Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
© Kamla-Raj 2014 Anthropologist, 17(2): 627-631 (2014)
The Concept of Identity in Cat’s Eye from theViewpoint of Julia Kristeva
Sarieh Alaei1, Fatemeh Azizmohammadi2 and Hamedreza Kohzadi3*
1Department of English Literature, College of English, Arak Branch, Islamic AzadUniversity, Arak, Iran
2,3 Department of English Literature, College of English, Arak Science and ResearchBranch, Islamic Azad University, Arak, Iran
E-mail: 1<[email protected]>, 2<[email protected]>3*<[email protected]>
KEYWORDS Abjection. Semiotic. Symbolic. Semiotic Chora. Revolt
ABSTRACT In Cat’s Eye, the protagonist of the novel attempts to formulate her subject by recalling her past andher painting exhibitions. According to Kristeva, without the semiotic mode and abjection, developing an identityis impossible. So once more the role of semiotic gets obvious. The semiotic mode should revolt against thesymbolic to make subjectivity. Here, if Elaine does not accede to the semiotic and revolt against the symbolic, shewould not able to get an identity. The authors of this paper attempt to follow the concept of identi ty in MargaretAtwood’s Cat’s Eye on the basis of Julia Kristeva’s theories.
*Address for correspondence:Hamedreza Kohzadi,Department of English LiteratureArak Science and Research BranchIslamic Azad University, Arak, IranZip code: 38361-1-9131, Arak, IranTelephone: +98 (937) 129 87 66E-mail: [email protected]
INTRODUCTION
Cat’s Eye narrates a middle-aged paintercalled Elaine Risely who lives in Vancouver. Shehas remarried and has two daughters. She comesback to Toronto, where she grew up, to preparea painting exhibition of her works. The storybegins at this point when she exhibits her oldand new works in a painting exhibition. Thepainter, who is both the narrator and the maincharacter of the novel, immerses in her ownthoughts looking past when a certain artistic andsocial event happened in her life and her per-sonality was affected.
Cat’s Eye should not be considered as a nov-el, which focuses solely on the story of its fic-tional characters over the past years. The audi-ence of this novel, becomes familiar with Cana-da’s social and cultural events in the mid- twen-tieth century. It also enables the audience tolook at the cultural elements of the course andfeminist movements that took place at that time.Cat’s Eye can be seen as a reflection of child-hood and adolescence story of the protagonist.
The author of this work keeps the nostalgiaalive and makes feelings in common with the read-er. In her childhood, Elaine used to keep a marbleresembling a cat’s eye in her red purse. The eyethat unconsciously became the main theme ofher paintings. Indeed, entering the childhoodhome and looking at that Cat’s Eye helped herrecall her past memories. One of the most centralcharacters by whom Elaine was affected is Cord-elia, her friend. Main questions seem striking:why is this exhibition in Toronto- her hometown?And what does Elaine look for? And why shedoes paint?
The Semiotic and Symbolic in Elaine’sPainting
In painting class, Elaine should paint a por-trait of a woman. Mr. Hrbik, her Master, told her:“you can draw objects very well. But as yet youcannot draw life. God first made the body out ofdirt, and after he breathed in the soul. Both arenecessary, Dirt and soul” (Atwood 1988: 692-693). Dirt and soul, it refers to something whichKristeva (1982) defines as “being inseparable thesemiotic mode and the symbolic mode” (p. 12).Edward Mooney (2011) affirms that “the semiot-ic communication of embodied signification con-tinues even as symbolic capacities emerge; itnever diminishes despite increasing dependenceon the symbolic” (p. 8).
In this part, Margaret Atwood agrees withher and mentions that both body and soul are
628 SARIEH ALAEI, FATEMEH AZIZMOHAMMADI AND HAMEDREZA KOHZADI
imperative for life. Body can be applied to thesemiotic mode and soul can be applied to thesymbolic. Hence, that the being is an alive crea-ture it needs both modes of signification togeth-er. At last, Mr. Hrbik told Elaine: “you are an un-finished woman,” he adds in a lower voice, “buthere will be finished.” He does not know that“finished” means over and done with. “He in-tends to be encouraging” (Atwood 1988: 693).
Elaine stated that he is not aware of the mean-ing of “finished” but it can be inferred a mainpoint. As a matter of fact, Elaine herself does notknow the exact meaning of “finished”. It meanssomething is complete and “unfinished” meanssomething which is not complete, somethingdefective. Therefore, Mr. Hrbik stated “unfin-ished” to refer to an incomplete person in theseparation of body and soul. It means that thebeing has to pay attention to those two modesof signification- the semiotic and the symbolic-otherwise, it will not be a complete being.
Abjection in Expelling Cordelia
Elaine suffers from lack of identity. In front ofCordelia’s disturbance, Elaine’s mother tells her:“You have to learn stand up for yourself, don’tlet them push you around. Do not be spineless.You have to have more backbone” (Atwood1988: 409) and Elaine says:
“I think of sardines and their backbones. Youcan eat their backbones. The bones crumble be-tween your teeth; one touch and they fall apart.This must be what my own backbones, is like:hardly there at all. What is happening to me ismy own fault, for not having more backbone”(Atwood 1988: 409).
It indicates that Elaine needs to be an inde-pendent subject, but she is not. She is lookingfor her identity. Elaine can behave the way shelikes. “I see that I don’t have to do what shesays and worse and better, I’ve never had to dowhat she says. I can do what I like” (p. 497) andalso “Ten stacks of plates,” say Grace. “Thiswould once have reduced me. Now I find it silly.I keep walking. I feel daring, light-headed. Theyare not my best friends or even my friends noth-ing binds me to them. I am free” (p. 498).
What happened to make Elaine behave in thisway? Before that, she obeyed Cordelia’s order.She was completely obedient. Elaine was afraidof disobedience! But now, she can do what shelikes. She is courageous and she does not obey
Cordelia. It goes back to that event which Elainewent to the down of bridge for picking up herhat. That event influenced on her. “Elian floun-der through the water, the edge of the ice break-ing off as I step, walking with waterlogged over-shoes is hard; I could slip, and fall all the way in”(p. 484) and “I can see light along the edges ofthe ravine, from the houses there, impossiblyhigh up. I do not know how I’m going to climbup the hill with my hands and feet hurting likethis; I do not know how I’m going to get home”(p. 484).
But after a while “I’m lying on my back be-side the creek, looking up at the sky. Nothinghurts anymore...The bridge is different- looking;it seems higher above me, more solid, as if therailings have disappeared or been filled in” (p.485) and she said: “I know I should get up andwalk home, but it seems easier to stay here, inthe snow, with the little pellets of ice caressingmy face gently. Also, I’m very sleepy. I close myeyes. I hear someone talking to me. It’s like avoice calling only very soft as if muffled” (p.486).
It was that event which affected on Elaineand Julia Kristeva defines it as semiotic effect. Inpain and fear situation, Elaine goes back to herimagination- that time when she is unable to keepon and closes her eyes- she communicates witha woman in her mind. On the basis of Kristeva, itwas returned to semiotic Chora. The semioticChora is the place of drives and imagination. InKristeva’s view, in semiotic Chora, there is nodifference and no boundaries between the beingand other (Kristeva 1982: 14). Elaine can’t differ-entiate between herself and Cordelia. She has tofind borders to get subjectivity.
It is possible by abjection. After semioticChora, abjection happens. According to Kriste-va, abjection means expelling what is not for thebeing and consequently, the being gets inde-pendency and identity. In Cat’s Eye, when Elaineexpels Cordelia, abjecting takes place and in thisway, Elaine feels free and can do what she likesand there is no compulsion. “I see that I don’thave to do what she says and worse and better,I’ve been had to what she says. I can do what Ilike.” And she says: “it is as if I can see right intothem. Why was I unable to do this before?” (At-wood 1988: 499).
Kristeva (1982: 136) stated that the semioticmode is revolutionary because it affects on thesymbolic mode. Here, in this part of novel, return
THE CONCEPT OF IDENTITY IN CAT’S EYE 629
to semiotic mode shows that it revolts againstthe symbolic (Cordelia’s behavior which is thesymbol of patriarchal society and the symbolicmode).
Abjection in Art
Literature can be purifying as well as abjec-tion. As Kristeva (1982) writes in Powers of Hor-ror: “literature may also involve not an ultimateresistance to but an unveiling of the abject: anelaboration, a discharge, and a hollowing out ofabjection through the crisis of the world” (p. 208).
In Powers of Horror, Kristeva describes Ce-line’s work to understand better the relation be-tween literature and abjection. (In Kristeva’sview, Celine is an abject author). In Noelle MacA-fee’s words: “Celine is the author of abjection asKristeva shows; When reading Celine, our ownborders of self are put on trial. We begin to losethe ability to discern between inside and out-side, self and other, strange and familiar” (McA-fee 2004: 35).
Then this makes us to go back to thetic phaseof the signifying process, unable to identify, “be-comes ambiguous, grows hollow, decays, andcrumbles; it is a fleeting, derisory, and even idi-otic illusion and one which is yet upheld” (Kriste-va 1982: 135). In Kristeva’s view, “Celine’s textsdo not discard things but they make object, ofcourse hateful object. And this is part of the pa-thology of abjection: turning the phantasm ofwhat is abjected into a dreaded object, an objectof hate” (McAfee 2004: 53).
It can be applied to art (literature is a kind ofart). Art acts as abjection. In some works of art,we see hateful objects. In them, we can’t differ-entiate between self and other. In these kinds ofworks, we look for borders. An artist goes backto the thetic phase- unable to distinguish bound-aries. It can happen by drawing or writing.
By creating a work of art, abjection takesplace and we find borders by drawing or writingsomething in disgust. An artist can abject themand differentiate borders. This stage leads todevelop subjectivity. According to Kristeva(1982: 76), abjection is the most vital and criticalstage in making subject and developing identity.
In Cat’s Eye, Elaine as a painter draws someportrait, especially of women. For instance, inher painting: “Farther along are Jon and Josef. Ilook at them with some fondness, them and theirmuscles and their cloudy headed notions about
women. Their youngness is terrifying. How couldI have put myself into the hands of such inexpe-rience?” (Atwood 1988: 1017).
Josef and John were lovely for her and now,they act as abjection. Elaine blames herself be-cause of her relation with them. She loved thembut next to them, she can’t differentiate betweenherself and them. They act as abject, so Elainehas to expel them. She did it before by leavingthem, but now, she recalls her past.
By remembering the past and painting theirpicture, Elaine discharges them. Dismissing themis vital for developing identity. That’s why Elainedid it. That the art acts like abjection, Elaine ex-pels them by painting to make her subject. Rela-tion with them hurts the boundaries and she hasto eliminate that to distinguish the borders.
On the other hand, in this painting, “Next tothem is Mrs. Smeath; many of her. Mrs. Smeathsitting, standing, lying down with her holy rub-ber plant, flying, with Mr. Smeath stuck to herback, being screwed like a beetle” (p. 1017). Ac-cording to Kristeva, the distinction between sub-ject and object (self and other) happens throughabjection. In her words, “the abject has only onequality of the object- that of being opposed to I”(Kristeva 1982: 1).
In this painting (Mrs. Smeath), this fact isclear. Kristeva (1982) asserted that literature helpsto work in some maladies of the soul. This thingwhich suffers the soul contains abjection. Artacts in this way (p. 207). Here, in this part of thenovel, Mrs. Smeath acts as abjection since inchildhood, Elaine hated her. It was annoying forher. So it acts like abjection. Elaine paints herand in this way, she expels what suffers her anddisturbs her boundaries. This picture containsdisgusting and shows Elaine’s hatred. She says:
I put a lot of work into that imagined body,white as a burdock root, flabby as pork fat. Hairyas the inside of an ear; I labored on it, with, I nowsee, considerable malice. But these pictures arenot only mockery, not only desecration. I putlight into them too. Each pallid leg, each steel-rimmed eye, is there as it was, as plain as bread.I have said, look. I have said, I see (Atwood 1988:1018).
And “this is part of the pathology of abjec-tion: turning the phantasm of what is abjectedinto a dreaded object, an object of hate” (McA-fee 2004: 53). Consequently, Elaine has turnedwhat is abjected into an object of hate. The fourthpicture in her exhibition is Cat’s Eye. In fact, inher portrait:
630 SARIEH ALAEI, FATEMEH AZIZMOHAMMADI AND HAMEDREZA KOHZADI
“Behind my half-head, in the center of thepicture, in the empty sky, a pier glass is hanging,convex and encircled by an ornate frame. In it, asection of the back of my head is visible; but thehair is different, younger. At a distance, and con-densed by the curved space of the mirror, thereare three small figures, dressed in the winterclothing of the girls of forty years ago. Theywalk forward, their faces shadowed, against afield of snow” (Atwood 1988: 1027).
This painting acts like abjection but what isgoing to be abjected? Elaine describes herself.In this way, she discharges part of herself. Sheremoves parts of herself which is dependent onher and disturbs her boundaries. When the in-fant recognizes boundaries, it removes the ab-ject mother because it is a barrier to distinguish.Abjection is both foreign and familiar.
As a result, Elaine destroys this barrier torecognize boundaries to develop her identity. Bypainting her portrait, she expels some parts ofherself, both foreign and familiar. She is depen-dent on that part and that is a fence for makingher subject. Hence, she eludes this part to havean identity. This process is necessary for hersince she is looking for her subjectivity.
And the last painting in the exhibition; It iscalled the Unified Field Theory. This picture re-lates to that terrible event in Elaine’s childhood:“Cutting across it a little over a third up is a wood-en bridge. To either side of the bridge are thetops of trees, bare of leaves, with a covering ofsnow on them, as after a heavy moist snowfall.This snow is also on the railing and struts of thebridge” (p. 1027).
That event made Elaine feel free and be freeof Cordelia- who was in abjection role- and madean independent character for herself. In this paint-ing, Elaine recalls that event and once againeludes it. On the whole, it can be inferred thatElaine as, an artist, expels whatever does notbelong to her through her paintings.
Revolt in Recalling the Past
“Tubular neon in cursive script decorates therestored brick façades, and there’s a lot of brasstrim, a lot of real estate, a lot of money. Up aheadthere are huge oblong towers, all of glass, lit up,like enormous gravestones of cold light; Frozenassets” (Atwood 1988: 39).
If the symbolic mode of signification over-comes, the being will change to a dead person.
In this state, coolness and unfeelingness depart.For instance, the society of spectacles (In thesociety of spectacle, people forget their real de-sires and they are at the service of society. That’swhy it leads to unfeelingness) is the one. In Cat’sEye, Toronto has changed. It has turned into asociety of spectacle. The description which Elainerenders of Toronto proves this fact. Then in thiskind of society, people are cool and unfeelingand indifferent. Then, the beings have to revoltto keep alive psychic life.
According to Julia Kristeva (1982), the soulis in danger without revolt. It’s essential to re-volt to make and keep a suitable psychic spaceand inner garden (p. 2013). In this way, the beinghas to revolt against the rigid symbolic modeand against the society of spectacle. That’s whichKristeva (1982) called “interior revolt” (p. 45). Inher view, this kind of revolt is critical for individ-ual independency and communication with oth-ers.
Kelly Oliver (1993) believed that “intimaterevolt is the process by which the subject-in-process displaces the authority of law which ittakes to be outside of itself onto its own individ-ual authority, which it takes to be inside itself. Inthis way, the individual belongs to the social; ina way that supports its own sense of self as wellas relations to others” (p. 86) and Kelly says thatthis intimate revolt is a return, a return to identi-ty.
In Cat’s Eye, Elaine says: “I don’t look muchat the towers though, or the people passing mein their fashionable getups, imports, handcraft-ed leather, and suede, whatever. Instead, I lookdown at the sidewalk like a tracker” (Atwood1988: 40). It shows that Elaine is rebelling by re-calling her past. She lives in a cool and unfeelingatmosphere.
Elaine is looking for her identity and as Kellyexpressed, revolt is a return to identity. ThenElaine is revolting for reviving her identity. Howis it indicated? Elaine looks at sidewalk like atracker. Tracker can imply two conceptions: 1- itreveals changing the situation and being power-ful, the symbolic mode. It involves a cool andapathetic atmosphere. 2- It refers to the past. Itgoes back to the semiotic mode. Therefore, thisconception includes “revolt”. In other words, itshows two sides- semiotic and symbolic. But forrevolt, it is vital to revolt semiotic against sym-bolic. How is it clear in Cat’s Eye?
Elaine says that she looks at the sidewalk.This sidewalk can be a symbol of Chora. Ac-
THE CONCEPT OF IDENTITY IN CAT’S EYE 631
cording to Kristeva (1982: 14), Chora is a placewhich the being situates in it. It can be inferred,Elaine is coming back to the semiotic Chora bylooking down at the sidewalk. In this way, revolthappens. By recalling her past (returning to semi-otic), revolt takes place.
CONCLUSION
As noted, one of the important themes ofAtwood’s novel is self-identity or looking forfemale identity. By means of Kristeva’s theories,it was showed, that Elaine is looking for her iden-tity. From the perspective of Kristeva, identity isnot a fixed entity. With respect to the semioticand the symbolic mode, which are alongside andmotherhood model which are applied in the nov-
el, the reader reaches this point that Elaine hasno fixed identity but her subjectivity is in a pro-cess. This refers to the post modern’s point ofviews. In their view, everything is in a process.In postmodern world, there is no place for fixityand passivity.
REFERENCES
Atwood M 1988. Cat’s Eye. New York: Bantam.Kristeva J 1982. Power of Horrors: An Essay in Abjec-
tion. New York: Columbia UP.McAfee N 2004. Julia Kristeva. London: Routledge.Mooney EF 2011. Julia Kristeva: Tales of horror and
love. Kierkegaard’s Influence on the Social Scienc-es, 13: 177.
Oliver K 1993. Reading Kristeva: Unraveling the Dou-ble-bind. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
