Naomi's Suburban Blog

What’s up with the tortoise?

2005-11-19T19:18:00.000-08:00

In Jane Gardam’s The Queen of the Tambourine, one of the most interesting scenes that Eliza describes is her miscarriage (222). It happened in the garden of number thirty-four, which in itself is probably rich with meaning, but the thing that struck me the most was the tortoise. As Eliza lay on the ground after the miscarriage, the tortoise came at her with its “sharp claws” and “snake head” (222). Why a tortoise? What does it mean?

Ancient Chinese culture gives much meaning to the tortoise. According to The World of Feng Shui, the tortoise is a symbol of longevity, protection and support. As well, according to The Minneapolis Institute of Arts, the tortoise not only represents strength and long life, but can also be used to predict the future. In relation to Eliza, it seems ironic that the tortoise, a symbol of long life, enters the picture when her baby has just died. Perhaps the fact that Eliza attempts to “kick it away” (222) has meaning—she is rejecting the symbol of protection and support during a time when she needs these things the most. As a result, she ends up paying for this rejection through the madness that this miscarriage causes.

The tortoise is also believed to be a significant animal by the Native Americans. According to Spiritual Stew, certain “totem animals,” exist for the purpose of being with you throughout your life, sharing a connection with you, and teaching you a specific lesson. The tortoise is one of these animals, and it is connected with peaceful nature, ancient wisdom, feminine energy & healing, and psychic protection, among other things. I find this interesting because Eliza is definitely in need of peace and healing at this moment in her life, but she rejects the tortoise, which could have brought her these things.

I am certain that much more could be read into this incident, for anyone that has a special interest in tortoises.

So…what’s not a heterotopia?

2005-11-19T18:13:00.000-08:00

In his article, “Of Other Spaces,” Michel Foucault discusses spaces that he refers to as “heterotopias.” He refers to these “other spaces” as being outside of the normal experience of human life. For example, the crisis heterotopia is for people in some sort of crisis or transition in life, such as the boarding school. Another example is the deviation heterotopia, which is a place where behaviours are contrary to the norm, such as the prison. In class, we discussed other places that might be considered heterotopias, such as fairgrounds, all-inclusive resorts and cemeteries.

But what’s not a heterotopia, then? The definition that Foucault gives us seems so broad that one could make an argument for almost any space to be considered heterotopic. What about a public washroom? This space fully blurs the boundaries between public and private, and can thus be considered heterotopic. Or one’s place of employment, perhaps. Each person probably has certain authority on the job that would not apply or be appropriate outside of the workplace. How about an ice rink? This is a place where it is perpetually cold, even in the middle of summer, and thus is outside of the normal human experience.

What needs to be addressed is the question of what can actually be considered “normal human experience.” If the definition of heterotopia is that it is outside of the normal experience of human life, but we cannot even define what “normal” is, then we have a problem. Personally, I would consider something like a washroom or a job to be “normal,” but as stated above, these spaces can also be considered heterotopic. I suggest that something as fluid as “normal” cannot accurately be defined, which makes it almost impossible to define “heterotopic.”

I’ll take Judaism, Mysticism and a side of fries, please

2005-11-08T21:08:00.000-08:00

Can religions be ordered like a McDonald’s Happy Meal? Should we be picking and choosing whatever we like from different religions and putting them together to form a convenient, bite-sized quasi-religion? This sounds a little sketchy to me.

In Hanif Kureishi’s The Buddha of Suburbia, the characters seem to be doing just this. For example, when Haroon is making his second appearance, it all appears quite fake, as if he is just using Buddhism and Mysticism for his own purposes. As they arrive, there is a “pause for God to put his thumbs together and do a few minutes’ trance practice” (30). If Haroon were true to his religion, would he need to practice? Would he even be performing in front of a crowd, for that matter?

In this same scene, Eva also appears fake in her “long red dress which fell to the floor and…red turban” (30). She then calls the gathered crowd “a sympathetic lot. Pretty stupid…. [Her] dream is to get him to meet with more responsive people—in London” (30). From the sound of it, Eva is just using this religion (or parts of it, at least) to increase her social stature.

The people that follow Haroon seem to have jumped on the religion bandwagon. They “looked keenly and expectantly” (13) at Haroon, and followed him in “some basic yoga positions” (13). Does this count as a religion? Or is this more like the teenagers who are jumping on the Kabala bandwagon after Madonna?

I think religions should be more personal and heartfelt than this. A religion should be something that you believe in wholeheartedly, not something you can order at a drive-thru.

A Rose by any other name

2005-10-26T18:17:00.000-07:00

The thing that struck me the first time I watched Keeping Up Appearances was that all four of the sisters have names which are also flowers: Hyacinth, Rose, Daisy and Violet. At first I thought that it was just cute, like when a couple gives all their children names that begin with a certain letter. However, after studying Victorian England for another English class, I found out that there are actually meanings associated with all types of flowers. So could there be more to these names? I found the meanings of different types of flowers on Victorian Bazaar, a website which does seem to suggest this.

Firstly, the most obvious is Rose. While different coloured roses have different meanings, the most common meanings for roses are love, beauty, sexuality and desire. The character of Rose on the sitcom fits her name perfectly. She is seen as the most sexual of the sisters, but she is also the one who is searching for love. This is shown when she goes into “mourning” and wears all black when a lover rejects her. The fact that it is a black negligee entwines love and sexuality to an even greater degree.

The character of Daisy also fits well with the meaning of the flower. Daisies are equated with loyal love, purity and patience. Daisy is incredibly loyal to Onslo, even though he does not seem to be interested in her as a sexual partner anymore. Daisy is frequently seen reading a romance novel, patiently waiting for Onslo to notice her. The fact that Onslo is no longer interested in sex with her also gives her a kind of purity, especially in contrast to Rose.

Hyacinths are flowers that symbolize rashness, consistency and jealousy. This is quite fitting for the character of Hyacinth, who is consistently trying to appear better in front of her neighbours. It can be suggested that this desire to improve her social standing is fueled by a jealousy of those who are better-off than she is. Many of the behaviours she engages in are quite rash and not very well thought out, as most of them fail.

Finally, Violet is the sister that is hardly ever seen. This in itself fits with the idea of the “shrinking violet.” Violets are also associated with faithfulness and taking a chance on happiness. Violet the character, who is wealthy by marriage but not entirely happy, can be seen as faithful because she puts up with her husband’s antics. It appears that she took a chance when she married him, hoping that money would bring happiness. Unfortunately, it did not.

Just slap on a new coat of…cement?

2005-10-12T11:32:00.000-07:00

Last time I painted my bedroom (bright green, by the way), I did not take the time to do any of the things which Debbie Travis would advise before painting a room. I did not fill in the nail holes, I did not use primer, and I did not cover the floor with anything. I just covered up the old paint with new. Needless to say, it was not the greatest painting job I had ever seen.

The Cement Garden by Ian McEwan somewhat reminded me of my haphazard painting job. It seems that in the novel, whenever any conflict or unpleasantness arises, the reaction of the characters is just to cover it up, instead of dealing with the issue. A psychologist might call this “denial.”

The most obvious example can be found when the mother dies. Jack and Julie “Roll her up in [a] sheet” (63) and then bury her in cement in the cellar (64). Instead of dealing with the pain of their mother’s death, or calling the authorities, the siblings try to cover it over and live in a state of denial.

There are many other examples of cover-ups in the novel. Tom decides “he was tired of being a boy and he wanted to be a girl now” (46), because girls don’t get hit. Instead of dealing with the issue of bullying, Julie and Sue simply dress him up as a girl (77). Also, when Tom wants to regress into being a baby, so he no longer has to deal with his mother’s death, Julie just lets him sleep in the cot in her room (108).

Near the end of the novel, when Jack goes into his room, he states, “Everything I looked at reminded me of myself” (127). He then proceeded to tear everything down and stuff it into the closet until “the room was empty like a cell” (128). I think this act is the ultimate in denial, as Jack attempted to deny his very self.

The siblings are caught up in this cover-up right up until the end of the novel. Even as they sat in Julie’s room, “listening to the great rhythmic thuds” (137) of their mother’s grave being discovered, they just sat in the room talking and reminiscing. “Julie pulled the curtains closed” (138) as a way of blocking out the real world, so they could live in their denial a while longer. Finally, the novel ends as “a revolving blue light made a spinning pattern on the wall” (138). The reader is not invited to enter the real world with the siblings, which is what they will be forced to do once the police take them into custody.

What’s so bad about kitsch anyway?

2005-10-01T12:18:00.000-07:00

Matei Cainesco (1987) is pretty down on the whole notion of kitsch. He speaks of kitsch as something that is predictable (253) and commercially available (252). He calls it a type of “false art” which is simply manufactured for mass consumption, and “is meant to offer instant satisfaction of the most superficial aesthetic needs or whims of a wide public” (262). He claims that people are drawn to kitsch either for status-seeking purposes, or simply for a pleasurable escape from their drab lives (228). Throughout the entire article, it seems that Cainesco can find nothing positive to say about kitsch.

But I have to wonder…what’s so bad about kitsch anyway? Am I a bad person because I have three framed Monet prints hanging in my bedroom? And what about my miniature Statue of Liberty from New York, or my wooden giraffe from Kenya? I suggest that kitsch, while it may be commercially available, is not really as bad as Cainesco makes it sound.

My years of psychological training have taught me this: as humans, we have a psychological need for relationships and contact with other humans. We have a need to belong. I suggest, therefore, that these kitsch objects, which we feel so compelled to collect, may actually be feeding that psychological need. Take, for example, my wooden giraffe from Kenya. I have never been to Africa, so this piece of kitsch is not status-seeking for me. It was actually a gift from my beloved Nana, who currently lives in Africa. So, even though I don’t particularly like the giraffe, I like the feeling of closeness to my Nana that I experience when I look at the statue. I think that many kitsch objects which people display around their homes can each be linked to a unique person or experience. The displaying of these items helps us to remember the feelings of love, belonging, and joy.

Sorry...no cat here!

2005-09-16T21:06:00.000-07:00

Hello, and welcome to my blog. If you have happened upon this site by mere chance, I must let you know that the purpose for my postings is purely academic. I will be responding to a number of readings for my SFU English 382 course, all about the British Suburbs. So if this topic intrests you, by all means, read on. However, if you were hoping for cute photos of my cat, you are out of luck. Enjoy!