river and onto a window, not on the balcony where the distributor stands.

This distribution of food resembles Marxism, in which the prevailing concept is a equal distribution of wealth.   However, in Bishop’s version of Marxism there is an incredibly small amount of food to be distributed.  The people are upset they cannot have more, but they cannot reach the balcony on which the distributor stands to do anything.  This version of a society seems to match the realistic outcomes when a country decides to embrace the values of Marxism.  Their may be a system of equality among the masses, but unlike Marxism dictates, there happens to be a person or class that rules over the masses and decides how much wealth can be distributed.

The title suggests a religious connotation.  The ruler of this fabricated nation reflects that concept, as he splits enough bread and distributes the coffee to everyone much like Jesus duplicates bread and fish to the masses.  Bishop relates her distributor to Jesus to comment on religions part in repressing a people in a social system.  The ruling class of a such systems use religion or a strict set of acceptable social laws in order to keep their people in line (19-24).

Bishop is also commenting on the fact that most nations who model their social structure after Marxism, tend to be poor nations.  She shows this by having their being such a small amount of food and drink to be distributed, which the people outside the balcony “licked up” (37).  Also the narrator tells the reader that “A window across the river caught the sun/as if the miracle were working, on the wrong balcony” (38-39).  This imagery represents a nation that attempts a social system and is failing; however, across a body of water another nation prospers.  The failing nation  doesn’t understand why they are not blessed, so to speak.

Bishop’s largest statement in this poem is for Marxism to ever be completely implemented and successful, it would in fact take a miracle.  Human’s are unruly and selfish, and tend to taint idealistic social structures with human nature.  Marxism can be seen as a reaction to such behavior; however, something incredible and almost unthinkable would have to occur for everyone to be in the same social class, accept it, and have enough of everything they need.

Political Theory

The most prevalent aspect in a Marxist reading is the state of socioeconomic classes within a cultural work.  A reader must examine what ideologies are being held by the prevailing social class in a work, and what that class does in order to maintain their status.  Such things can be discovered through the political structure and policy making/enforcing, how characters in different social classes act, what decision those characters make when confronted with conflict, and the consequences of those choices.

According to Ryan, political criticism involves stepping back from the cultural situation in which we live and starting off with the notion that nothing is normal.  He calls this process “negation” (118).  Apparently, our identities and ideologies become warped from growing up in a particular social system that teaches certain ideologies to be the norm.  Money equaling power is an example of this.  From following this given in culture, we direct ourselves in a life path that leads to wealth, assuming of course, that wealth will bring us happiness.

The purpose of negation is to identify what the ruling social class is and what actions they take to obtain their persistent goal, which is staying the ruling the class.  Identifying this is important because as that powerful class takes action to stay in power, they are making sure “others” are staying out of power.  This process probably includes degradation of some degree.

From examining a literary work, we can identify such things.  A literary work is always written by a person and a person is always affected by the environment in which they live.  As a writer crafts a cultural work, the most prevalent ideologies of the time are deeply ingrained into the writers mind, and thus come out in the work.  If the writer is writing about people, he is surely going to involve what social class they’re in, what they do when they meet people in out of their class, the reactions of such meetings, and what effect that has on the characters and plot.

So in general, I believe political theory is the examination of a social system by identifying what is “normal” in that context.  From there, we can deconstruct the system by trying to question it’s legitimacy (Kosenko 8-10).  The main questions are:  Who is in charge?  Why are they in charge?  How are they staying in charge?

 

Female sexuality “In the Waiting Room”

In Bishop’s poem “In the Waiting Room” a tension with female sexuality pervades the text.  In the poem, the narrator waits while her aunt is getting dental work done.  While the narrator waits, she reads through National Geographic.  While reading the narrator thinks about the relationship between her and her aunt, and occasionally hears screams of pain coming from the dentist’s office.

The narrator attempts to establish herself as a child throughout the poem, as opposed to a female.  I assume the narrator is a she because Bishop wrote the piece, but the narrator never clearly states her sex to the reader.  Instead, the narrator reassures herself “three days/ and you’ll be seven years old” (54-55).  The narrator attempts to compare herself with the “object world” around her in order to create her identity as a child ( Ryan 96).  In this instance the object world is time.  There is more of this as the narrator explains the waiting room as she enters.  She is sure to tell the reader that the room is full of “grown-ups” (8).  The narrator says this to create a contrast between herself, establishing her identity as a child, but a smart one.  The narrator is sure to tell us, after she picks up the National Geographic, “(I could read)” (15).  The narrator uses objects, people, and time as an object world to forge her identity as a child.  Her need to present her identity so directly demonstrates conflict in becoming a grown, sexually mature woman.

To see this we must examine the things that narrator expresses distaste towards.  For example the narrator describes the images she sees in the National Geographic.  She has no problem viewing a graphic image of a man impaled on a pole or children with pointy heads.  These phallic images don’t jar the narrator, but when she tells the reader about the women’s breast she uses the word “horrifying” (31).  The narrator mentions the breasts a second time as “awful” later in the poem (81).  The breasts, a sign of female sexuality and identity, bother the narrator.  She is adverse to the ideas of having breasts, or more specifically breasts that are exposed.  She does not wish to have that connection to the female identity.

More evidence of this tension with female identity comes as the narrator judges her aunt.  After hearing a whimper of pain come from the office, the narrator describes her aunt (the only other female character in the poem) as a “foolish, timid woman” (42).  This is followed by a conflict of identity.  The narrator questions if she is herself or if she is her aunt.  Are they one person under the sex of women or is she independent.  The need to express the struggle shows the narrator is not settled with the idea of being a part of the mature female sex.

The narrators struggle with her sexual identity is based on the concept that it is not personal intellect and personality that determines if one is a woman but anatomy.  As before the narrator attempts to assure the reader she is smart enough to read through her magazine at such a young age, but does this only once.  The fixation on the breast, and the adversity to it are much more prevalent and therefore significant.  She questions if it is the breasts that “held [women] all together/or made [them] all just one” (82-83).  Female identity unity is based upon a single anatomical trait rather than an intellectual basis of thought or positive thought process.

From this evidence in what the narrator chooses (carefully) to tell the reader, we can see that in describing breasts as “terrible” and “awful” only, and questioning if they are what makes a woman a woman, the narrator fears accepting a mature female body.  Perhaps there is another option(31 81).  If we see the breasts as part of the narrators object world, she may simply be seeing breasts as an object that others identify women by and not their names or the fact that they think a certain way or believe something.  And in giving the breasts a negative connotation, the narrator attempts to critique society for identify women’s identities in such a way.  The question of a woman only knowing if she is a woman if she has breasts may be in the text.  And the narrator clearly deplores this idea, which may lead back to a moment of mental trauma or ridicule the narrator faced before the moment of this poem.