In class, we practiced steps we can take to apply theoretical lenses to a text. We read Sharon Old’s poem titled “On the Subway” through a number of lenses in order to select the most relevant and thought-provoking details for analysis. For this post, I’d like to see you continue the discussion by analyzing a quote or two through one lens, and commenting on at least two students’ posts.
Quick-Review of the Steps for Applying Theoretical Lenses:
1) Select your lens and then write out the language of the lens
2) Re-read the poem and find words, phrases, lines that best match up with the lens language
3) Write about these lines to unlock a deeper meaning to the poem by connecting the lines to the lens language.
Remember—choose only one lens! (Lacan’s mirror stage theory, Freud’s memory theory, W.E.B. DuBois’s double-consciousness theory, Homi Bhabha’s hybridity theory, Judith Butler’s gender performativity theory).
If it’s helpful, you can select one of the following sentence starters to begin. There is no right or wrong way, and these are just a few of a million ways to do it! The only rule is to avoid simply summarizing the plot.
- Lacan would have much to say about Sharon Old’s narrator in the poem “On the Subway.”
- A post-colonial reading of Sharon Old’s “On the Subway” reveals ____________.
- An interesting way to read Sharon Old’s “On the Subway” is through Homi Bhabha’s hybridity theory.
- A close look at the poem “On the Subway” through Lacan’s mirror stage theory exposes ____________.
- Sharon Old’s train in “On the Subway” is a literal representation of ___________.
- Sharon Old’s poem titled “On the Subway” is about ____________.
BRING YOUR MEMOIR TO NEXT CLASS!
Lacan would have much to say about Sharon Old’s narrator in the poem “On the Subway.” According to Lacan, we the "I" only exist because there's a "other." Using this perspective, when the narrator states that "and he is black and I am white, and without meaning or trying to I must profit from our history," she touches upon some of Lacan's ideas about the "I" and "Other." For me, with this statement, the narrator is saying that the conditions of her life, which are vastly different from the black man's, were outside of her control. Specifically, when she references as the reason this is so she is implying all things from slavery,segregation and all things show that history, she is implying that history has favored her. Therefore, she is not at fault because she doesn't "try to" enforce the inequality, it was there before her. Lacan would probably agree with her because her perspection of herself is heavily based on other.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on your point that the narrator uses history to justify her views and attitude towards this man. But I don't think we can say for sure that her life is very different from that man's life. Yeah, sure, their lives are different in that he uses the mens' restrooms and she uses the ladies' restrooms and all that jazz, but there's nothing he says or does that would suggest they lead completely different lives. They are, after all, on the same train. So we don't know whether or not they do live different lives. You may be right that they do. But I think that because of history, she is influenced to believe that the man is the "other" and she is the "I", and therefore believe they live different lives as the "norm" live different lives compared to the "other".
DeleteI agree with Valerie, we really don't know much about the man at all besides the color of his skin, his gender, and that he is on a train. Everything else we were told by the author is assumed. He could be a mugger, like she says in the poem, but at the same time he may be an ordinary person. Old's point of view on him though is altered because of his skin color and his gender, but we as readers don't really know a lot about this man. However, her views on race and gender allows Old to portray him as the "other".
DeleteLacan would have much to say about Sharon Old's narrator in the poem "On the Subway." Lacan uses an example of a baby and the mirror and how the baby is unaware of this parallel world as reality itself. As the baby grows, they realize that this parallel world is their reality once they see it through the mirror. In "Girl, Interrupted" the narrator says "Another odd feature of the parallel universe is that although it is invisible from this side, once you are in it you can easily see the world you came from." This is interesting because the story is about a girl in the ward and that line, specifically, refers to, I believe, the world of of the "mentally ill" or "crazies" which is invisible to regular people and it's hard to distinguish the world you live in but when you're one the other side, you can see the world more clearly. This is similar to what Lacan is saying, I believe.
ReplyDeleteYour analysis through Lacan's Mirror Theory lens is very interesting. While reading the poem I didn't pick this up and it was really hard for me to find a clear connection between the poem and Lacan's theory. However, the connection you made Devin makes complete sense. I also really liked how you included a quote from your memoir to further analyze how initially the baby or person is unaware of the reality, existence, and impact "the other" has on the individual but as the person begins to mature everything comes to focus.
DeleteSince we studied Lacan's theory, I thought that it applies really well to those society considers "mentally ill." These individual are basically stuck in one phase of Lacan's phases and so I wonder how different the might apply his theory as time evolves.
DeleteSharon Old's poem "On the Subway" is a literal representation of Judith Butler's gender performativity theory. Butler states that how we see gender and the stereotypes that come with gender only exists because of the repetitive actions/performances people put on. The more repetitive these actions are, the more reinforced they are. In Old's poem, the narrator comments on the stranger across from her on the subway, saying that "he has the casual cold look of a mugger" and that "he could take my coat so easily, my briefcase, my life." By saying this, the narrator believes that this man is a danger to her, despite the fact that he didn't physically touch her or did anything to provoke such ideas. This shows that because society has portrayed and is still portraying male strangers as a threat to women, especially in movies, the media, etc., women are tend to stereotype male strangers by becoming more cautious and vigilant of them. This can also suggest that people will never stop stereotyping others unless the repetition of stereotyping people stops, which is highly unlikely to happen.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you on the point you made Valerie. It is really clear that in the very beginning the author makes the distinction between the female (herself) and the male (the guy sitting across from her) by the use of the commonly used stereotypes and the learned associations we perform and witness the performance of on a daily basis. But why do you think this distinction was made. Was it made because the author was thinking about gender performativity? Or was it made because the author was thinking of post-colonialism? Which factor made her feel more unsafe race or gender?
DeleteTo answer Crystal's question, I don't think there's enough evidence that will prove whether race made her feel more unsafe than gender, since there's a sort of a balance between these ideas in the poem. However, I do believe that race plays slightly a more important role because color was the factor that most likely caught her attention. Imagine if she saw a white man. I believe that she wouldn't react to the white man; she wouldn't even write a poem about facing him! Now consider this: what if she saw a black woman? do you think that she would react as strongly to her as she would to the young man?
DeleteI agree 100% with you Valerie. Through the gender performativity theory, Olds portrays men as scary and dangerous and I also agree that the stereotyping won't stop even if we tried, as it is too entrenched in people's minds. To further the discussion and answer Calvin's question, I think Olds would react, but not as strongly to the man because men supposedly pose more of a threat. I still think she would react to the woman due to racial issues.
DeleteYou make a valid point Val about stereotypes. They never will disappear,but doesn't society wish to have gender stereotypes in order to distinguish between anatomies? Dont you enjoy the idea that you and a male counterpart are different in several other ways than your private parts?
DeleteAn interesting way to read Sharon Old’s “On the Subway” is through Judith Butler's Gender Performativity Theory which states that gender is just a series of repetitive and learned associations linked to an individuals biological sex and or preferred gender. In the poem Sharon says, "He is wearing red, like the inside of the body exposed. I am wearing old fur, the whole skin of an animal taken and used." I interpreted this through Judith Butler's lens by thinking about Sharon's association of wardrobe or color choice to differentiate male from female. The male is wearing red and it seems like the inside of his body is exposed because males are commonly associated with danger and the freedom to dress as they please even if they are too revealing. On the other hand Sharon is completely covered in fur and needs to be hidden because she is a female and certain wardrobe is deemed inappropriate for women to wear. As this depicts the polarization between sexes we can also identify Sharon's metaphor to be a representation of the concept, sex vs. gender and how the body itself can be or either female or male. That regardless of the biological sex or preferred gender we are all equal if "othering" agents such as physical appearance, wardrobe style, e.t.c, were set aside along with the frequent use stereotypes and learned associations that only serve to polarize both sexes.
ReplyDeleteI love your interpretation of that line you chose. I certainly agree that Sharon uses clothing to differentiate males and females. Especially during the time when she wrote this poem (1987), women were less exposed that they are today. Gender roles were important back then, and I believe that they play a significant role in Sharon Old's poem.
DeleteI agree with Calvin, I really like your interpretation. I never thought of it like that. I felt as though she mentioned her wearing old fur to signify that she was classy and had a high status of power than the black man because when I think of people dressing up that way I just feel as though it's a high class style, but I agree with you 100%.
DeleteCrystal this is a very interesting interpretation of the quote. Your interpretation demonstrate the polarization of gender within society. However, I also agree with Christina's point that the quote demonstrate the polizarion of class within society. Like for me, the quote "He is wearing red, like the inside of the body exposed" , in addition to demonstrating the differenciating class structure, was as if she wanted to say that he is walking unashamed, as if he had no fear of demonstrating his "true" nature.
DeleteSharon Old's poem can be observed through the lens of double consciousness, a theory proposed by W.E.B DuBois. This theory states that an individual can have 2 identities at once–in his explanation "American" and "Negro." In Sharon Old's "On the Subway," the narrator acts as both the colonizer and the colonized. The first half of her narrative talks about the man's dominance over her. She said, "I don't know if I am in his power," demonstrating her trepidation of the man. The second half shows her acknowledgment of the fact that she is the colonizer. Sharon was aware that her "white skin makes my life..., the way I think his own back is being broken." In other words, she felt a sense of authority over him. It is very interesting that, through the postcolonial lens, we can see Sharon Old's dual identity when she thinks about the "other."
ReplyDeleteCalvin-nice way to compare the poem to Post-Colonial theory. I definitely agree with you when you say that the author felt a sense of authority over him, but I also think that he had some authority over her-even enough to make her question her safety. Even though she was assuming he was a threat to her, she allowed her own assumptions to strike some sort of fear. This power is interchangeable, as he has some power over her and she has some power over him. Therefore, the terms "colonizer" and the "colonized" can be used in two different forms.
DeleteI like the way you viewed the poem through the double-consciousness lens! I didn't even notice that while I was reading the poem. I also find it intresting how Olds defines herself as the colonized and the colonizer, it's as if she feels that way because she doesn't like the fact that a man of color is in the same place as she is. It is also like she feels powerful over this man because of her skin color. It's an intriguing thought to think of oneself as the colonized and colonizer.
DeleteI agree with Sinead, the power is interchangeable. The narrator right away put the black man in a box by stereotyping him and identifying him as a mugger, and then towards the middle she says that he could easily take her life away. Who knew that you can be both terms at the same time.
DeleteI really like the way in which you touched upon power. As you mention, it is very interesting by how this women is faced with the paradox of "feeling" vulnerable while also feeling powerful due to social conditions about race in our society.
ReplyDeleteWithin Sharon Old's poem On the Subway, it is clear that Judith Butler's theories on gender play a role in the author's experience. I have to wonder if the man, who apparently has more power over Old because he is a man, was a woman? Would it change the author's point of view? Would she still feel over powered and weaker than the person sitting across from her? In addition, in Butler's point of identity and biology, Old assumes roles for both herself and the man. She assumes that because she is a woman she is weaker and wouldn't suffice in an altercation with the man. She believes that the anatomy of both her and the man sitting across from her define the interactions between them. However, according to Butler, these ideas of man and woman are made up, therefore Old is adding to the performance of gender by solidifying beliefs of gender roles, where the man is stronger than the woman.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Old is reinforcing the stereotypes society has of women and men by accepting the fact that she is weaker than the man. And to answer your question about if the man were a women, would she change her perspective, I personally think she would. Since she already strongly implies that she is, to bluntly say it, sexist, I think she would feel different if it was a woman instead in that she wouldn't feel as in danger as she does sitting across from this man. We already know she believes in these stereotypes so thinking she would have different perspectives on different genders isn't so far-fetched.
DeleteI don't the woman would feel threatened if the man was a woman because women don't really feel threatened by each other if they both are alone. This is due to the fact, that women can relate more to each other and they are not fearful of each other's presence.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAccording to the post-colonial theory, Olds definitely looks at the colored man as the other, she even states "...he is black and I am white, and without meaning, or
ReplyDeletetrying to I must profit from our history". Well during this time, I believe that it was common to look at blacks as the "other", as racism and discrimination were still really entrenched. Since this poem was written in the 80's, how would it be different if it were written now? I think that living in a place as diverse as NYC causes people to be more accepting. Would have Olds reacted as she did?
I agree, the time this poem was published says a lot about what is considered other. I think that if this poem was written now, Olds would use less provocative language.
Delete-Omar Romero
During this time, it probably was more accepted to write in this almost racist perspective. Also, with you mentioning NYC, I quickly googled Sharon Olds and google told me that she attended Columbia University (right here in the city) in 1972-before she wrote the poem. I feel like being in the city doesn't play as much of a role in how people look that others, but more time period. The 80's wasn't exactly the best time for minority groups, so regardless of her surroundings, I think Olds would have written it in the same view, if not harsher, had she never been to Columbia previously.
DeleteI really like how you compare Old's reaction during the 80s to how people would react now. I think a person now wouldn't be that judgmental or they wouldn't even think about the person across from them since now it is very accepting and common.
DeleteThat's a really nice point Cierra.. and a very difficult question to answer. It would seem as though that in modern day society, even moreso, New York, diversity is a common place. We're all very accustomed to diluting physical and concious differences that might seperate or even ostracize people who we might potentially interract with.
DeleteNevertheless, I think it's agreed that more times than not, there's an insinctive underlying sense of noticing differences between individuals, regardless of attempts at ignoring them. I don't know how, or if it measures statistically.. but it's awfully noticeable, even if an involuntary response.
Sharon Old's poem "On the Subway" highlights W.E.B DuBois's double-consciousness theory. This concept states that "one ever feels two-ness,-- an American, a Negro; two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in a dark body...". This demonstrates that an individual's identity is divided into several parts so it is essentially difficult for us to have one identity. In the poem, Olds says that the young man had a "casual look of a mugger". The narrator feels threatened because of the way the guy looked, but what if he was a really nice, genuine person? What I'm trying to say is that the black man in this poem had two identities, one was how the author saw him and the other is who he truly is.
ReplyDeleteChristina, this is a wonderful interpretation. This idea of "two warring ideals in a black body". These two ideals are constantly "warring" in the strive of finding his true identity, or demonstrating his true nature. To answer your question, this is were the ideas of stereotypes and labels come into play. People make assumptions based on racial, ethnic, and gender ideals, among other factors.
DeleteI definitely love how you explain that we are often faced with the responsibility of having to represent and be two different things because of our relation to the other.
DeleteI never thought of the man this way, and I think that your observation is very interesting! I like how you applied W.E.B. DuBois's theory, it was very well found.
Delete-Omar Romero
I really liked when you said an individual's identity is divided into several parts because a person knows their own identity and then "others'" point of view plays a role in that. Overall people's judgment plays a role in one's identity.
DeleteThis couldn't have been said better. Your interpretation was really convincing.I really agree that everyone has double personalities, the one they are naturally born with and the one people assume them to have.
DeleteIn a post-colonial view of this poem, I can see almost instantly that Sharon Olds is othering the man on the train. It's not like she even spoke to him, she just looked at him and from his looks she decided that he was dangerous. A lot of you have pointed out how she saw the guy as a "mugger," which I totally agree is her thinking with stereotypes; but I think an earlier quote really captures this entire poem in a lens of post-colonialism.
ReplyDeleteOn the second line, Sharon describes the man's feet as "huge, in black sneakers laced with white in a complex pattern like a set of intentional scars." I'd like to think that she used his sneakers as an analogy of ACTUAL colonization; the shoes, which are black, represent a lot of indigenous civilizations, and the laces, which are white, represent literal colonizers and imperialists. But wait, how can I just assume that? Well, if you think of the actual word 'lace,' it means to entwine or tangle something. Laces on shoes are also interchangeable, laces can be removed and switched out for another set. Shoes cant be swapped, unless its a whole pair.
So what's the point? The laces are added to the shoe after the shoe is created, but at the same time, the laces can change the whole look of the shoe. You can say the laces are colonizing the shoes.
That's what I see at least. Does that make sense?
-Omar Romero
I like how you literally visualized and interpreted the sneakers. I agree with your point, and I especially like how you say that the "laces are colonizing the shoes." But when using the shoes, I'm curious as to the meaning of the laces to the shoes and vice versa.
DeleteSo if we're talking about shoes, then if you think about it, shoes NEED laces to function. If you don't tie your laces, or just leave them out, then as you walk, your shoes will fall off. Thus, the shoes are sort of unwearable. In this perspective, does that mean that the indigenous civilizations needed the colonizers? Do the colonizers add something necessary to the indigenous civilizations?
Post Colonial Theory, to describe it broadly,deals with "expectations about race and culture." In looking at Sharon Old's poem, "On the Subway," we can see clear traces of this. When reading this poem, many of us automatically thought of this as racist. While race wasn't exactly a lens that we were examining, doesn't that sort of fall under Post Colonial Theory? In the poem she says, "...And he is black and I am white, and without meaning or trying to I must profit from our history" She further goes on to explain that the young man could easily hurt her. This is a stereotype, which is an expectation about race and culture. This is even further exemplified when she says that she must "profit from our history." This implies that it is institutionalized and ingrained in our society. Post Colonial Theory, in this case, relates since there is a sense of perpetuity in categorizing and looking at other groups differently.
ReplyDeleteI like the word that you used Belle: stereotype. Stereotype is an expectation about culture but who is to blame? Her or society? Should we blame her for allowing society to brainwash her with all of these discriminations and taking a part of it by acting out those discriminations? Or should we blame society for being the one that is ignorant of the negative consequences that all of these stereotypes will have on future generations? Blame the individual or the whole?
DeleteA post-colonial reading of Sharon Old’s “On the Subway” reveals a double consciousness when W.E.B DuBois states, " He simply wishes to make it possible for a man to be both a Negro and an American without being cursed and spit upon by his fellows..." This indicates the perspective of "I" and the "other" in which W.E.B DuBois views the "other" in demonstrating a negative response towards his actions. This relates to "On the Subway," when the author says, "He could take my coat so easily. There is a sense of the girl viewing the "other" in a negative perspective. The "I' basically thinks about the "other" in a way to form their own judgment.
ReplyDeleteI like the way you analyzed this quote from the poem because you showed how the "I" always views the other in a way that can relate to the self. For example, how can the other affect the self. Can they hurt me? Can they help me? Questions like this come up to the mind when one refers to the other.
DeleteMy questions is, would the author's perspective of the other differ if, instead of a black male, there was a female (white or black) across from her on the subway? Do you think her reaction and hesitation would still be similar if the "other" was someone more familiar and less socially 'intimidating' than a black male?
DeleteThe following quote is from the poem "On the Subway": "And he is black and I am white, and without meaning or trying to I must profit from our history, the way he absorbs the murderous beams of the nation's heart, as black cotton absorbs the heat of the sun and holds it." This quote can be analyze throughout Freud's lens regarding the memory. Moreover, this is so because Sharon in the previous quote states that she must "profit from our history" as she may be referring to the hierarchical relationship between the whites and black. Leading to this idea that even though this poem was written in a period of time when these ideals were progressing, the racial difference between white and blacks kept on living in the memories of many, or hidden between the "marks of the wax slab", meaning its didn't completely disappear. This could had lead the author to stereotype the man due to the the predetermine labels and ignorance that is embedded within the ideas that come with racism.
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting on how the author chose the "profit". Profit is a positive connotation. She finds it in a good way that history taught her how to automatically stereotype and discriminate a person. I also find it a paradox that with the progression of history, there should also be in progression in the way that people think. And yet, the author is reverting back to the thinking that was centuries before her time.
DeleteFirst, good job on using Freud's memory theory!! I thought that was a difficult theory to use for this poem. Second, I agree with you that the memories (or stories) of the past is what influenced the narrator's perception of the man and black people. We obviously don't know anything about her family, but it could be inferred that someone in her life had to be racist or prejudicial towards black people in order for the narrator to have this image in her head that black people are dangerous and she profited from slavery because she is white.
DeleteA post-colonial reading of Sharon Old's "On the Subway" reveals that there is not always a fine line between a bully or colonizer and the bullied or colonized. This is demonstrated through the, "I don't know know if I am in his power- he could take my coat so easily, my briefcase, my life-or if he is in my power..." The post-colonial theory deals with identity and through a further breakdown of this quote, I analyzed that the skin and the briefcase are the things that are a part of his identity. If a bully takes that away or pokes fun at a person's characteristics or identity, then essentially, the identity of the person being bullied is being taken away or mocked at. This would give the power to the bully. However, acceptance is also part of the post-colonial theory. If the person being bullied accepts his or her identity and that nothing can change it, no words or actions can affect that. A bully has to realize he is doing harm in order to have power. There can be no "other" if the person being outed does not accept that label; labels only exist because we let them be noticed and acknowledged.
ReplyDeleteLacan would have much to say about Sharon Old’s narrator in the poem “On the Subway" which contains certain points that relate to Jacques Lacan's mirror theory. One of these points in the poem is in line that reads "there is no way to know how easy this white skin makes my life, this he could break so easily, the way I think his own back is being broken....". I believe the idea being portrayed in these lines is that as a white women, she would't be able to have that sense of superiority over black people if it haven't been for slavery and the discrimination towards minorities. In other words in order to be/feel powerful there must always be a group of people below you in status. Therefore this relates to Lacan's idea that "i" can not exist without the "other".
ReplyDeleteDarelis I agree with you because if it was not for slavery being so deeply rooted into our nation, we probably wouldn't have these ideas of always having a social heirarchy. But I do think even if slavery didn't happen there would still be something that people would do to differentiate one group from the other because that is how people are in general. We are always trying to find one thing that makes someone different from the rest of us just to feel like we are the best.
DeleteI agree with this point and I like how you used outside knowledge to correctly apply this lens and see how the writer made you come to this conclusion. Also, i think they're were more quotes throughout that also had the same ideas being portrayed.
DeleteI don't think she felt a sense of superiority when she was with the guy on the subway. I agree with your connection to slavery but i don't think a person fearing another person is a sign of superiority
DeleteSharon Old’s poem “On the Subway” can be viewed through the lens of Judith Butler’s gender performativity. When the author says “he could take my coat so easily, my briefcase, my life. One can see that the young man poses as a serious threat to the welfare of the woman on the train. In society, men are known to be “dangerous” especially if a woman is alone in public without the protection of other male. This sentence implies that the woman on the train is at a vulnerable state because if anything were to happen she would not be able to defend her. But as we can see, there has not been any type of physical encounter between the woman and the man but yet she feels like her life can be taken in the blink of an eye. How is this even possible? Do to the fact that we have been brought up in a society based on how a male and a female are perceived to be, women are naturally inclined to think that if a male is making any sort of eye contact or gesture toward them that they are at risk of being harmed.
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting when an individual automatically judges another even when they don't know each other or there is no interaction between each other. It shows how judging others is second nature for everyone in society because we are influenced to think this way by society.
DeleteA Post-Colonial reading of Sharon Old’s “On the Subway” reveals that particularly in this era race played a major role in defining the “other”. This is seen when she says “And he is black and I am white and without meaning or trying to I must profit from our history, the way he absorbs the murderous beams of the nation's heart, as black cotton absorbs the heat of the sun and holds it.” When she mentions “ I must profit from our history” I think she essentially means that she is only classifying this young man as the “other” because of our tragic history of slavery. It imposes that such stereotypes are basically established norms in our society.Societal influence is a factor that contributed to Sharon’s perception. In addition, being white is something that is considered to be normal as opposed to being black, Sharon implies that being black is different. Relating back to history the whites were the colonizers and the blacks or slaves were the colonized.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with what you said. I like the fact that you mentioned how societal influence played a role in Sharon Old's perception of the man. If she grew up in the family that taught her not to judge someone by the basis of their skin then Sharon wouldn't have felt like she was superior to the man. Being white is almost like a privilege and being black puts a person at a disadvantage.
DeleteI think the most interesting aspect of that quote is her choice of using the word "must", which carries a sort of authoritative and definite connotation. This is especially interesting since throughout most of her poem she seems to be hesitant and confused, questioning many ideas she introduces. Her choice of using that word shows the extent to which society has influenced racial relations. And the fact that she understands that she has this upper hand in being the white person emphasizes how there are still large degrees of supercilious attitudes among the "superior" race.
Deletei agree with this and being that i focused on this lens too, it showed me another way to look at this poem and helped strengthen the argument that the main character "other-ed" the dark shinned male.
DeleteI agree with this and I think what Nicholas pointed out before about her usage of the word "must" is very interesting. This reminds me of Lacan's Theory because Sharon Olds feels the need to follow the stereotypes in society and be influenced by these beliefs.
DeleteAn interesting way to read Sharon Old’s “On the Subway” is through Homi Bhabha's hybridity theory. Bhabha says that the distinction between the colonizer and the colonized can become distorted and difficult to see which alters authority. Thus, according to this theory. when the narrator in “On the Subway” says “I don’t know if I am in his power… or if he is in my power,” the colonizer and the colonized are almost becoming one; you cannot have one without having the other. There is the person of superiority without a person of inferiority. There is no oppressor without an oppressed. However, the narrator clearly knows that she is the colonizer and the man on the subway is the ‘other’ when she goes on to say “And he is black and I am white.” It’s sad to admit that in today’s society, the differences between us is causing so much violence and separation.
ReplyDeleteThrough Lacan's idea of the association between a lack of intelligence and recognition of "mediatization", it can be inferred that Sharon Olds, the author of "On the Subway", is equal to the chimpanzee in terms of maturity and intelligence to a certain degree. This is evident since she doesn't seem to understand, questions, and is indecisive on who has power in the social situation she is placed in across from the black male on the subway cart. This shows that she hasn't fully annexed herself from the environment she's in, since she doesn't fully comprehend the intertwined nature of authority between an individual and their environment.
ReplyDelete"[The young man] in black sneakers laced with white in a complex pattern like a set of intentional scars" In the lens of Post Colonial theory and referring to history as well, whites were the colonizers and,referring to the theory, blacks became the colonized. In America there is only white and "other". Relating to the excerpt with the lens applied, I believe that Sharon Olds' experience can imply that though the Black population knows of their complextion,they can not escape being labeled as "other" because of the restraints casted upon them by their colonizer.The colonizer wants the "other" population to be affected by their power and therefore decides to make their acceptance requirements so complexed that the "other" population is stuck and can never meet the label of "normal","ordinary","accepted", etc for which they so badly crave for. In short, the colonizer oppresses the "other" by installing ideals in the "other" that they know the "other" can never achieve,but will always strive to achieve in order to gain the acceptance of their colonizer. These unrealistic requirments and ideals leave scars on the "other" and reminds them that they will always be "other" and nothing more.
ReplyDeleteOn her poem, "On the Subway," Sharon Olds hints on the accuracy of Postcolonial Theory. The poem states, "[He] is black and I am white, and without meaning or trying to I must profit from our history." When the poem says "without meaning," it hints that the judgement was there in society and the narrator accepts it without question. She also explains how the narrator's race helps her "profit" because of her history, since white individuals were once seen superior to the people of color. Therefore, she explains that she is only superior to the man because of her race. This is because society has taught people to think that way and it is instilled in their minds because of what had happened in history between the races. Society has a lot of influence on how people see each other, especially when it comes to race.
ReplyDelete-Rangon Islam
I completely agree with you. I think one of the many reasons why racism is still such a huge issue today is because of slavery in America in the past. However, do you feel like it is her fault that she thinks this way? Is her easily accepting what society believes really her fault?
DeleteI don't actually think it's completely her fault for viewing this man the way she did. But in this case, she doesn't feel superior because she feels threatened. So if in the past whites were superior to the people of color why does she feel so threatened now?
DeleteSharon Olds's "On the Subway" is a literal representation of Judith Butler's Gender Performativity Theory. While observing the black man in front of her, she mentions that "his feet are huge" and that "he could take [her] coat so easily, [her] briefcase, [her] life". Sharon Olds felt threatened by his huge body and the strength that he seemed to possess. This strength is what society describes as masculinity. The writer automatically connected his male gender to him being strong and threatening. This shows that females and males have a set stereotype in society just like how Judith Butler states in his theory.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you but I think it has to do more with her not knowing him than anything. A girl can be friends with a really buff guy but not be afraid of him because she knows him and she knows he wouldn't hurt her. The lady in the poem is nervous because she doesn't know him, so she doesn't know what he can do.
DeleteThis is so true! It is also like the experiment Ms.Walsh conducted when she stated certain words and the students had to categorize them under male, female, or neither. This proves how society has influenced us in our opinions on gender.
DeleteI agree with Anthony I think that Sharon feels threatened because Sharon doesn't know what he's capable of,she judged him too quickly without actually knowing him. However, she is simply following her instincts and believes in the stereotypes that society imposes about male attributes.
DeleteIt's a shame that people Judge people based on color or gender, especially if they judge them as hostile. It's unfair to the person being judged because they can a great person but never get the chance to meet people because of impressions and stereotypes.
ReplyDeleteThis is a reply to Victoria
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSharon Old's "On the Subway" is a very good representation of Lacans mirror theory because the poem does a good job showing the differences between the two people in the subway and the tension that comes with being different. In the poem the lady compares her own clothing to the apparel of the man, and says how strong he is compared to her. She even goes as far as to say he looks like a mugger, so she starts fearing for her safety. This connects to Lacan because it shows how distressed someone can get when they can't control and therefor understand others. If the lady knew who the guy was she would be less apprehensive because she would know that she wasn't in any danger. If she could control him somehow she would also be relieved. Lacan states that you can only control and therefor know yourself however, so she wouldn't have that peace of mind and would react the way she did in the poem
ReplyDeleteI think thats an interesting perspective and I agree.She is afraid of him because of her lack of control of the situation.She is vulnearable while he is strong. Without knowing, the young man is in control of a situation that isn't even a situation.
Delete^^^^Great Stuff
ReplyDeleteIn some variations and forms, these respective theories undoubtably coincide with one another; all of which share a common factor -- identity. "Who am I?" is a ponderable, well distinguished notion between intrinsic nature, and its existence within the eye of the beholder. "What am I able to control?" -- the supercilious manifestation of "I" relative to the "other," subsequent to the recognition of self.
"The young man and I face [one another]..." In context, the "other" is in the perspective of the "I" as the "I" is concurrently in perspective of the other. However, the "I" is characterized as the narrator... So we are only allowed a single perspective of what is truly occurring, or what has occurred. It's her understanding of the man -- the unknown -- or lack there of, that catalyses her bitter disposition.
Her uncertainty (#elani) of her own power emphasizes the uncertainty of her identity, which frustrates her. I think Lacan's mirror theory best encapsulates the analysis of Sharon Old's "On The Subway."