Final Blog

- T O   S U M   U P. . .  -

I enjoyed both the articles and the movie this week. I thought they each had something interesting to say about the concepts of love and desire. 

The first thing that I was really drawn to was the concept of internet dating. Paumgarten discussed the concept of finding love through the internet. I find it interesting how often our society uses technology as a crutch for our everyday humane activities. I think it is one thing to have your information on the internet that someone could find and possibly connect with, therefore contacting you. I think it is another thing entirely to let technology compare these facts and associate who would be good for who. Although I do have fate that this is entirely possible, it seems odd that we would leave such a serious decision up to a computer - a device that feels no emotion. I don't think love (or desire) are this simple. For example, a computer is not going to set you up to have an affair with a married man or woman... yet our desire can want that. The same thing can be said for true love. Sometimes the "perfect" match isn't quite so perfect. We can never be sure because, as we have definitely learned in this course, we do not consciously make this decision. There is no set algorithm, our mind is radical and even unpredictable in this manner.

The main point that stuck with me about Kristeva's article was about how love and desire basically cannot exist without each other. My first thought was of the little angel and devil on the shoulders bickering about the "correct" decision. We cannot truly love someone until we have truly desired them. We need desire to open the door for us. However, once the door is open and we want to be alone with love, desire is third-wheeling the whole situation, running it into the ground. It's getting desire to close the door as it leaves thats the tricky part. 

I enjoyed the movie because I knew nothing about it going into it. I was surprised to find Jessica's meticulous character lesbian, and surprised again when she decided against it. It made me seriously start to question the concepts of love and desire. I think Jessica truly loved Helen, which is why they remained friends at the end of the film. However, she did not desire her. So was it true love? Is desire needed after you have fallen in love to keep a relationship authentic? I think this movie pushed the boundaries of friendship as well. I began trying to rationalize the ending by thinking that Helen and Jessica were just menat to be really close friends and not lovers, that they made a mistake. However, there was more to their friendship than just enjoying each other's personalities. Jessica was at times attracted to Helen and wanted her sexually. My final conclusion for the film was that the movie was playing on the idea of love and sex. The two women did love each other but did not connect sexually and therefore fell apart. The movie shows our human carnal ways of life and how we lust for one another and that a relationship cannot last without that. I wondered what would have happened if Helen did not want to have sex with Jessica as much. I wonder if they would have lived happily ever after or if it still would have fallen apart. Just how important is sex?

I enjoyed this semester. I thought the readings were interesting and I ESPECIALLY enjoyed all of the movies that we watched. I thought the course was going to be about the ooey-gooey nature of love and how every princess gets her prince and vice versa but I liked the very real and sometimes brutal discussions and ideologies we looked at. I liked how the class was very open for us to express our emotions and feelings about love and desire and how we weren't afraid to look into the sexual components of it to, seeing as how that is a very important part of the whole concept.

Simple Passion

- I S   T H I S   L I F E ? -

After reading Annie Ernaux's "Simple Passion" I came to a conclusion about the essence of life and living. We have seen countless examples of desire consuming a person's life; everything from their eating habits to the way that they think. It's clear that being the in state of "desire" is being in the state of a completely different mind-set, one that we have little to no control over.

This is evident in "Simple Passion" Ernaux explains that "A" took over her life. I believe that one quote sums all of this up, "After that passage, the rest of the book returned to being what everything else had been to me for the past year - a means of filling in time between two meetings." 

"A means of filling in time between two meetings." This line stuck with me, I re-read it over a few times to fully grasp the intensity of it. This woman has been completely engulfed in her desire for "A" that nothing else even has meaning to her anymore. Her family, friends, work, hobbies, interests, nothing mattered or satisfied her life. Besides having a poor essence of life, this mind-set can also lead to serious problems in the future. If someone is this displeased in their world and obsessed with only one factor (one that most likely they cannot have, hence them being obsessed with having it in the first place) then it can lead to depression or suicide.

Before "A" we are led to believe that Ernaux had lived a normal life. She was happy when she was supposed to be and sad when she was supposed to be. Her past was as real as life should be. There was no obsession and she had control over herself. After "A" came into the picture she lost this control. All she did was think about him and desire him, to an unhealthy level that consumed her entirety. 

So what does this mean for the future? How does something like this play out? What if a person only believes in one thing and then they are told they cannot have it? What else would there be to live for? It's interesting how our mind has the ability to betray us in this way.

Love Song

- T H E   G A M B L E R -

by Fun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rT-5NY83OYI

Slow down, we've got time left to be lazy,

All the kids have bloomed from babies,

Into flowers in our eyes.

We've got fifty good years, left to spend out in the garden,

I don't care to beg your pardon,

We should live, until we die.

We were barely eighteen, when we crossed collective hearts.

It was cold but it got warm, when you barely crossed my eye.

Then you turned, put out your hand, and you asked me to dance,

I knew nothing of romance, but it was love at second sight.

I swear when I grow up, I won't just buy you rose,

I will buy the flower shop and you will never be lonely.

Even if the sun stopped waking up over the fields,

I will not leave, I will not leave 'til it's our time.

So just take my hand and know that I,

Will never leave your side.

It was the winter of '86, all the fields had frozen over,

So we moved to Arizona, to save our only son,

And now he's turned into a man, though he thinks just like is mother,

He believes we're all just lovers, he sees hope in everyone.

And even though she moved away, we always get calls from our daughter,

She has eyes just like her fathers, they are blue when skies are grey,

And just like him she never stops, never takes the day for granted

Works for everything thats handed to her, never once complained.

You think that I nearly lost you,

When the doctors tried to take you away.

Like the night you took my hand, beside the fire.

Thirty years ago to this day.

You swore you'd be here 'til we decide that it's our time,

But it's not time, you never quit in all your life.

So just take my hand and know that I 

Will never leave your side.

You're the love of my life and know that I

Will never leave your side.

You come home from work, and you kiss me on the eye.

You curse the dark you say that I should never feed them what is ours.

And so we move out to the garden, look at everything we've grown,

Now the kids are coming home, so I'll set the table, you can make the fire.

________________________________________________________________________

"The Gambler" is off of Fun's first album, "Aim and Ignite." Nate Reuss (the singer and lyricist) has such an incredible talent with lyrics that it was hard for me to pick just one of his songs. However, this song is always so touching to me. First off it is sung about his family, from his mother's perspective. Writing from his own mom's perspective gives the song a whole new light and makes it even more touching than if it were from his own. Through her eyes, Nate is describing how she met her husband and the life they pursed with their two children (their son being Nate). 

One of my favorite lines is "but it was love at second sight." I think this really emphasizes how real the relationship is. We always hear "love at first sight" but how often is that true? Without even knowing the person, it must just be lust or desire. The fact that Nate emphasizes love at second sight makes the listener understand that it's not a fairy-tale story but a very real one.

The next part I really like is when Nate is describing himself and his sister. I like the word play he does here. When he talks about himself, he links himself to his mother and when he talks about his sister, he links her to his father. This kind of capitalizes on the whole "daddy's girl" and "mama's boy" stereotype and ultimately provides a sweeter story told. On a side note, I also like how he spends two more lines of lyrics talking about his sister rather than himself, just a nice brotherly thing to do.

Nate has a few songs about his father having cancer and he talks about that in this song as well. All of Nate's songs have to do with himself or his family but they're told creatively like this one. He never says the word "cancer" in any of his music but in interviews he has told people the truth. It makes the line "when the doctors tried to take you away" even more heartbreaking when you realize the struggle and impact that this severe illness must have had on the entire family. The song then goes into the children coming home and the family getting together, which provides a positive light. It's clear that Nate's father (though not entirely healed) had survived and still lives a fulfilling life.

My absolute FAVORITE part of this song, however, is the ending. The song ends almost abruptly, both musically and vocally. This is because his mother's life isn't over. Nate told the story of his mother's life up to present day and he ends the song there, on a positive note. The last notes of the song (a major third, which is a very happy sounding interval) leave us to believe that everything in their life is good, despite the troubles and that they do love each other and live happily.

All in all this song is a very realistic and happy approach to love. I realize a lot of the stuff we talk about is the opposite, and Nate has plenty of heartbreaking songs as well, but I really enjoy listening to this sweet tale of his parents. Like I said, Reuss has an incredible way with words in all of his music (the music is also very unique and *fun* to listen to) and is a terrific storyteller.

The Bad Girl II

- L A M E N T   O R   R E L I E F ? -

After finishing the bad girl I couldn't help but only feel sorry for Ricardo and not the bad girl herself. It was almost impossible to feel any remorse for her at all seeing as how she continuously manipulated and lied to Ricardo (and many, many others). Throughout the whole story, Ricardo would keep taking her back no matter the scenario - because he loved his image of her. In my last response I spoke about how Ricardo's mind was lying and manipulating him more than the bad girl was. He saw her as this almighty figure that if he could obtain, then he would forever be happy.

I know realize that is why he kept after the bad girl. She was what he could never have. Like when someone says, "don't look behind you," ALL you want to do is look behind whereas only a few seconds ago you couldn't care less. Once you desire something, you become obsessed and lose all reason.  This is what happened to Ricardo.

At the end of the novel, the two are once again in each other's arms. The bad girl is sick, however, and dying yet Ricardo still takes her back. I think they both see each other as vulnerable in their own eyes. The bad girl sees Ricardo as a man that can be by her side when she finally dies and Ricardo sees the bad girl as finally needing him and unable to continue without him. Therefore when she inevitably dies I am wondering if Ricardo's true state of mind (not his desire) is lamenting the loss of the bad girl, or relieved that he no longer has their un-liftable weight on his shoulders.

I found the last line of the book particularly interesting. The bad girl tells Ricardo that she has given him a good story for a novel, which made me think that she is trying to gain her place in history from the grave! She is manipulating her way right through purgatory! I feel like that "un-liftable weight" was thrown right back on Ricardo for now his desire for her has turned into making their whole undesirable love story into... a love story?

The Bad Girl

- W A I T,   I ' V E   S E E N   T H I S   B E F O R E -

After reading the first half of Mario Vargas Llosa's "The Bad Gril" I realized its direct correlation to Madame Bovary. At first I thought, "Oh no! Not again," however I do seem to enjoy reading this book despite the annoyance of its Madame Bovary, Lily. The one predominant theme that I couldn't fully understand (in both novels) is Charles or Ricardo's attraction to such an undesirable character. I tried to look into this more.

It's very clear that when we lust for someone our judgment becomes clouded (we have seen this in countless examples of film, tv, literature, etc.) however how come our judgement becomes so clouded that we ignore all of the major flaws that someone has? I mean, when we're extremely hungry we will eat just about anything, but you can still hate the taste of the food. How come we don't see the bad parts  of people.

Lily had constantly treated Ricardo poorly, yet he would continuously take her back! Why?! If he's so "hungry," then why doesn't he just get something else to eat? I came to the realization that it also may be a specific character trait (...flaw) in these character's personalities. From personal experience, I had been in a similar position where I was infatuated with a girl that did not treat me well but after awhile I grew sick of it and broke it off. Even though I still wanted her, her undesirable qualities were too strong to outweigh the desirable ones. So how come Charles and Ricardo can't do it?

Perhaps they're too blinded and even more infatuated than I was, but I tend to view this element as a character weakness. Of course, there wouldn't be much of a story if Ricardo just left Lily in the beginning I suppose, either. Regardless, I have one more theory. Lily presents herself as such a talented liar and cheat that perhaps Ricardo constructs his own "lie" of her. Maybe Lily isn't lying to Ricardo as much as Ricardo is lying to Ricardo. Maybe he willingly suspends all belief of the negativity in Lily's character and therefore manipulates his mind into seeing only the positives. Then again, isn't that what desire is anyways?

Films

- C O N T I N U O S   T H E M E   O F   D E S I R E -

After watching the two films I realized that the same theme of love and desire can be seen through just about any medium. Whether it is reading a book, looking at art, listening to music or watching a movie - love and desire are everywhere! In the film Solaris, Chris (George Clooney) is struggling with trying to overcome the inner desire for his wife. He is visited by her when he's on the ship near Solaris and is very quickly (and easily) tricked into thinking she's real.

Chris' wife had died and having her back literally made no sense. At first Chris rejected the idea of his wife but then his love and desire won over. After a while the plot progresses and we learn that the new Rea is a replica of the real one that was made from Chris' memory. Even though he knew this, he could not bring himself to let her go again. His desire for his wife was so strong that he was willing to suspend his disbelief and trick himself into thinking it was her.

At the end of the movie Chris is faced with the choice of choosing reality or fiction. In reality his wife was dead and he could never have her back but in Solaris Rea could always be there, just as he remembered. Although many people would choose to keep their reality - Chris could live the life he wanted and be happy in this facsimile of his mind. I think this movie shows how strong and powerful desire can be. Do we have enough control as humans to make decisions when desiring or are we completely impotent to its power. Did Chris really have a choice or was his desire too strong?

Madame Bovary (2)

- E M M A' S  C O N T I N U O U S. . . I N T O  T H E   G R A V E -

After completing the novel I cannot say that I'm surprised of Emma's outcome. In my mind, Emma is stuck in the state of mind that her life will be like the books she reads- that the perfect fairy tale will find her. In a sense, she does deserve a happy and fulfilled life, just like any other woman would want, however, Emma is only concerned about her own happiness and will constantly neglect those around her if she finds a new source for that happiness.

An example of this can be seen in Charle's surgery. Emma wanted Charles to do the surgery because she knew it would bring him great fame and, in turn, bring her happiness. When Charles is given this idea he is timid, and now that it benefits her life, Emma immediately jumps in saying that he should do it and that he'll be great. I did not take this encouragement from her sincerely at all. Emma only wanted to be the wife of the famous surgeon and have more money and notoriety. Hence, when the surgery is not a success, she instantaneously blames Charles and is angered by him! As if experimenting surgery was wrong. In fact, I did not think Charles was in the wrong for trying to perform the surgery. People criticized him for it but experiments are how modern medicine has become the way it is today. 

Besides the "lovingness" that Emma was giving to Charles, she was also secretly seeing Rodolphe. That was her new love and desire. I say "that" instead of "he" because it was the scandal and frill of the affair that Emma had fallen in love with. Rodolphe's money didn't hurt either I bet. When he leaves her, she is stuck with Charles again. Of course, Emma becomes depressed for her fairy-tale life that she thought would be given to her on a silver platter was flushed down the toilet.

Oh woe is Emma. I actually began to feel bad for her when... BAM, Leon's back. Here we go again, new life, new love, blah, blah, blah. A point where you want to flip a few pages in the book and fast forward through the movie. Predictable Emma rekindles her feelings for Leon and now wishes to start again with him.

It's no surprise that in the end Emma takes her own life. It was only a matter of time before she came to the conclusion that her life was not a fairy tale and that she could not live the fancy life that she desired. Still, one does have to feel some sympathy because it was not entirely her fault. Wanting to have wonderful life is no fault but Emma seemed to expect it to just come to her without her doing any work.

As I type and re-read my blog I get angry again like I did when reading the novel. I very much disliked Emma's character for her greediness and selfishness. Even though she was limited in her options, I still would have liked to see her divorce Charles and be shunned by her community than jump from guy-to-guy hoping that that man would give her the life she wanted. I would have liked to see Emma kill herself metaphorically and start a new Emma in a new town with a new life, yet she kills her self for real and I was let down. All that being said, I love when a novel sparks my emotions and subsequently I thoroughly enjoyed Madame Bovary. 

Madame Bovary

- E M M A' S  C O N S T A N T  D R I V E -

After reading this week's chapters of Madame Bovary, I found a distinct pattern in the way that Emma lives her life. At the beginning we are introduced to Emma living on a farm with her father. Here she is unhealthy and desires a better life for herself. When Charles comes to mend her father's broken leg, she falls in love with the man of a higher class that is successful. However, she does not fall in love with Charles, but the desire to live a better and more fulfilling life with a wealthier man. As soon as she sees Charles, he instantly becomes the only thing she could ever want.

Soon after they get married and start a life together, Emma begins to feel bored and uninterested in her new life and husband. She finds music, art, and walking in the park to be monotonous whereas she used to find these activities to evoke joy. Eventually the two get invited to the Marquis' grand ball. Emma once again becomes thrilled at the idea of going to an extravagant ball. When there, she is overwhelmed with the pompousness of the event. After dancing and drinking and conversing with wealthy individuals, she quickly decides that living this life is the only thing she could ever want.

After the party Emma describes the night at the best night of her life. However, she immediately goes back to depression because she can no longer enjoy the world she wishes to live in. Sensing that Emma was unhappy, Charles offered to open a new practice in Yonville and start a new life with Emma... again. As soon as he declares that a new life is a possible option for them, Emma realizes that it is the only thing she could ever want.

The two start a new life in Yonville. Emma believed that her life was once again everything she could ever have wanted but eventually finds her self getting bored again. Here is where Emma meets Leon. Leon is a young man who is passionate about the arts. He rekindles Emma's love for music, art, and reading. Emma soon comes to the conclusion that Leon is in love with her and, enthralled by excitement, she falls in love with him also. However, to avoid committing adultery, she quickly ignores this thought and becomes a more loyal wife to Charles. Yet, Emma began picturing how much better her life could have been with Leon and soon she comes to the realization that Leon is the only thing she could ever want.

After Leon leaves for Paris, Emma is once again emotionally distraught. This continuous pattern displays itself over and over again. When Rodolphe comes into Charle's practice and meets with Emma, he falls for her. Yet again Emma is thrown into a spiral of lustful wishing for a new a better life with money and lavish parties. Once Rodolphe expresses his love for Emma, she eventually cannot resist and the two begin a scandalous affair, sneaking around and meeting at night to be together. She wants to go away and start a new life with Rodolphe (sound familiar?) because he is the only thing she could ever want.

Emma is the perfect example of how a person can continuously desire more, but never be able to fulfill those desires. She is a woman who keeps on wanting more in life and can never be truly satisfied. Emma is fully-heartedly, one hundred percent in love with the idea of love and fools herself into believing that whatever fleeting desire she has next is truly the only thing she could ever want.

- Celestina Week Two -

C A L I S T O ' S  C H A I N

The first thing I came to think about when Calisto gave Celestina the chain was how he had promised her the cloak and skirt instead. I was wondering why these specific items were the objects of barter in the first place, and came to the realization that clothing (such as skirts and cloaks) provide a "cover" for people. I feel as though the clothing represents a way of hiding the truth behind close doors whereas as a chain is much more noticeable and revealing (compared to clothing and items that you wear). In that respect, the chain represents who people really are and furthermore represents Calisto's lustfulness and desire. By him choosing to give this more personal attachment to Celestina rather than the garments, speaks volumes about the chain itself. Celestina has such a superior postion over Calisto, that he is willing to put his whole desire and lust into Celestina's hand, rendering him utterly impotent.

For Celestina, this chain represents a victory in that she has won over Calisto both profitably and personally. I feel as though Celestina views this as a meaning of life - she thrives off of this excitement and power to mandate people's love affairs. As an extension, Parmeno and Sempronio are enraged at Celestina because the chain represents her power over them as well. Seeing as how the two of them are Calisto's more revered servants, it is frustrating to them to see him primarily confide in Celestina. 

D E S I R E  O F  N I G H T

What is ironic about the whole "night" theme is how we typically view night as either a time of romanticism and fun, or a time or fear and danger. Those peaceful walks in the park with moonlight can easily turn into a crazy guy with a chainsaw jumping out at you. That being said, I think there are few primary elements to Melibea and Calisto's night meeting. 

First off, it reveals the secrecy and "taboo" desire that the two have for each other. The fact that they are sneaking around provides a thrill and element of danger to their lust. I think Fernando de Rojas is trying to stress the concept of their espionage romance almost to a point of wrong-doing. This "wrong-doing" also foreshadows the idea that maybe things won't go over so well in the end of the novel.

In terms of the night time being positive, it directly correlates with how Calisto describes Melibea as "radiating" and "having eyes like stars" and such. However, the night time also correlates to Celestina. The name Celestina comes from Celestial which means pertaining to the sky and heavens. Celestina has a haunting presence is Melibea and Calisto's relationship at all times because she is the mastermind behind the entire thing. I think the whole "night" theme has a double meaning with Melibea being the good aspects (the hand-in-hand moonlit walks through the park) and Celestina representing the darker aspects (bam! Chainsaw guy).

- Themes in Celestina -

T H E M E S

After reading the first ten acts of celestina I have noticed a few reoccurring themes in the play. First off is the theme for the desire of approval. There are two elements to this theme. The first one is love. Obviously, we want approval from the person we love and are willing to go to great extents to get that approval. For instance, Elicia loves Sempronio and was cheating on him with Crtio. However, by displaying her anger and frustration in this way, it shows they she really desires the approval (and in this case love) of Sempronio. This love element of the approval theme can also be seen in Calisto. He falls madly in love with Melibea before he even knows her, overwhelmed by her beauty and more so overwhelmed by his desire for her approval.

The other element of this theme of approval is seen through the servants. This element is not based on love but the desire of acceptance. Parmeno is jealous of Calisto's favoritism towards Sempronio. Even though Parmeno knows Celestina and advises Calisto to stay away, he ignores Parmeno's advice and sways towards Sempronio. This is most likely a result of ignorance and lust.

Another theme I found in this play was the theme of greed. This theme is clearly evident in all of the characters. There are countless examples of greed that can be found in almost every character. Calisto is a noble and wealthy yet is always desiring more and treating his servants poorly. Although his love for Melibea is not necessarily greedy, the way he goes about managing his wealth is. There is one point where Sempronio is boasting Calisto about how generous he is to have given Celestina a hundred coins. What is ironic is that it is clear that Calisto does not give out money often, yet Sempronio is pretending to idolize how altruistic he is.

This theme can be seen directly in regards to Celestina's, Sempronio's, and Parmeno's characters. When Sempronio learns of Calisto's love for Melibea, he immediately conjures a method that he can profit and   and coerce Calisto into spending money into getting his love. The same act is seen alter when Sempronio and Celestina devise their plan. What I did not expect was how quickly Parmeno threw out his dignity and pride and sold out to Celestina for chance to be with Aresua.

I look forward to finishing the play and seeing how these themes and these characters are resolved. I am curious as to see if any of the characters will be able to redeem their "flaws" before either their death or the end of the play, whichever comes first. 

- Troubadour Poetry, Slavoj Žižek, and Buñuel’s “That Obscure Object of Desire” -

T R O U B A D O U R  P O E T R Y,   Z I Z E K,   A N D  "T H A T  O B S C U R E  O B J E C T  O F   D E S I R E"

     What I find interesting about the poetry is all the sadness and extreme despair that comes out of love. Love is word we over use in our culture: I "love" spaghetti, I "love" this tv show. The actual word love is supposed to hold a extreme meaning of maximum joy and happiness, yet we "love" the Jersey shore? That being said, troubadour poetry was written in a time where the word love really meant a whole lot more, and when so much heartache comes with it, it's even more sincere and significant. 

I started to think at why we feel love and I thought, for whatever reason, of dreams. There's a reason we cannot remember dreams when we wake up. This is a defense mechanism that your brain has so that it doesn't have to rationalize your dreams the night before. Sometimes dreams feel so real and if we had a lot of our brain power devoted to analyzing dreams we could very easily go insane and start questioning reality. My question is, if our brain is crafty enough to come up with this safety net, how come we are so subject to love? Why doesn't our brain register love as a threat and develop a defense mechanism against it. It seems to do us more harm than good at most points.

     After reading this essay I found several things interesting. First off, I liked how he Zizek refereed to women as the "Lady" because I think that says a lot about the idealization of women, through text. We talked last week about how people are blinded by love and wind up thinking that the person they're in love with is this god-like, perfect creation. Thus, referring to the text, we think of them as "The Lady" for us. It's a mocking way to write but I suppose we're mocking ourselves by falling into this trap.

Another thing I found interesting about Zizek's essay was how it related to the video we watched. It's interesting how from an outside perspective we see things are being unreasonable or ridiculous, but when completely involved everything seems very real. Love really is like a drug in that it inhibits our ability to see things clearly and think logically, to an extent. 

     This film had a surplus of examples of love and desire. I think you can sum it up as just that: love and desire. Even though the two words are correlated, they are very different. In the movie, Mathieu falls in love with Conchita but also desires her greatly. When he has her all he wants to do is be with her sexually, but when he loses her, all he wants to do is have her back (not necessarily sexually). 

On the other hand, Conchita loves Mathieu but also desires his love in return. I'm not convinced that their relationship would ever be normal because they both love and desire the same thing in different ways. We naturally believe that when two people "love" each other, they're perfect for each other. This movie is a great example of how love can ruin people while having both people still love each other... over... and over... and over... and over again.

In regards to two actresses playing Conchita, I wanted to believe that one was a representation of Mathieu's love for Conchita and the other was a representation of his lust for her. However it didn't quite add up. I came up with several different ideas, each one getting shut down. I am interested in seeing what other people came up with in class because this is one thing that really stuck with me.

The other part of the movie that was odd to me was the butler's character. I'm not entirely sure why he kept coming on screen buttoning his clothes and straightening his tie (as if he had just had his clothes off). It happens a few times, which led me to question his behavior. He also drops a dew demeaning lines about women that Mathieu shuts down rather quickly. I feel like this character is symbolizing something but am struggling to find out what. Once again, I look forward to what the class thinks.

- Song of Songs, Narcissus, and Lacan's "Mirror Stage" -

S O N G  O F  S O N G S

The relationship between the lover and beloved is very sensual. There are many elements of the text that conclude this. The very first line is "Let him kiss me the with kisses of his mouth..." It's interesting that the first line of the song is not something alone the lines of "Oh how I feel for this man..." but instead is something physical. The poem also continues to compare the love to material objects, which makes the love seem un-authentic. Furthermore - this is a love between a wealthy man and a lower class woman, which brings with it taboo qualities (which can make people more attracted to each other). The conversation goes back and forth about beauty and jewelry but is very shallow, in fact non-existant in regards to deeper emotional meanings. 

N A R C I S S U S

After re-reading Narcissus' and Echo's conversation I realized that Echo did not "echo" Narcissus in the traditional sense. Apparently Echo had the ability to pick and choose which aspects of conversation she was to repeat. She chose certain sections of Narcissus' shout-outs to reply back with. When Narcissus questioned  "Is there anyone here?," Echo responded, "Here!" The "?" and "!" suggests that Echo didn't respond in a questioning way ultimately meaning that she can also change the inflections that the first voice says (which is not traditional in an echo either). That being said, Echo came off as possibly insane. She may have scared Narcissus by immediately charging to embrace him rather than identifying herself first. Naturally anyone alone in the woods would have made a bolt for it. I knowI would.

When Narcissus saw his reflection in the water he immediately fell in love with the desire for himself. He fell in love with something he could not have (in this case because he was the person). Being the individual was not enough to satisfy his desire for himself. He needed some external connections whether it be emotionally, physically or both. 

Narcissus was fully aware that it was his reflection in the water but he couldn't pull himself away from the burning desire he felt. This is a very common aspect of love. Very often when we desire something we tend to put it on a pedestal and admire to a point that is unrealistic. We almost "fool" ourselves into believing that person, object, place or whatever is the most incredible god-like thing ever to exist, whereas someone who wasn't clouded by desire may have a more practical interpretation. The fact that Narcissus knew it was himself and still could not conquer his emotions proves that we are controlled by our lust and victims to its power.

M I R R O R  S T A G E

One can absolutely see a correlation between Lacan's article and the Narcissus myth: primarily, the whole concept of reflection. Lacan calls the discovery of reflection an identification, which is practical for when we are extremely young in age, we have very little ways of connecting with our identity. This leads to physical motions being our initial bridge to discovering who we are. (Perhaps there is some underlying reason there as to why we are such a physical species?)

Just like Narcissus became aware of himself when admiring his reflection, we become a little more connected with ourselves. The story starts to digress, of course, when Narcissus falls victim to his own desire. Luckily, humans are too young to feel desire for love to that extent at that age.