Tuesday, April 11, 2017

The Body

"I had forgotten my skin, my misplaced body" (Young 271).

Here, Dale C. Young's speaker states that the body, body parts and mind are separate and may not in fact belong to the person they are attached to.  Then, "phantom skin" is brought up (Young 271).  When one feels something that is essentially a living metaphor, something that is not really attached to one's body an amputated leg but once was.  In the grief process, I know that many people may feel their dead loved one present at specific moments, walking along side them.  Onlookers will deny this truth because they may not feel or see the same thing.  We learn that the speaker feels phantom touches in their sleep.  The speaker references Mark- "it is better to lose a part than to lose a whole" (Young 271).  But the speaker does not want to let go of the idea of this touch, this fantasy because they know that it serves their inner happiness and they are accustomed to it. 

In U Tin Moe's "Desert Years" the earth seems so intertwined with the body.  Objects and bodily movements are inseparable.  "Sobs/ An intake of breath/ A sliver of glass..." (Moe 446) The imagery of a person sobbing so many times, sharply breathing in out of involuntary routine contrasted with a tiny piece of glass is crushing.  It is supposed to be emotionally overwhelming- to think that even the smallest shard of glass could cause such suffering.  Moe continues, "The earth doesn't dare put fruit forth/ it abandons all and looks at me)" (446).  The personification of the earth as looking at the speaker and refusing to give crops is terrifying, I imagine, for the speaker.  It's as if the responsibility of the earth not producing is all the speaker's fault.  I'm sure it's not the speaker's fault, but they blame themselves. 

Angel Nafis uses imagery in a way that is comparable to Moe in "Legend."  The difference is that we know exactly who the speaker is referencing- their dad.  Because of all of the details and objects associated with the speaker's dad, the audience feels as if they can see him.  I certainly felt the anxiety of waiting for someone who was late and had no cell phone and I imagined his car and eating a grilled cheese sandwich with him.  The speaker doesn't seem like they see their Dad often, but when they do, he does the same things he's always done which the speaker may have previously found irritating but now it feels kind of comforting.  I think there is always that tendency, and yes I am totally projecting here, that when a person moves far away from their family and realizes that life and the world is constantly changing around them and life seems to be a series of piling on of sheer adjustments that no one warned you about- to miss the things that seemed irritating or even maybe were bad for them.  Sure, the speakers Dad might have his quirks, but I think that something a lot of people slowly realize is that family is important.  I think, especially in the US, there is this whole idea that you are supposed to become a completely independent person and act in totally selfish manners at all times and there is an idea that emotional attachment to family is abnormal.  I think that as adults, many people rediscover things they once disavowed- family, religion, etc.  I'm not saying that it's a good thing to rekindle negative relationships or to reach into the past trying to discover something that doesn't represent you anymore but it's a tendency I've noticed in folks. 

In this society filled with privileged people and corporations telling everyone what to do with their own bodies, I think it can feel difficult to take ownership.  Our bodies have been with us, usually, our whole lives.  Our brains can replay the past in our minds and spark a physiological reaction.  Therefore, it's absurd to believe we can control everything that happens in our mind and body.  But don't we have some locus of control, even when society seeks to vanquish us of autonomy?  Of course the answer will vary based on experiences and marginalization.  It is such a difficult question to which I do not have a definitive answer. 

2 comments:

  1. Your answer to the prompt of the how the political is complicated by the narrative, rings throughout your response. In this writing, you nail exactly what is political in something as significant as bucking the American ideology of individualism. By acting from a family loyalty and love that isn't the selfish branding we've been sold, it is an act of defiance. You ask, "But don't we have some locus of control, even when society seeks to vanquish us of autonomy?" You're right to allow for answers varied by personal experiences. It's equally true, that within the question you pose, we most definitely do have some control. It is our own will expressed through the bodies in we which we house our selves, over which we determine what happens. This is a deeply political act - self-determination, agency over the very body that's been commodified and ordered into economic obedience. The locus is self-determined. The political is the act of making that determination for ourselves.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Mind body Spirit separation and fusion reminds us that we have very little control but we also have influence. Your post was pretty brilliant and answered a lot of the questions the poem bring up mind body Spirit separation and fusion reminds us that we have very little control but we also have influence. Your post was pretty brilliant and answered a lot of the questions the poems bring up

    ReplyDelete