What's with the Vampire Fever?

Forgive the title of my blog, but I'm feeling uninspired. I became very engrossed in Carmilla, and found myself developing attachments for some of its characters. This definitely caught me by surprise, because I have never understood the appeal of gothic novels (maybe that's because in high school I was forced to read Nathaniel Hawthorne, Poe, and Charlotte Perkins Gilman) and most certainly have never understood the appeal of vampires. The only Anne Rice I'm familiar with is her Sleeping Beauty series, I have never seen or read Dracula, and somehow, thankfully, I have avoided the Twilight craze. But I might be ready to rethink all that.

This week I had to look to other students blogs as well as do some external research because while I really enjoyed the story, and picked up on the more than obvious sexuality, I didn't really connect it to a meaning or representation or metaphor pertaining to Irish culture. Thankfully Colleen posted those guidance terms/ideas and it led me to some interesting websites. I'll list some of them for you-

http://www.mysteriousbritain.co.uk/folklore/vampire-folklore.html

http://www.irelandseye.com/aarticles/history/events/dates/emanc.shtm

http://www.irelandseye.com/aarticles/history/events/dates/emanc2.shtm

Whether or not those websites qualify as "scholarly" has yet to be determined... Additionally, I referred to the book Blood Read: The Vampire as Metaphor in Contemporary Culture edited by Joan Gordon and Veronica Hollinger.

For me, Carmilla was a love story for the soul, and not at all "lesbian". The connection that Laura and Carmilla experienced was physical, mental, emotional, other worldly. I don't like to use the idea of Lesbian undertones, because I think there's a certain attitude associated with such a label, and clearly the love and desire was so animalistic and pure that it can't be defined by a label. Gothic literature often touches of powerfully dramatic feelings and emotion, and how delicious that Carmilla could provide so much classic text!

The first time we're introduced to the uncontrollable attraction is when Carmilla and Laura share their dreams from years ago, confirming that somehow they are kindred spirits meant to be.

" 'I wonder whether you feel as strangely drawn towards me as I do you; I have never had a friend-shall I find one now?'....... Now the truth is, I felt rather unaccountably towards the beautiful stranger. I did feel, as she said, 'drawn towards her,' but there was also something of repulsion. In this ambiguous feeling, however, the sense of attraction immensely prevailed. She interested and won me; she was so beautiful and so indescribably engaging" (Ch. 3).

In a matter of days their connection turns into a kind of unbreakable enslavement, and the mental intimacy they share starts to manifest in holding hands, kissing, and head laying.

"She used to place her pretty arms about my neck, draw me to her, and laying her cheek to mine, murmur with her lips near my ear,'Dearest, your little heart is wounded; think me not cruel because I obey the irresistible law of my strength and weakness; if your dear heart is wounded, my wild heart bleeds with yours. In the rapture of my enormous humiliation I live in your warm life, and you shall die-die, sweetly die- into mine.'..... And when she had spoken such a rhapsody, she would press me more closely in her trembling embrace, and her lips in soft kisses gently glow upon my cheek" (Ch. 4).

I find that passage, probably the most poetic and best description of the binary forces of their soulful connection. Laura is falling more and more in love, Carmilla seems to be feeding off that connection.

In doing independent research I did find some information about the vampire being metaphor for tuberculosis, and that made total sense to me. I read somewhere that TB claimed up to 30% of the population in major cities, like Paris, in the 1800s. Since it's easier to blame others for illness, and families not wanting to be stigmatized as being associated with someone with consumption (much like GRID/AIDS in the 80s), I guess I could understand why it was easier to explain a vampire lurking in the night waiting to fester on women and children. :)

Oh, Maria, you keep messing with my mind

Reading and understanding have come to mean two very different things in this class. I find that I am doing all right with reading the text, and even independently researching themes or times in history, what I am to be getting out of these texts is a little fuzzy. While reading Castle Rackrent I experienced many motions associated with reading a novel- anticipation, interest, frustration when the story didn’t go my way. My last blog offered my feelings on Rackrent, so I won’t rehash that here. After reading through some of the student blogs my interpretation of Edgeworth and her characters started to change. Reading through Susan Egenolf’s Maria Edgeworth in Blackface, I can say my interpretation and feelings have changed again… at least until I read everyone else’s blogs ☺

There is something about Edgeworth that bothers me and I cannot quite put my finger on it. I know that Edgeworth has been deemed some kind of hero or pioneer or success of the Irish narrative, but I believe Rackrent can be viewed on a larger scale as a piece of elitist propaganda. In the case of Rackrent, the novel is less about racial fears and stereotypes, and more about the fear of those not worthy of the throne (or self-rule) taking over. There are two passages in Egenolf’s essay that remind me of this-

1. “Edgeworth felt quite anxious about her family’s relations with the native Irish and about the possibility of a peasant uprising… ‘that whilst our terrified neighbors see nightly vision of massacres, we sleep with out doors and windows unbarred. I must observe, though, that is it only those doors and windows which have neither bolts not bars we leave unbarred’” (849). This quote is taken from correspondence with Edgeworth’s Aunt Ruxton. In her letter, Edgeworth explains that they wished their doors and windows weren’t unbarred and she has fear of a potential uprising.

2. “The form of Castle Rackrent thus imitates the type of government the Edgeworths were advocating for the Irish-rational and fair Anglo-Irish land ownership which would benevolently guide the native peasants and commercially manage the land. Although the Edgeworths consistently supported education for all classes, Maria believed that the lower classes should not partake in governing” (851). This idea is further explained by Edgeworth, “But the point still to be proved, still to be enquired into, is whether the majority of numbers necessarily includes the majority of sense, judgment, moral feeling, and all that should form the legislative and governing preponderance in any nation” (851).

What a *loaded* statement!

I get the parallel Egenolf was making to “blackface” and dialect, and that’s not quite the direction I want to go in… rather I think for Edgeworth’s clear distain of peasants she maybe felt like she had to over-exaggerate people, places, and situations of Ireland. By further perpetuating the stereotypes the British had over the Irish, fear of the lower class would remain, and a true regime takeover not possible. At the same time, wanting to show an act of solidarity for the Irish (as a way to protect her from harm) she adds the voice of the Editor, thereby creating a balance between both parties.

I have a feeling I’m not truly conveying what I mean… What I’m trying to say about Edgeworth’s fake alliance with the Irish lower class is similar to how charities for the poor were run in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Much of the upper class felt they had a civic responsibility to pity and support people at a disadvantage. Charity was more for the social benefit of that wealthy person- “Oh, look at how great they are, giving time and money to that poor good for nothing person!” rather than a true desire to help economically disadvantaged persons.

Essentially, I think Maria Edgeworth was a classist, pushing her father’s agenda. She made fun of the Irish (in a tongue in cheek kind of way) to demonstrate they weren’t good enough to be anything but farmers and peasants serving a landlord or master. It’s like the idea of making something look bad on purpose, or making something look bad, to make you look good. (Last idea was started in Jason’s blog.) Now, if what I believe about Maria Edgeworth being a British snob, why is she considered an authority in Irish Literature?

Why Jason is Neither Hero or Villain

The character of Jason Quirk is a curious one. In Castle Rackrent, we are introduced to the narrator’s son, Jason as an afterthought, but with a sense his character will make a return later in the story. By modern day accounts, Jason Quirk is a jack of all trades- landlord, business owner, negotiator, son, attorney, “agent”, and confidant. I find that Jason is neither villain, nor hero but rather a smart, creative; some would say shady and manipulative person who represents good and evil.

On one hand I find it a little disgusting how he conducted himself and did business- “The execution came down; and every thing at Castle Rackrent was seized by the gripers, and my son Jason, to his shame be it spoken amongst them. I wondered, for the life of me, how he could harden himself to do it; but then he had been studying the law, and had made himself attorney Quirk; so he brought down at once a heap of accounts upon my master’s head…” (106) I believe Jason is much like a real estate agent who represents both the buyer and seller. Nothing Jason did was illegal, or wrong, but certainly was un-ethical by most standards. He made business decisions that were in his best interest, and clearly Sir Kit and Sir Condy were ok with the burden of responsibility being lifted.

As shocked and awed as you are over this sudden purchase of properties, buildup of wealth and purchasing of debts and accounts you can’t help but applaud Jason. He’s a person born to a “lower class” of Ireland who had the smarts, determination, wit, and strategy to not only come out of that lower class, but to become a successful and somewhat wealthy businessman. He created his own destiny and that makes him pretty heroic.

As much as you can “villain-ize” Jason, I found myself leaning a more critical eye to the Masters of the house. What person really has no idea what their spending habits are? Okay, I guess in this modern age of Hollywood excess there are quite a few. But that being said, why wouldn’t you take an interest in your estate? Sir Condy is spoiled, indulgent, and un-wise. I hardly feel bad for him and his debts when he is the only one in control of such things.

After finishing Rackrent, I went back through the preface and a passage jumped out at me- “The heroes of history are so decked out by the fine fancy of the professed historian; they talk in such measured prose, and act from sublime or diabolical motives, that few have sufficient taste, wickedness, or heroism, to sympathize in their fate.” (61) I found just about every character un-relatable and somewhat foolish, and even a little one-dimensional. It’s probably no surprise that the character I enjoyed most was Jessica. I understand this is a complex, and multi-faceted novel so maybe my understanding of these characters is only scratching the surface.

One thing about Castle Rackrent I found truly fascinating is the pride and grandeur that go into Irish wakes and funerals. My husband and I have always joked how we want an Irish wake and a New Orleans funeral when it’s our time to expire. After reading about Sir Patrick’s wake and it’s definitions in the glossary I took it upon myself to do some research, and was surprised at how much traditional Irish wakes are seeped in different traditions and rituals reflecting the religious beliefs of a region in Ireland including washing of the body, shaving the body (if a male) and the opening and closing of windows to release spirits from the dead.

"Anomalous States"

Typically, when I read essays or "scholarly articles" I take pages of notes on things I find fascinating, or difficult. Because I was so unclear with the vocabulary it was hard to take notes. I was continually reading and re-reading passages every time I broke my reading to jot down notes. For me, a lot of the author's intention or meaning was lost as I worked on defining key terms and ideas. A word that kept jumping out at me was "subaltern". Subaltern by definition means a lower rank, or position (and not necessarily powerless) and I almost felt Lloyd used this term too loosely- "If one defines the subaltern not as that which desires the state but as that which is subaltern because it resists or cannot be represented by or in the state formation" (127) Were the poor of Ireland actually repressed and voiceless? In researching this term I came across the article Can the Subaltern Speak by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak and it helped me to have a better understanding of the term. If you wish to check it out:
http://www.mcgill.ca/files/crclaw-discourse/Can_the_subaltern_speak.pdf

I did like Lloyd’s exploration on how we perceive violence and how different people don’t consider it violence when it’s for the state or the church- “… a distinction between popular and state-sanctioned violence is crucial in order to understand why one society might be characterized as violent and another as orderly” (142). I think the distinction he makes between land and food is key. What I get from that is we cannot put modern day wording and thoughts on a people or land that are so different. The needs, resources, religion, and technology put Ireland in a world of it’s own. Ireland is individual and cannot be compared to other nations.

While reading Anomalous States I couldn’t help but feel like some of his ideas can be applied to the “founding” of our country. This whole belief about who the Irish were/are is much like our attitudes about indigenous peoples, Latinos, and blacks. And, then, there was that whole religious conservative movement…

Without fully understanding the text and his scholarly approach, I think you can draw some themes and meanings out of his writing. Anomalous States explores ideas of cultural representation, populations, and perceptions. What I got most out of that is to keep an open mind. Things aren’t always what they seem, and while somewhere hidden amongst all that is some basic truth, how we interpret that truth is a lot different.

Finally, there was one area that I struggled with and that was the exploration of Edgeworth and Morgan. “Resolution becomes highly problematic in ‘an era of transition’ in which it has to be recognized that the novel is itself partisan rather than transcendental, ‘coloured from the political creed of the author’, as Morgan had it. To reread Edgeworth’s comments from this perspective is to acknowledge that the incoherence of her metaphor is an index of the very precise strains felt by the novelist at this historical juncture.” (141) Is he trying to say that representation of the Irish will always be violent and jaded because of the personal intentions of the author, or at very least, background of the author?