Richard:
Consistently, the novel frames each character with a defined
gender role at the beginning but near the end of the novel, these roles
drastically change. A distinctive example was Richard. At the beginning of the
novel, he was the ultimate male figure who had power over others including many
women: Chloe and Poppy. He had the money and home in which he performed both
the womanly and manly duties. He cooked, cleaned and cared for the home as a
traditional domestic woman would while he also paid the bills and worked as the
traditional domestic man. With these details, the reader can ask several
questions including what does it suggest that Richard chose to perform all of these
duties and not send for his wife eagerly waiting for him back home in China?
A very interesting question about whether Richard’s gender role
extended into the afterlife was brought to me and truthfully, we may never
know. From his death scene and Ming Wai’s “rebirth,” I can specify many female
characteristics to his death. He was in water, which has always been related to
females and their natural ability for childbirth, often performed in watery
environments. Also he was portrayed as weak and fragile, which is often the
description of women during the time period when men were physically and
mentally dominating over women. He basically gave up, which was demonstrated
when he thought/said “I’d give my breath to you.” The scene’s descriptions were
very surreal and calm which added to the feminine qualities of his death.
Later, when they placed his body in Corlissa’s home, his mouth was sewn shut,
which represents the oppressed voices of women during that time period. The
1920’s were very important to the advancement of women in all fields,
especially politics because women gained the right to vote in 1929. But these
were the women who could vote (they were US citizens) and Chinese immigrant
women could not voice their opinions because of their male dominant culture. I
think that is as far as I can take what the novel has given me else I would be
speculating about the afterlife.
As a reader, I hope you took the time to view the novel in a wider
lens and notice specific instances involving gender roles and the affect of
altering preexisting notions either cultural or societal. What did get from the
close reading involving gender definition?
I think Richard's reasoning for not sending for his wife may be very basic. That is, it was an arranged marriage, and now that he's been abroad and established a life for himself, he doesn't want to bring the past into it. Sure, he could continue to have affairs even if his wife were living with him, but it certainly wouldn't be as easy. This actually puts him in a bit of a predicament, as to express his masculinity (by sleeping with whomever he chooses, spending his money as he chooses, etc.) he has to take on a feminine role (cooking and cleaning) to do so.
ReplyDeletePerhaps his being reduced to a feminine identity upon his death, in the ways that you stated, it is showing that he shouldn't have tried to break out of his traditional role, just as Chloe shouldn't have. If he had brought his wife over initially, would he have died at the end? Certainly the chain of events following his wife's arrival would not have happened if she had been there already. Perhaps Richard brought about his own downfall, both through his own greed and breaking from his traditional role.
I think you are spot on with the feminized gender role of Richard, particularly relating to his death, in Water Ghosts. However, I also think as researchers and writers we rely too heavily on the notion that everything feminine has to come back to childbirth. I'd be interested to see if we could ever make an argument without it.
ReplyDeleteI will say that I disagree with an assumption you make in your analysis. I do not think "surreal" and "calm" naturally apply to women, and I do not think that they are innately feminine. I think that notion is more of a generalized notion we apply to death/passing to be able to swallow it.
However, I'll agree with you again that I think the significance of Richard's mouth being sewn shut being a representation of lost voices and oppression. Though, I think it could be more developed. What does it mean that a Richard, a man, has his mouth sewn shut? Could it also be a sign that the women are trying to reassert themselves? Could it be the immigrants and a whole did not have agency or rights?
Again, your commentary and personal touch are appreciated.
Jackie
Anisha,
ReplyDeleteThis is a great post! I love your analysis on gender roles! Because this is the third step of analysis, I would love to know some of the passages you annotated in order to get to this point (where you are drawing conclusions about Richard's gender role). I agree with Jackie that your assumptions of "surreal and calm" do not apply to women nor are they innately feminine. I would go as far to say the opposite. You relate this calmness with water and it's generative, feminine properties; but hink of how many hormones are going through the female body during pregnancy and child birth. Those make you anything but calm and collected. Lasty, I agree with your analysis on Richard's mouth being sewn shut. However, I would articulate that the act of a woman sewing his mouth shut is more symbolic than his mouth just being sewn shut.