Fresh Thoughts: 100% Organic

Arendell, Terry. “Conceiving and Investigating Motherhood: The Decade’s Scholarship.”  Journal of Marriage and Family 62.4 (2000): 1192-1207 JSTOR. Web. 1 Dec 2009.

In this article, the author is discussing the research on motherhood that has taken place over the last decade. She attempts to summarize the research, and condense it, allowing the reader to find data and statistics located in one place. Arendell’s main argument is in reference to the study of motherhood in relation to the “norm.” That is, the ideal American family – White, middle class, married, stay-at-home-mom. She takes issue with this version as the ideal family, stressing that it turns the true norm of mothers – those that are single, employed, of color, or of a lower class – against themselves and leads to more dissatisfaction among mothers rather than more harmony.

One of the author’s main points in support of her argument is the idea of intensive mothering. She defines this as mothering that is “exclusive, wholly child centered, emotionally involving, and time consuming.” She also states that this form of mothering focuses on the mother in an almost damaging way. “The mother… is devoted to the care of others; she is self-sacrificing and ‘not a subject with her own needs and interests” (1194). This is contradictory to the ideal mother, who is happy and content to give all of her time and energy to her children. Intensive mothering is detrimental to the mother, and increases stress levels, which may in turn damage the child.

Another of her main points that I felt would be very helpful in my paper was made regarding mothers of color. She states: “Three issues… form the ‘bedrock’ of the ‘motherwork’ of women of color: survival, power, and identity. And motherwork is conducted not only on behalf of individual children but also on behalf of the larger social group in which they are situated” (1195). I felt that these three main ideas really showed well in The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao. Beli seemed very focused on all of these ideals, and less on the ideal of intensive mothering, leaving the American reader to assume that she is a terrible mother. This kind of mother is in direct contrast with the ideal mother, who is only worried about her children, and is willing to sacrifice anything for their happiness. The mother of color focuses more intently on the adult her child will become and how this adult will fit in with his or her culture at large.

One other minor idea that might be useful in her article was a “universalist approach” to mothering, in which certain things are universally expected from a mother, regardless of any differentiating factors. These are “mothers foster and shape a profound affectional relationship, a deeply meaningful connection” (1194).

Another minor idea in her article was the politics and economics of motherhood. She cited research that stated women of color have the most pregnancies, and that while 25% of births in White, Latina, and Asian American women are to unwed mothers, 66% of births in Black women are to unwed mothers (1195).

Lastly, a minor detail I found interesting in her article was regarding contradictory feelings that many working mothers feel. She states, “These cultural contradictions – condemnation of working mothers even as most mothers work for pay – complicate women’s experiences and assessments of mothering” (1199). I was intrigued by this quote because it is so true. I know my mother likes to make all kinds of accusations against working mothers when she herself works two days a week. It’s kind of strange to think if how fundamentally demoralizing that cultural contradiction is. It is as if our culture is simultaneously saying women must work, and women must beat themselves up for working. What a strange world we live in.

A writer could use this article to support many arguments. I thought it would be the most useful for anyone writing about A Home at the End of the World or The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao simply because they both focus on mothers that are non-traditional, and not in keeping with the American ideal of intensive mothering. This article could also be used in any argument relating to mother-child relationships, or discrimination against minorities. I plan on using this article in relation to my paper discussing Beli, and the way that cultural expectations shape the ways that she raises her children in The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao.

One part of this section that I really loved was Birdie/Jesse’s relationship with Nicholas. I was rooting for them to be together, and I loved that he treated her with care on that crazy night that they both got high. Then when they met up again at the party, I was thrilled!

Someone else to complain about: Jim. Oh man, I wish Sandy/Sheila had never met him. He made me want to punch him in the face, both with his horrible attempts to befriend Birdie and the fact that he completely stole Sandy away from her daughter. I was glad when that kid punched him in the face, I wished he would have gotten punched a few more times.

I also wondered about the mare’s name – Mr. Pleasure? That is just about the strangest name for a female horse that I have ever heard. I loved that Mr. Pleasure was Birdie’s favorite horse, and that it had a strange name, like Birdie.

Another character that was introduced in this section was Mona. I loved Mona, and her horrible makeup and bad attitude. I could just picture her with her horrible 80’s hair and her horrible 80’s blue eye shadow. I loved that Birdie found a group to fit in with so easily at her new school, but I hated that everyone there was so racist.

I couldn’t believe the way that they treated Samantha, the only black girl. I thought the scene where Birdie and Samantha meet to pee in the woods at the party was really interesting. If Samantha knew that Cole was Black, it is mind boggling to think that she didn’t make any attempt to show it. I thought maybe Samantha was just really put off by Birdie’s group of obviously racist friends.

I loved Birdie’s random encounter with Rap music outside the museum steps in New York City. I could just picture Birdie hearing the rap for the first time and running over without shame to dance with the other Black kids.

The end of this section of the novel really has me concerned! I hope that Birdie doesn’t end up just running away and getting lost. I hope that she can at least decide to stay in New Hampshire, or else find some of her long lost family!

Since we were talking so much about passing in class this week, I decided to do a little close reading experiment and highlight in my book whenever the word “passing” was used, and a any instances where I thought the fact that passing was being eluded to was so obvious that the reader was practically hit over the head. I came up with a few interesting scenarios.

“I remembered those years mostly in fragments, a montage of unconnected images which I would begin to make sense of only later: a drunk Navy kid trying to break into our motel room one night, and my mother scaring him away with a karate kick to his groin; speculums soaking in a sink at Aurora; a huddle of thunder-thighed women sharing a group hug; and always, the blurring world beyond our windshield, glimpsed only in passing” (136).

“When we were alone she also liked to remind me that I wasn’t really passing because Jews weren’t really white, more like an off-white” (140).

“I swallowed hard and closed my eyes. There was nothing I could say to make my mother feel better, nobody I could become” (152).

I felt the first passage, from page 136, may have been making a reference to how confused Birdie truly is. She has a new name, a new identity, and has been stripped of the “Black Pride” culture she loved. Because of her passing, the world is becoming too blurry for her. Too much for her to handle.

The excerpt from page 140 really intrigued me as well. It is almost as if Senna is reinforcing Rodriguez’s argument from the article we read in class, because Sandy is trying to make it seem as though Birdie is “not really passing.” This use of language, or the way it is phrased, makes passing seem like something to be ashamed of. Sandy is making excuses for her daughter, so Birdie does not have to feel like she is passing. So maybe Sandy is attempting to lessen the burden of the cultural rejection Birdie feels that goes along with passing.

The passage from page 152 really struck me as well. It seems that Birdie has changed her identity so many times that she has almost become fluid. She is like a shape-shifter, able to portray thousands of identities. However, the thought of her being upset because there is no one she can shift into that will ease her mother’s pain just seems so sad. Imagine never being able to truly be yourself, and be forced to take on only the needs and wants of those around you, and at such a young age? It’s just sad really.

But those were some scenes about passing that I noticed in this section. I can’t help but wonder if they are going to become more or less frequent as Birdie/Jesse continues on in her struggle! =)

So can I just say that this section of the novel nearly made me cry in the laundromat? I mean, seriously, I was that upset. The things that these poor sisters are being put through are appalling.

The first thing that upset me was the fact that Sandy was obviously falling into some kind of mental breakdown, and had no one else to turn to but poor Birdie, who is confused enough as it is. I mean, she is acting very schizophrenic, thinking that everyone is after her because of her involvement with the ever mysterious “visitors.”

Something else that seemed horrible in the novel: the grandmother. I noticed that in the novel she is described in relation to two animals – a snake and jellyfish. I thought this was very interesting, since both can be poisonous and potentially lethal. The way that she ignored Cole and fussed over Birdie was just obnoxious, as was her gift of Golliwog, which oddly enough, became quite a treasured doll. Some of the things the grandmother said just took my breath away, such as her comments about Sandy’s weight, and her statement that sending the girls to Nkrumah was “child abuse.” I still wonder why Sandy needed to ask her mother for money, and how much she told her mother about why she was in such dire straits.

Another character that I love and hate: Carmen! I mean, I love that she gives Cole the attention and guidance that she needs as a Black pre-teen with a white mother, but I hate that she has a problem with Birdie’s whiteness. I just wanted to slap her every time she made rude comments. Ugh, how terrible can you get?

And that thing with Redbone in the schoolyard? How he said “I’m going to miss you” and then took her picture? I don’t even want to know what he’s up to!

And my final rant: JAMAICA??? Are you SERIOUS!!?? I am absolutely shocked that Cole and Birdie are separated! Who cares how different they look, that is terrible! And I am also really mad at Deck for allowing that crazy woman Sandy to take his daughter and run away and do God knows what! He should have stood up to Carmen and told her that both daughters were coming, no matter what they looked like. I mean, Jesse Goldman? Sheila? So horrible. It was hard to stop reading at page 131, I really wanted to continue on with this section…

So this week we watched The Incredibles and began reading Caucasia. Very interesting combination there… and maybe just about as opposite as you can get as far as family is concerned.

I love “The Incredibles” and I really thought that the points we discussed in class about the contradictions presented in the film, such as being yourself, but not living up to your potential. They are very interesting contradictions! And the Underminer at the end. In addition to being hilarious, it definitely brings up an interesting point. What was Pixar’s goal in making this movie? Very interesting indeed.

I also looked up the lyrics to the song “Brown Sugar” by the Rolling Stones that we discussed, and I was literally shocked by what the lyrics say:

Brown Sugar lyrics

Gold coast slave ship bound for cotton fields
Sold in a market down in New Orleans
Scarred old slaver knows he's doing alright
Hear him whip the women, just around midnight

Ah, brown sugar how come you taste so good?
Ah, brown sugar just like a young girl should

Drums beating cold English blood runs hot
Lady of the house wonderin' where it's gonna stop
House boy knows that he's doing alright
You should a heard him just around midnight

Ah, brown sugar how come you taste so good?
Ah, brown sugar just like a young girl should
Ah, brown sugar how come you taste so good?
Ah, brown sugar just like a young girl should

I bet your mama was a tent show queen
And all her girlfriends were sweet sixteen
I'm no school boy but I know what I like
You should have heard me just around midnight

Ah, brown sugar how come you taste so good?
Ah, brown sugar just like a young girl should

I said yeah, yeah, yeah, whew
How come you... how come you taste so good?
I said yeah, yeah, yeah, whew
Just like a black girl should

I literally could not believe some of the things… “whip the women?” “Why do you taste so good?” This song is the most inappropriate thing a young black girl could ever  want to impersonate. I am so shocked that this song was as much of a hit as it was, I think in current times it would be absolutely rejected by pop culture, and seen as vile and hateful. But hey, it was 1971, and apparently this was completely fine back then, since it was a number one hit in the U.S. and the lead song for the Rolling Stones Sticky FIngers album. Another interesting fact about the song brought to you by wikipedia:

The song was later used in a 1998 Pepsi commercial with a fly singing a cover version of “Brown Sugar” after sipping on some spilled Pepsi. The commercial was used as part of Pepsi’s aggressive ad campaign of switching to a blue background on its cans & bottles after decades of using a white background.

Now I think using this song for a fly singing about Pepsi is the most appropriate interpretation we may ever get.

All of this is very intersting… Hmm. =)

“The Incredibles” has always been one of my favorite movies. I just thought it was so entertaining, and I love Jack-Jack and Edna Mode (or whatever her name is..?).

In regards to the family aspect of the film, I thought it was a pretty creative play on the typical representation of family. The mother was the typical homemaker. The father was the breadwinner that worked in an office job. There were the boy and the girl children, and the young baby. The girl, Violet, was shy, and just wanted to fit in. The boy, Dash, was very competitive and was always pestering his sister. And then Jack-Jack was just kind of cute and mysterious.

I also loved that the Dad was just trying to relive his glory days, and then the Mom thought that he was cheating on her, which are also huge stereotypes in the typical American family.

Although the “theme” of the film was probably supposed to be something cheesy about always living up to your full potential, I kind of got a different idea. To me, it seemed that viewed through the lens of family-focus, it kind of had a theme regarding telling lies. The family all lied to each other and the world at large. And then when they revealed their secrets, all was well.

I think this is interesting, because it seems to me that as families, we are always telling each other some kind of lies. Telling your Mom that you were studying Friday night, not playing beer pong, or telling your little brother that you always listened to your Dad when you were 13. However, I am not of the opinion that complete honesty with family is the best policy. I know that my mother would probably have a heart attack if she knew all the inner workings and small details of my life. Heck, she would probably pass out if she even knew my belly button is pierced!

So, in conclusion, watching the movie with the focus of family in my head made for a different experience, and lead to me to think about a movie I have always loved in a different way. Very interesting…

So I missed the discussion in class, so here are my thoughts that I didn’t get to share.

So about the dogs and Byron..

They were both pretty baffling to me. But I think the dogs kind of represented the way that Lurie wished he could have been. In touch with his emotions, not at all logical, able to act off of impulse and receive little or no punishment. Although he seemed to not care about the dogs, except to honor their lives, I think that might have been one of his lies to himself. I think he was secretly “one of those people” that loves dogs.

And Byron… I have no idea. Maybe that was a distraction he needed? Maybe he really has some deep-rooted psychological problems that are manifesting themselves in this play? Or maybe he is just schizophrenic, which I mentioned on one of my blog posts. I have no idea.

The end of Disgrace was really odd to me. I was expecting there to be a lot more resolution to the problems that David and Lucy encountered than there was. I was so shocked that Lucy was pregnant and also that she wanted to keep the child. I could only imagine what Lucy must have gone through, living right next door to one of the men who raped her, and who could also potentially be the father of her child.

Another thing that really bothered me was the reaction that Petrus had to the entire situation. The fact that he offered to marry Lucy in order to protect her? But really he just wanted her land? I can only assume that is the culture in South Africa, and that I am just seeing this all from an American perspective, but I am so shocked that Petrus changed drastically from a friend to a greedy business man. When we first met Petrus, I wouldn’t have thought that he would be so cruel to Lucy, even if it meant he could rise to a higher class standing.

Another part that I thought was really strange was David’s opera. What on earth was up with that? His obsession was just so strange and then he never even got it together. Some parts even seemed like David was schizophrenic or something. The whole thing just seemed strange.

Well, I suppose the most shocking part of this section of Disgrace was the attack of Lucy’s farm. I was just shocked reading it, and I have no idea why that crime would have happened to her, even after reading the articles about Africa. I was just surprised that your ordinary run-of-the-mill robbers would go so far as to rape a woman, burn a man, and kill every single dog. I was just confused about the whole idea of the violence. Was Petrus in on it since he wasn’t around? Was it random? Was Lucy targeted because she is a lesbian? I wasn’t sure.

And the other event that is really important is David’s trial. I was shocked that he wouldn’t even apologize, although I suppose it is in keeping with his character. The fact that he ran away to his daughter’s home was really what shocked me the most about the entire situation. I was amazed that his daughter was his only resort.

I really loved the passage on page 102 where David is discussing Bill Shaw’s ideas about friendship. I thought that passage really showed a lot of the coldness of David’s character, as well as the honesty of Bill’s character. I felt that the section was beautifully written, and brought up a good point regarding friendship. I loved the point that David brought up regarding where friendship forms. There is a limit – a cup of tea may not constitute a friendship in the same way that years of shared experiences does. But to Bill Shaw, just knowing David, and then hearing of his troubles, was enough to bond them. Obviously David doesn’t feel the same way, which is kind of shocking. I found myself wondering where David’s compassion was, or his gratefulness. But maybe he is just too cold and calculating for those kinds of emotions.

So as the weekly wrap-up post, the topics up for discussion are the end of TBWLOOW and the beginning of Disgrace. The main characters Oscar and David appear to me as polar opposites, at least in respect to women. Oscar is the man that had sex once in his life, whereas David has had more sex than he can remember, with his experiences ranging from raping a student  to stalking his favorite prostitute.

From a cultural perspective, both societies (Dominican and South African) are very accepting of violence against women. However, Dominican culture accepts physical violence against women whereas South African culture leans more acceptance of sexual violence against women. It seemed to me as though Diaz characterized Dominican men as physically violent but sexually romantic. Although the articles we read about South Africa show that physical abuse is also extremely common in the society, rape is unusually common. One of the points I really loved that the article from Time said was: “Rape is a signal of a society that is sick to the core,” (which was quoted from Zevenbergen).

One of the reasons I found this quote so intriguing was that I thought it held true to David’s character. In a lot of ways he seems sick to the core. He is cold and calculating and delusional. How much more sick can a character get? Granted, so far in the novel he does not really seem like the next Marilyn Manson, but there is a creepy quality to his character that reminds me to lock my door at night.