Maternal Revenge and Redemption in Postfeminist Rape-Revenge Cinema

Edited by

Sheila C. Bibb & Daniel Escandell Montiel

Best Served Cold

Series EditorsDr Robert FisherDr Daniel Riha

Advisory Board

Dr Alejandro Cervantes-Carson Dr Peter Mario KreuterProfessor Margaret Chatterjee Martin McGoldrickDr Wayne Cristaudo Revd Stephen MorrisMira Crouch Professor John ParryDr Phil Fitzsimmons Paul ReynoldsProfessor Asa Kasher Professor Peter TwohigOwen Kelly Professor S Ram Vemuri

Revd Dr Kenneth Wilson, O.B.E

A Probing the Boundaries research and publications project.http://www.inter-disciplinary.net/probing-the-boundaries/

The Persons Hub‘Revenge’

Probing the Boundaries

Best Served Cold:Studies on Revenge

Edited by

Inter-Disciplinary Press

Oxford, United Kingdom

The Inter-Disciplinary Press is part of Inter-Disciplinary.Net – a global networkfor research and publishing. The Inter-Disciplinary Press aims to promote andencourage the kind of work which is collaborative, innovative, imaginative, andwhich provides an exemplar for inter-disciplinary and multi-disciplinarypublishing.

Inter-Disciplinary Press, Priory House, 149B Wroslyn Road, Freeland,Oxfordshire. OX29 8HR, United Kingdom.+44 (0)1993 882087

ISBN: 978-1-84888-043-6First published in the United Kingdom in eBook format in 2010. First Edition.

Table of Contents

Introduction viiSheila C. Bibb & Daniel Escandell Montiel

PART I Historical and Philosophical Perspectives

Aristotle on the Purpose of Revenge 3Krissana M. Scheiter

Dead before Breakfast: The English Gentleman 13and Honour AffrontedStephen Banks

The Anthropology of Revenge, Ancestral Wrath: 23A Modern Day Dilemma?Sheila C. Bibb

‘If you don’t come to me, I’ll come to you’: Primal 31Injury and Revenge in the Ghost Stories of M.R. JamesTerry Scarborough

PART II Literature and Poe-Tic Revenge

The Mixed-Blood Settles Scores: The Question of 41Racial Justice in Georges by Alexandre DumasClaudie Bernard

Analysing Darker Motives of Delving Robert Browning’s 49‘Poetry of Revenge’Paula Guimarães

The Servant as an Agent of Retributive and Restorative 61Justice in Wuthering HeightsEsra Melikoğlu

A Self-Destructive Path to Dead End: An Exploration on 71Revenge in Wuthering HeightsKuo-Ping Claudia Tai

Montresor and Hop-Frog Strike Back: Poe’s Never-Ending 79Poetics of RevengeMarta Miquel-Baldellou

PART III Revenge in the Arts and around the Globe

The Involuntary Casualties of Revenge in Alan 91Ayckbourn’s The Revengers’ ComediesIwona Bojarska

Revenge, American Cinema and Framing the Decade 97of the 1970sWilliam Gombash, III

Maternal Revenge and Redemption in Postfeminist 105Rape-Revenge CinemaClaire Henry

Revenge as Cultural Catharsis in Moya Henderson’s 115Opera LindyTimothy McKenry

PART IV Various Perspectives on Revenge

The Writer Seeking Vengeance: Blognovelism and 127Its Relationship with Literary CriticsDaniel Escandell Montiel

Treatment of Vengeance in Ferdowsi’s The Shahnameh: 137Book of KingsLeyli Jamali

Unlikely Heroines: Self-Destructive Sexuality and 145Narrative Identity-Building in the Fiction ofJoyce Carol OatesJenaeth Markaj

Experiences of Revenge as Reflected in the Contemporary 153Pashto Short StoryAnders Widmark

Introduction

This volume is based on a collection of papers that were presented at Inter-Disciplinary.Net’s 1st Global Conference on Revenge. This three day Conference,held in Oxford, UK during July 2010, together with this publication, forms part ofa broader Probing the Boundaries project facilitated by Inter-Disciplinary.Net.This project seeks to explore various aspects of the nature of Persons and theirexperiences and in this instance focuses on concepts and applications of revenge.The conference attracted participants from a wide range of countries anddisciplines, both from within and outside academia, all of whom have aprofessional interest in this subject.

Revenge as a concept evokes many differing responses and has been the subjectof much debate. One of the chief areas of disagreement lies in deciding whatconstitutes revenge, what constitutes justice and what determines the line betweenthe two. While cultural beliefs and traditions may play a large part in determiningthis, it became clear as delegates presented their papers that there are often otherfactors at play as well. Additionally, the ways in which revenge may manifest itselfare also many and varied. Whether it is through the manipulation of events in orderto humiliate and shame the person believed to have in some way wronged another,or the use of Art to publicly and collectively re-educate a segment of society, theprime concern of the person seeking revenge is often thought to be a need to venttheir own feelings and so maintain their honour and social standing. However, thisis not always the motive and it became clear from this conference that to think ofrevenge only in these terms is both limiting and inaccurate. Not only does it affectthe way we think about revenge and our response to it, but it also prevents us fromrecognizing some of the many guises which revenge may adopt. An open andquestioning approach allows us to consider notions, constructions and argumentswhich are not at first obvious. It also allows us to weigh these alternatives in across-cultural setting. Diversity was, therefore, a major factor in the success of theconference, both in terms of the subject matter covered and in the regions anddisciplines represented. We are delighted to be able to present here their collectiveworks.

The papers, which form this eBook, cover a wide and varied array of topics. Inorder to build on the conclusions reached and support the hypothesis that revengeis a subject, which would benefit greatly from a detailed and ongoing discussion,the papers have been grouped together into four sections, each with a commontheme. PART I investigates some of the basic concepts of revenge as it considersboth historical and philosophical perspectives. This is followed by PART II thatlooks at Literature and considers revenge as both an instrument and a subject invarious acclaimed works. The emphasis in these examples is on the individual.PART III expands on this theme to show how revenge is incorporated into the

Introduction

__________________________________________________________________

world of the Arts, often as a means of facilitating a collective act of revenge.Finally, PART IV is devoted to other perspectives, particularly those involvingwriting, either in other parts of the world or within cyberspace. In each of theseinstances the subject matter presents a unique example of revenge and some lessobvious ways in which it manifests itself.

As stated above, the first part of this book focuses on various historical andphilosophical perspectives which set a background for understanding not onlysome of the general concepts and considerations regarding the topic of revenge butalso context for the specific examples under discussion. In the first paper KrisannaM. Scheiter examines Aristotle’s contention that revenge is analogous topunishment. Contending that rather than destroy the offender, revenge is actually ameans to bring about justice and ensure that in the future the perpetrator does notrepeat the offense, Scheiter’s work leads naturally into the second paper. Presentedby Stephen Banks, the focus here is on the restoration of honour and social status.Examining the English honour culture, and specifically the obligations placed ongentlemen to defend both honour and status by issuing a challenge to a duel, heargues that duelling was a highly nuanced activity encompassing both the desirefor revenge and a means to divert it into a system of reparation. In the third paper,Sheila C. Bibb offers an anthropological insight into revenge as she considers thedilemmas faced by those who have a belief in the Ancestors and their continuedinfluence over the living. Using examples from sub-Saharan Africa and Asia, sheshows that the need to maintain both honour and status as well as avoid thevengeance too often wreaked as a result of ancestral wrath, can pose greatchallenges in a modern world. PART I concludes with a paper by TerryScarborough which examines further the perceived role of ghosts in mediating fearas he analyses primal vengeance and reprisal as it is reflected in the ghost stories ofM.R. James. All four authors reach similar conclusions, each arguing that revenge,while intimately bound with notions of honour and social status, also encompassesvery nuanced cultural responses.

Embracing the literary theme introduced at the end of the first section, PART IIexamines very specific examples of revenge in literature. Entitled ‘Literature andPoe-tic Revenge’, the section begins with Claudie Bernard’s examination of racialjustice in Alexandre Dumas’ book, Georges. Focusing on the failure of Georges to‘kill the colour prejudice’, this paper shows how heroic intentions and models mayparadoxically thwart expressed desires for equality, honour and status. The secondpaper in this section analyses Robert Browning’s ‘Poetry of Revenge’. Written byPaula Guimarães, this paper contrasts the more usual Victorian literary approach ofextolling noble and virtuous passions and actions with Browning’s deliberate useof evil characters in his poetry. She argues that by channelling the voice of acharacter, Browning is able to explore evil without actually being evil himself.This device allows him to question the responsibility of the artist in his creationsand to also investigate the relationship between art and morality. These themes are

__________________________________________________________________

arguably explored further in the next two papers, both dealing with Emily Brontë’sbook, Wuthering Height’s. Esra Melikoğlu focuses on class-division and the role of the servant as Nemesis and agent for retribution. She argues that the dialoguebetween victim and offender acts as revenge but is meted out proportionately andas a prelude to reconciliation. In this way the future concept of restorative justiceand social reform is hinted at but never attained. Kuo-Ping Claudia Thai, in herexamination of this same novel, focuses on the self-destructive element which sooften is associated with acts of revenge. Highlighting the way in which Heathcliffrealizes the absurdity of his existence – a life lived not for living but formeaningless revenge – she argues that the power of revenge can unexpectedly andinstantly transform and dissolve; in this case death is his only way out. The finalpaper in this section is Marta Miquel-Baldellou’s interpretation of two works byEdgar Allan Poe – The Cask of Amontillado and Hop-Frog. Exploring the by nowfamiliar themes of deception, both of the intended victim and often of self, theperpetrators of revenge in these two instances are demonstrated to be parallel textsreflecting the circulatory nature of revenge apparent in many literary works,namely, the victim of revenge invariably reflects the self the avenger seeks todestroy. It is this recurring theme of the juxtaposition between justice and revenge,between victim and avenger which is further explored in the next section of thisbook, as we move from literature specifically to the wider spectrum offered by aconsideration of the Arts.

PART III begins with what may be thought of as a transition piece as IwonaBojarska delves into the machinations recorded in Alan Ayckbourn’s TheRevengers’ Comedies. Once more exploring the relationship between victim andavenger, Bojarska adds another dimension to our understanding as she investigatesand demonstrates that revenge is bound to terminally affect not just the avengersand their targets but also frequently traps outside agents in the process andsacrifices them as well. While this example focuses on individuals and thoseimmediately involved with them, William Gombash III turns our attention to thewider nature of political motives and cultural stereotypes which frame the publicattitude. He does this by examining the role of American cinema and its popular1970’s revenge genre in framing the political discourse prevalent at that time, inrelation to victimhood and exploitation. Focusing on films such as Dirty Harry andDeath Wish, which symbolically frame heroes, locales and enemies withintraditional parameters, he shows how the mass media adapted their message topromote American values of law, order and vengeance. Contemporary versions ofthis same genre, in the form of Postfeminist Rape-Revenge Cinema such as KillBill Vol 1 & 2 and Sympathy for Lady Vengeance are discussed by Claire Henrywho argues that revenge is never just revenge for rape. There is always a maternalconstruction which serves to both justify the acts of vengeance and at the sametime results in an ambivalence towards revenge. The final paper in this section isby Timothy McKenry and takes us from film to the world of Australian opera.

Introduction

__________________________________________________________________

Lindy, an opera by Moya Henderson retells the true story of Lindy Chamberlain, amother accused of murdering her baby daughter. Her eventual exoneration makespossible this opera, which acts as a form of ‘cultural revenge’ giving one section ofsociety the opportunity to punish, marginalize and re-educate another. McKenryposits that Lindy actually represents a cultural tool enabling catharsis throughvengeance. In all these instances the authors show us that revenge rarely affectsjust the individuals directly involved but frequently includes outside agents andsociety. It is this collective aspect, which can add a further dimension and can leadto tragedy or catharsis.

The final section, PART IV, brings together various additional perspectives.Starting with a contemporary literary genre – the blognovel, Daniel EscandellMontiel’s analysis of a new form of relationship between the writer, the reader andthe critic reveals a three-way charade between blogs into the cyberspace. FeaturingHernán Casciari’s blognovel Más respeto que soy tu madre, and the criticismlevelled at it by a literary critic in his own blog, we are introduced to a new way ofexacting personal revenge as the unwary critic is cast as an unfavourable characterin the blognovel. Turning from the contemporary to an ancient historical writing,The Shahnameh: Book of Kings, Leyli Jamali exposes the different kinds ofvengeance and revenge, which connect its events as the warrior-heroes battle fortruthfulness. Identifying vengeance with passion, with justice, with moral valuesand authority, and also with honour all give credibility to the act. She notes,however, that this credibility ceases when revenge is seen to be nothing more thana hostile response in favour of evil forces. As she traces the logic and motivationbehind the various acts described in the writing, it again becomes clear thatvengeance and revenge have many guises and are not simple to understand orexplain. Jenæth Markaj addresses this in a different manner as she examines thenotions of both self-destructive sexuality and narrative identity-building found inthe fiction of Joyce Carol Oates. The apparent passivity of Oates’ femalecharacters frequently draws criticism from feminists yet this ignores the power ofnarration as a cathartic process. While the deliberate and triumphant act of revengemay be fulfilling to both the reader and the protagonist, the argument here is thatthe refusal to rebel or conform to the expected outburst of revenge – taking actuallyfacilitates a more substantive form of retaliation, as there is a redefinition ofpersonal identity. This then gives rise to an understated but powerful testament ofself and effectively destroys revenge in its more familiar form as the woman in factgains revenge by her very refusal to engage with it. Staying with literature, but thistime the short story genre found among the Pashtun of Afghanistan, AndersWidmark explores how the concept of revenge is formulated within this type oftext. Seeking answers as to whether revenge in this situation is narrated accordingto its traditional denotation of ‘defending honour’ or if a more neutral ormaterialistic type of revenge may be discerned, Widmark also considers whetherrevenge is a typical characteristic of Pashtun life or not.

__________________________________________________________________

While Anders Widmark’s paper concludes the current consideration of thistopic it is apparent that this has been very much an introduction to revenge, not anencompassing and final determination. The success of the 1st Global Conferenceon Revenge and the fact that there are still many more dimensions of the subject toexplore leads us to hope that future gatherings will be similarly successful. Bybroadening the discussion of revenge and deepening the discussions that havealready begun we believe it will be possible to better understand not only revengeas a subject but also its impact and ramifications within all aspects of life. We aretherefore proud to present this volume as the first instalment in what we hope willbe a complete series dedicated to the subject of revenge.

PART I

Historical and Philosophical Perspectives

Aristotle on the Purpose of Revenge

Krisanna M. Scheiter

AbstractAristotle defines anger as a desire for revenge aroused by an intentional andundeserved slight. His remarks on revenge are scattered throughout his corpuscausing many commentators to overlook or oversimplify his account of revenge.Stocker and Hegeman, for example, claim that for Aristotle the purpose of revengeis to make the offender suffer and take pleasure in his suffering. David Konstanclaims that the purpose of revenge is to restore one’s sense of honour and socialstatus. Both these claims are correct, but the main purpose of revenge for Aristotle,I argue, is to restore justice and ensure that we are not mistreated by the offender inthe future. I begin by showing that for Aristotle revenge entails three things. First,we desire to cause the offender pain; second, we want the offender to know that weare the cause of his pain; and third, we want him to know that we are causing himpain because he mistreated us. If the purpose of revenge was merely to takepleasure in the offender’s suffering, these last two criteria would be unnecessary. Ifurther show that the desire for revenge is not a desire to destroy or ruin theoffender. Killing another person or ruining their reputation would be an act ofhatred, according to Aristotle, not revenge. This is an important point and one thatmany contemporary philosophers writing on revenge have failed to make. ForAristotle, revenge is analogous to punishment. We punish people for stealing sothat they will refrain from stealing in the future. Similarly, we seek revengebecause we believe the offender wronged us; we want to cause him pain so that hewill not wrong us in the future.

Key Words: Aristotle, revenge, anger, punishment, justice, injustice, honour,slighting, orge, hate.

IntroductionThere is a tendency in contemporary Western culture to view revenge as

immoral, even irrational.1 Jon Elster, for example, claims that revenge is notcompatible with reason or goal-oriented behaviour because it ‘involves only costsand risks, no benefits’ (862).2 Suzanne Uniacke claims that revenge is wrongbecause it is motivated by resentment, rather than moral indignation (67).3

Aristotle, however, comes from a culture where revenge is often the norm, and sohe has a much different perspective.4 In the Nicomachean Ethics he claims thatthere are times when it is virtuous and rational to desire revenge (EN IV.5,1125b33-1126a8).5 In order to understand how revenge can be both moral and

__________________________________________________________________

rational we must figure out what Aristotle considers to be the purpose of revenge,which is the task of this paper.

Stocker and Hegeman claim that for Aristotle the purpose of revenge is to makethe offender suffer and take pleasure in his suffering (282). David Konstan claimsthat the purpose of revenge is to restore one’s honour and reputation. Both claimsare correct, but neither one captures what I take to be the ultimate goal of revenge(114). In this paper I argue that the aim of revenge for Aristotle is not simply thesuffering of the other person or saving face in front of other people; rather thepurpose of revenge is to right a wrong and to ensure that we are not treated unjustlyin the future.

I begin by discussing Aristotle’s account of slighting, which he claims givesrise to our desire for revenge. We desire revenge when we think that we have beenundeservedly and intentionally slighted. In the second section I give two reasonswhy the purpose of revenge cannot be just the suffering of another person and Iargue instead that revenge is aimed at protecting oneself against injustice, restoringone’s sense of self worth by making sure that the wrongdoer does not slight one inthe future. In the final section I claim that revenge is not just a form of punishment,but it is closely related to punishment in that it can be both rational and moral.

1. Anger and SlightsAristotle defines anger as ‘a desire accompanied by pain, for a conspicuous

revenge for a conspicuous slight at the hands of men who have no call to slightoneself or one’s friends’ (Rhetoric II.2, 1378a31-32). He has a much narroweraccount of anger than we do today. We talk about getting angry when our lovedones die, when social injustices go unpunished, or when natural disasters destroyour material possessions. For Aristotle, however, orge, the Greek word translatedas ‘anger’, refers only to the kind of anger that arises when we believe that we havebeen unfairly and intentionally slighted by someone whom we think ought to treatus well (Rh. II.2, 1378a31-32).6

A slight, according to Aristotle, is ‘the actively entertained opinion ofsomething as obviously no importance’ (Rh. II.2, 1378b10). He divides slights intothree categories: contempt, spite and insolence. Contempt is treating anotherperson disrespectfully. He explains that we get angry ‘with those who reply withhumorous levity when we are speaking seriously, for such behaviour indicatescontempt’ (Rh. II.2, 1379b31-32). Reversely, we do not get angry ‘towards thosewho are serious when we are serious, because then we feel that we are treatedseriously and not contemptuously’ (Rh. II.3, 1380a25-27). We also get angry ‘withthose who treat us less well than they treat everybody else; it is another mark ofcontempt that they should think we do not deserve what everyone else deserves’(Rh. II.2, 1379b33-34). By not taking someone seriously or treating someoneunequally we are sending a message to the person that he or she is unworthy. In

__________________________________________________________________

short, treating someone contemptuously means failing to give that person therespect and honour he or she deserves.

Spite, the second form of slighting, ‘is a thwarting another man’s wishes not toget what you want but to prevent his getting it’ (Rh. II.2, 1378b17-18). Anexample of spite would be a schoolyard bully who takes another child’s lunch andthen throws it on the ground. His motivation for taking the lunch is simply to slightand humiliate the other child. The bully does not believe that the other kid willfight back or tattle to the teacher or be any benefit to him whatsoever. If he did hewould not take the other child’s lunch.

The last form of slighting is insolence, which Aristotle claims ‘consists in doingand saying things that cause shame to the victim, not in order that anything mayhappen to yourself, or because anything has happened to yourself, but simply forthe pleasure involved’ (Rh. II.2, 1378B23-25). He claims that the ‘cause of thepleasure thus enjoyed by the insolent man is that he thinks himself greatly superiorto others when ill-treating them’ (Rh. II.2, 1378b27-28). Insolence is different fromspite in that insolence is aimed at causing the other person shame, whereas spite iskeeping the other person from getting what he wants. Aristotle notes that one ‘sortof insolence is to rob people of the honour due to them; you certainly slight themthus; for it is the unworthy, for good or evil, that has no honour paid to it’(1378b29-31). Insolence involves making ourselves feel superior and deserving ofhonour when in reality we are not superior and do not deserve to be honoured.

In sum, a slight entails treating someone as if they are of no consequence.Failing to take someone seriously, keeping someone from getting what he wants orrefusing to recognize another person’s excellence, accomplishments or status aredifferent ways of disrespecting the other person.

For Aristotle, slights are a special kind of injustice. Slights involve a failure toadhere to certain social expectations and this is a form of injustice on his account.He claims that ‘it is by proportionate requital that the city holds together. Men seekto return either evil for evil—and if they cannot do so, think their position mereslavery’ (EN V.5, 1132b34-1133a2). In the Nicomachean Ethics he claims thatthere are two different kinds of justice. On the one hand, there is justice in itsentirety, which involves following the mean and exercising the virtues of character(EN V.3). But there is a sub-category of justice, which Aristotle explains isequality or proportion (EN V.3). He claims that an unjust act is ‘assigning toomuch to oneself of things good in themselves and too little of things evil inthemselves’ (V.6, 1134a35-b1). When someone commits a slight they areoverestimating their own worth while at the same time undervaluing the otherperson. Aristotle further explains that some things are just by nature, while otherthings are just by law or custom (V.7 1134b32). Killing may be unjust by naturewhereas paying respect to one’s superiors is just through law or custom (V.7,1134b16-17).7 For Aristotle it doesn’t matter whether something is just by nature

__________________________________________________________________

or by law or custom. As a consequence, slighting may be only violating a socialnorm, but for Aristotle it is still an injustice.

2. The Pleasure of RevengeAristotle describes emotions, like anger, as pleasures or pains.8 Anger, he

claims, is both painful and pleasurable. Perceiving a slight is painful and gives riseto our desire for revenge, which he claims is pleasurable. He explains that revengeis pleasurable insofar as ‘it is pleasant to think that you will attain what you aim at’(Rh. II.2, 1378b2). Aristotle states that the desire for revenge is ‘attended by acertain pleasure because the thoughts dwell upon the act of vengeance, and theimages then called up cause pleasure, like the images called up in dreams’ (Rh.II.2, 1378b8-10). In other words, the desire for revenge is pleasurable becauserevenge itself is pleasurable.

The question, of course, is what makes revenge pleasurable? Stocker andHegeman claim that the desire for revenge is ‘a childish desire of angry men torepay in kind the pain they suffered’ (282). They quote the beginning of theNicomachean Ethics where Aristotle claims that ‘every action and choice, isthought to aim at some good’ (EN I.1, 1094a2). They argue that the ‘good aimed atin anger is the suffering of the other’ (283). Thus, on their account it is thesuffering of the other person that we find pleasurable when we get revenge. Thereare two reasons, however, why this cannot be how Aristotle conceives of the aimof revenge

First of all, if the suffering of the other person is the purpose of revenge, then itdoes not matter how the suffering of the other person comes about. But based onAristotle’s scattered remarks on revenge it does seem to matter how the sufferingof the other person occurs. Successful revenge requires three things. First revengerequires that the person who is slighted be the cause of the wrongdoer’s pain.Aristotle claims that we do not get angry, i.e. desire revenge, ‘if we think that theoffender will not see that he is punished on our account and because of the way hehas treated us’ (Rh. II.3, 1380b20). Moreover, he states that ‘no one grows angrywith a person on whom there is no prospect of taking revenge, and we feelcomparatively little anger, or none at all, with those who are much our superiors inpower’ (Rh. I.11, 1370b11-14). Second, the wrongdoer must be aware that theslighted person is the cause of his pain. He claims that ‘we do not get angry withanyone who cannot be aware of our anger’ (Rh. II.3, 1380b20-25). Third thewrongdoer must know that he is in pain because of what he did to the slightedperson. Aristotle states that when we seek revenge we ought to ‘inflict apreliminary punishment in words’ so that the wrongdoer will know why we arecausing him pain (Rh. II.3, 1380b19). If revenge is merely for the pleasure ofseeing the other person in pain, then it seems like we should take pleasure in thewrongdoer’s suffering whether or not we are the cause of his pain and whether ornot he is aware of our anger, but this is not the case, according to Aristotle.

__________________________________________________________________

The second reason for rejecting the idea that revenge is simply aimed at thesuffering of the wrongdoer is Aristotle’s analysis of pleasure and pain. He employsPlato’s account of pleasure and pain, pleasure being ‘a movement by which thesoul as a whole is consciously brought into its normal state of being; and that painis the opposite’ (Rhet. 1.11 1369b35-1370a2; see also Plato, Philebus 47c). Inshort, pain is a disturbance of a natural or normal state, whereas pleasure is therestoration of that state. Hunger, for example, is painful because it is a deprivationof the body, an emptiness. Eating is pleasurable because it restores the deprivation.These pleasures and pains are natural, but there are also pleasures and pains thatare habitual. For instance, if we are habituated to gorge ourselves on junk food,then we will feel pained if we have not had junk food for a while and we will feelpleasure when we do get our hands on a bag of Doritos.

If we apply Aristotle’s account of pleasure and pain to anger, we see that aslight must be a type of deprivation, not necessarily of a natural state, but of anormal or habitual state. We expect to be treated in a certain way by other peopleand when we are not treated in this way there is a sort of ‘social disturbance.’Revenge, being pleasurable and arising from a painful slight, must be a restorationof a social disturbance. Causing someone else pain would not in itself give uspleasure because it does not repair or restore the ‘social disturbance.’ The socialdisturbance is repaired only if the person regrets doing what he did and if we feelconfident that he will not do it again. Therefore the purpose of revenge is not tocause the other person pain. Rather causing the other person pain is a means to afurther end, namely repairing the social disturbance. We cause the other personpain so that he knows a wrong was committed and will not commit the wrongagainst us again.

It is worth pointing out that on Aristotle’s account, revenge does not have to besevere or violent in order to be effective. In the Topics he remarks that ‘upon somepeople it is vengeance enough to cause them pain and make them repent’ (156a38-156b1). He does not give an example of what he has in mind, but we can think ofan example that fits this description. We may get revenge on our parents byuninviting them to our child’s birthday party. This action would presumably causethem pain and if they know that we are doing it because we feel slighted by themthe hope is that they will regret what they have done. Simply causing someone tofeel ashamed could also be revenge for Aristotle since on his account shame ispainful.

3. Revenge vs. PunishmentRevenge is aimed at preventing future injustice, but it is not the same as

punishment. Aristotle draws a distinction between revenge and punishment. Heclaims that ‘punishment is inflicted for the sake of the person punished; revengefor that of the punisher, to satisfy his feelings’ (Rh. I.10, 1369b12-13). He isfollowing Socrates’ claim in the Gorgias that punishment is for the benefit of the

__________________________________________________________________

one being punished (477a). The purpose of punishment, according to both Platoand Aristotle, is to benefit the one being punished, to help the wrongdoer see thathe has acted unjustly and give him an incentive to become more just, not becausehe is afraid of being punished, but for the sake of justice. Punishing someone forstealing is supposed to help that person come to understand that stealing is wrongand teach him the value of being just. The purpose of revenge, however, is not tomake the other person more just (although this may be a happy consequence). Thesole purpose of revenge is to make sure that the wrongdoer will never againcommit an injustice against the person seeking revenge. The aim of revenge is notto make the other person more just or deter him from mistreating others. The aimof revenge is to make sure that we are not slighted again in the future.

4. ConclusionAristotle and the ancient Athenians have a much different view of revenge than

we do today. They understood that revenge could be vicious, destructive andimmoral. Aristotle even says in the Nicomachean Ethics that the virtuous personwill err on the side of forgiveness and will not give into his passions. Neverthelesshe claims that there may be times when the virtuous person ought to get angry andseek revenge. For Aristotle, and the ancient Athenians, revenge is not necessarilyirrational or immoral.

As I have shown, the purpose of revenge, on Aristotle’s account, is not to takepleasure in the wrongdoer’s suffering. Rather the goal of revenge is to prevent thewrongdoer from slighting us in the future. Just as punishment can be rational andmoral, so can revenge. Punishment is not moral if we are malicious, extreme orwrong about what kinds of acts we ought to punish. Likewise revenge is not moralif we overestimate our worth or what we are owed or if we seek malicious revengethat aims at harming the other person rather than trying to change their behaviourtowards us. Punishment is aimed at preventing future injustice in general andmaking the one punished more just. Revenge is aimed at preventing injustice fromhappening to us. The important point to take away from Aristotle is that revenge,being for our own benefit, does not in itself make it immoral or irrational.

1 Tamler Sommers points out that honour cultures (like ancient Athens) do nothave the same negative attitudes towards revenge as non-honour cultures. ‘TwoFaces of Revenge: Moral Responsibility and the Culture of Honour’, Biology andPhilosophy, Vol. 24, No.1, 2009, pp. 35-50 .2 For a response to Elster see AP Hamlin, ‘Rational Revenge’, Ethics, Vol. 101,No. 2, 1991, pp. 374-381.

__________________________________________________________________

3 S Uniacke, ‘Why is Revenge Wrong?’, The Journal of Value Inquiry, Vol. 34,2000, pp. 61-69. I do not think that Aristotle would disagree with Uniacke’s claimthat revenge is motivated by resentment (or what I call ‘anger’), but even so thedesire for revenge can be virtuous for Aristotle.4 See G Herman for a discussion about ancient Athenian attitudes towards revenge.He claims that not all ancient Athenians thought revenge was morally permissible.‘Honour, Revenge and the State in Fourth-Century Athens’, Die athenischeDemokratie im 4.Jahrhundert v. Chr, Franz Steiner, W Eder (ed), Verlag, Stuttgart,1995.5 For Aristotle acting virtuously just is to act rationally.6 Thumos is the other Greek word that is often translated as anger in Aristotle andPlato, however it has a much more broader usage than orge. Orge is used byAristotle to refer only to our desire for revenge that arises when we believe wehave been slighted. Thumos, however, can also refer to our desire for honour,reputation and victory (see Plato Republic IV).7 Aristotle does not actually give examples of things that are just by nature versusthings that are just by law or custom.8 There is some debate regarding whether or not emotions are always attended bypleasure and pain. See, for example, WW Fortenbaugh, 1970 & 2008, S Leighton,1996 and J Cooper, 1996.

Bibiography

Aristotle, The Complete Works of Aristotle. Vols. 1 & 2, Barnes, J. (ed), PrincetonUniversity Press, Princeton, 1984.

Elster, J., ‘Norms of Revenge’. Ethics. Vol. 100, No. 4, 1990, pp. 862-885.

Hamlin, A.P., ‘Rational Revenge’. Ethics. Vol. 101, No. 2, 1991, pp.374-381.

Herman, G., ‘Honour, Revenge and the State in Fourth-Century Athens’. Dieathenishce Demokratie im 4.Jahrhundert v. Chr. Franz Steiner. Eder, W. (ed),Verlag, Stuttgart, 1995.

Konstan, D., ‘Aristotle on Anger and the Emotions’. Ancient Anger: Perspectivesfrom Homer to Galen. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003.

Plato, Complete Works. Cooper, J. & Hutchinson, D.S. (eds), Hackett Publishing,Indianapolis, 1997.

__________________________________________________________________

Sommers, T., ‘Two Faces of Revenge: Moral Responsibility and the Culture of

Honor’. Biology and Philosophy. Vol. 24, No. 1, 2009, pp. 35-50.

Stocker, M. & Hegeman, E., ‘The Complex Evaluative World of Aristotle’s AngryMan’. Valuing Emotions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996.

Uniacke, S., ‘Why is Revenge Wrong?’. The Journal of Value Inquiry. Vol. 34,2000, pp. 61-69.

Related Readings

Allen, D.S., The World of Prometheus: The Politics of Punishing in DemocraticAthens. Princeton University Press, Princeton. 1999.

Carey, C., ‘Rhetorical Means of Persuasion’. Essays on Aristotle’s Rhetoric.Oksenberg-Rorty, A. (ed), University of California Press, Berkeley, 1996.

Chamberlin, A.F., ‘On the Words for ‘Anger’ in Certain Languages: A Study inLinguistic Psychology’. The American Journal of Psychology, Vol. 6, No. 4, 1895,pp. 585-592.

Cooper, J.M., ‘An Aristotelian Theory of the Emotions’. Essays on Aristotle’sRhetoric. Oksenberg-Rorty, A. (ed), University of California Press, Berkeley,1996.

Fortenbaugh, W.W., Aristotle on Emotion. Gerald Duckworth & CompanyLimited, London, 1975.

Frede, D., ‘Mixed Feelings in Aristotle’s Rhetoric’. Essays on Aristotle’s Rhetoric.Oksenberg-Rorty, A. (ed), University of California Press, Berkeley, 1996.

Harris, W.V., ‘The Rage of Women’. Ancient Anger: Perspectives from Homer toGalen. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2003.

____, ‘Saving the Phainomena: A Note on Aristotle’s Definition of Anger’. TheClassical Quarterly. New Series, Vol. 47, No. 2, 1997, pp. 452-454.

__________________________________________________________________

Herman, G., ‘Honour, Revenge and the State in Fourth-Century Athens’. Dieathenishce Demokratie im 4.Jahrhundert v. Chr. Franz Steiner. Eder, W. (ed),Verlag, Stuttgart, 1995.

Konstan, D., The Emotions of the Ancient Greeks: Studies in Aristotle andClassical Literature. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 2006.

____, ‘Aristotle on Anger and the Emotions’. Ancient Anger: Perspectives fromHomer to Galen. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003.

Kosman, L.A., ‘Being Properly Affected: Virtues and Feelings in Aristotle’sEthics’. Essays on Aristotle’s Ethics. Oksenberg-Rorty, A. (ed), University ofCalifornia Press, Berkeley, 1980.

Koziak, B., ‘Homeric Thumos: The Early History of Gender, Emotion andPolitics’. The Journal of Politics. Vol. 61, No. 4, 1999, pp. 1068-1091.

Leighton, S.R., ‘Aristotle’s Exclusion of Anger from the Experience of Tragedy’.Poiesis. Vol. 23, No. 2, 2003, pp. 361-383.

____, ‘Aristotle’s Account of Anger: Narcissism and Illusions of Self-Sufficiency’.Ratio. Vol. XV, 1 March 2002.

____, ‘Aristotle and the Emotions’. Essays on Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Oksenberg-Rorty, A. (ed), University of California Press, Berkeley, 1996.

Martin, T.W., ‘Sorting the Syntax of Aristotle’s Anger’. Hermes. Vol. 129, No. 4,2001, pp. 474-478.

Nussbaum, M.C., ‘Aristotle on Emotion and Rational Persuasion’. Essays onAristotle’s Rhetoric. Oksenberg-Rorty, A. (ed), University of California Press,Berkeley, 1996.

Striker, G., ‘Emotions in Context: Aristotle’s Treatment of the Passions in theRhetoric and His Moral Psychology’. Essays on Aristotle’s Rhetoric. Oksenberg-Rorty, A. (ed), University of California Press, Berkeley, 1996.

__________________________________________________________________

Krisanna Scheiter is a PhD student at the University of Pennsylvania. Whileinterested in ancient philosophy, philosophy of emotions and moral psychology ingeneral, currently her research and writing is focused on Aristotle’s account ofanger, revenge and justice.

Dead before Breakfast: The English Gentleman andHonour Affronted

Stephen Banks

AbstractThe desire for revenge may be aroused by physical loss caused by the malicious actof another. Deprived of what was his or hers, the avenger seeks to inflict retaliatorydamage on the transgressor. Yet a history of revenge, which confined itself todisputes over material objects, would be impoverished indeed. Historically, thedesire for revenge has been peculiarly invited not by disputes over things, but byconflicts over states of being, by those assaults upon reputation and by those socialhumiliations, which although intangible, nurture the deepest feelings of enmity. Inthe contemporary context one need only think of the spontaneous shootings inviolent neighbourhoods occasioned not by disputes over drugs or territory per sebut by the perpetration, sometimes unwittingly, of acts alleged to show disrespect.My paper will examine social slights and social humiliations as instigators of actsof violence, but it will do so in the very particular context of English honourculture. It will consider what it was to be a gentleman, the nuances of socialplacing and the particular social capital to be acquired by responding to slights bychallenging the offender to a duel. It will argue that the obligation to right a wrongwas particularly imposed upon gentlemen by the arrival, towards the end of thesixteenth century, of a courtesy literature that was not afraid to contradict theteachings of the Church. In its wake came duelling, an apparently somewhat severemethod of resolving honour disputes. I shall argue however, that in fact duellingwas a highly nuanced activity which evolved to both contain the desire for revengeand to divert it into a system of reparation to be offered, perhaps paradoxically, bythe party offended rather than by the offender.

Key Words: Duelling, honour, courtesy, gentlemen, revenge, Sanquhar,challenges.

On 29 June 1612 Robert Creighton, Lord Sanquhar was hanged outsideWestminster Hall. His crime had been to hire assassins to murder one John Turner,a fencing master. Turner had accidentally put out one of Creighton’s eyes in afencing match ten years before. At the time of his injury however, Creighton hadappeared to forgive his opponent and the matter had rested. Until three years laterthat is, when Creighton had been introduced to Henry IV of France. The King hadinquired as to how Creighton had acquired his wound and upon hearing the detailshad made no remark-other than to say, ‘Doth the man live? And that question gave

Dead Before Breakfast

__________________________________________________________________

an end to the discourse but was the beginner of a strange confusion in his workingfancy, which neither time nor distance could compose.’1

At his trial Creighton had readily confessed his guilt, yet he had defendedhimself by appeal to a set of mores and principles that he felt might in partexonerate him. He had referred to the obligation upon someone in his station topersonally and unreservedly requite any harm or affront to his honour. In aChristian society one thinks immediately of the contrasting imprecation to turn theother cheek but Creighton at this trial stated the matter baldly, ‘I considered not mywrongs upon terms of Christianity, for then I should have sought for othersatisfaction, but being trained up in the courts of princes and in arms, I stood uponthe terms of honour.’2 Francis Bacon, as Solicitor General, immediately responded,‘I must tell you plainly that I conceive you have sucked those affections ofdwelling in malice rather out of Italy, and outlandish manners, where you haveconversed, than out of any part of this island of England and Scotland.’3

Bacon, with the support of the king, was trying to resist a change in aristocraticmores initiated by the arrival of a plethora of Italian courtesy and conduct books atthe end of the sixteenth century.4 In particular they were trying to suppress theduelling that such a culture brought with it. To this end pamphlets were written,edicts made and Star Chamber deployed against would-be protagonists.5 None ofthese prevailed against a growing, ‘allegiance to that lodestar of Italian humanism,virtú: manliness, or the ideal of manly and courageous action, with overtonesstrongly aristocratic.’6 Characteristic of the new courtly literature was an obsessionwith one’s own projected mask and the assertion of a duty to preserve one’s visionof oneself and if necessary impose it upon others. In preserving one’s honourintact, ‘the extent to which the authors of civil courtesy and duelling were preparedto argue that some elements of their ideology were incompatible with the doctrinesof Christianity is striking.’7 If the new humanistic literature but reformulated ageold ideas nevertheless it legitimated violent responses to affronts and described thecircumstances in which such responses were obligatory. The duelling culture thatresulted influenced better English society until the 1840’s. My interest here then isin the duel and the place of vengeance within the culture of honour, and I hope bythe end that it will become apparent why I began with an anecdote that at first sightappears to have nothing to do with duelling at all.

The value given to the vigorous response to slights seems to have resulted insome men fetishizing their own honour to such an extent that they seemed to havelived their entire lives in readiness for outrage. Such men tended to be abnormallycompetitive in an already competitive society and they accepted the assertion ofHobbes that, ‘Because the power of one man resisteth and hindreth the effects ofthe power of another: power is no more, but the excess of power of one above thatof another.’8 Their punctiliousness allowed them to accrue a particular species ofsocial capital, Hester Stanhope the intimate of the violent, unpredictable andprobably indeed ‘half-mad’ Lord Camelford, killed in a duel in 1806 recalled with

Stephen Banks

__________________________________________________________________

delight, ‘His taking me one evening to a party, and it was quite a scene to noticehow the men shuffled away, and the women stared at him.’9 Such men moved veryquickly to the very extremes of physical violence, they were completelyuninhibited, and yet in a way they displayed a kind of childishness, an inability togovern themselves. Colonel Bayley reflected upon this mental infirmity when herecalled in his memoirs how in 1797 he had almost killed a fellow officer who hadaccidentally drunk the wrong cup of wine. ‘Not a mortal existing is certain of hisline of conduct for the ensuing 24 hours, some sudden impulse or capriciousemanation from the brain hurries him on to the commission of absurd and evencriminal actions, repugnant to his very nature.’10 Such men appear to have beeninvaded by a sense of honour, it possessed them rather in the way that the Homericheroes were said to have been invaded by fury, which drove them to great andterrible acts. That the sense of honour outraged is not quite the same as the lust forrevenge, I will suggest, but they have much in common. Both can lead to thatintoxication that comes from abandoning all consideration of consequences, allconcern for physical self and committing oneself wholly to acts which may lead toone’s own destruction.

Men did not only act in a passion however, sometimes they nursed grievancesconvinced that the ability to resent a slight indefinitely was a sign of high honour.The 1752 journal of Captain Augustus Hervey provides a useful illustration. In1747, a Portsmouth clerk, Mr Blankely, had been insolent to Hervey. Hervey hadthreatened to beat him, ‘yet he never took any notice of it.’11 However, the clerk, aputative gentleman, had turned up drunk at Hervey’s lodgings three days later,demanding satisfaction. Hervey had responded by giving the man a ‘gooddrubbing’. He had followed this up the following day by searching for Blankely toinstigate a duel. Blankely had however, fled and in his absence Hervey had writtento the dockyard and to the commander of the garrison to report Blankely’scowardice. Thus far the advantage had been entirely Hervey’s, yet he had notforgotten the insolence. Blankely had managed to find a new post at Gibraltarhowever, in October 1752 Hervey’s ship berthed there:

Having long resolved wherever I met Mr Blankley to call him toaccount for his behaviour at Portsmouth…I desired CaptainMorgan, a friend of mine, and an officer of the garrison, to go tothat fellow and tell that I desired he would immediately give mesatisfaction for his conduct and that we must meet with swordand pistol on neutral ground. He send word by Captain Morganhe desired to ask my pardon publickly in any manner I pleased,upon which Captain Morgan and Lord Robert Manners, whom Ihad sent to, told me surely it was sufficient, let his offence havebeen what it would. And so he came with his friend, and askedme pardon before these gentlemen, all in humblest manner.12

__________________________________________________________________

Perhaps only those familiar with this type of material will understand theexcruciating humiliation being described here-which very likely ruined Blankely.Hervey was careful to record that it was not he but two reputable witnesses whohad adjudged that Blankely had made adequate reparation. Throughout his memoir,Hervey gave regard to the judgment of others and it did not occur to him that theymight regard his conduct with disapprobation. Forgiveness was not easily to beseparated from cowardice in his eyes and the domination of others and theextraction of reparation was not to be the subject of censure; rather, it was a tokenof manly spirit.

Carried to extreme one might imagine that the extreme fetishization of honourmight lead to society dissolving in a blood bath-yet self-evidently it did not do so.Honour culture was always contested; there were other views abroad. Furthermore,although honour culture was manifested through duelling, the institution of theduel had emerged and evolved as a method of containing the violence implicit inthe culture that gave it birth. As in Italy in England, duelling ‘succeeded indiverting the nobility from faction warfare with armed gangs without leading to adislocation of social intercourse by incessant fighting over trivial slights, real orimagined.’13 Casualties in English duels were quite high, perhaps one third or moreof pistol duels in the later eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries resulted in aserious injury and one third in a fatality. Between 1785 and 1849 at least 277duellists were indeed rendered ‘dead before breakfast.’14 Nonetheless, the duelmarked the limit of the acknowledged and tolerated violence between gentlemen;its ritual brought an honourable and acknowledged termination which preventedgrievance running on into blood feud.

Why then did gentlemen allow the duel to constrain them? Partly becausegentlemen had early developed the notion of equality as the price of distinguishingthemselves from social inferiors. Rules to regulate conflict were necessary tomaintain mutual solidarity and formal duelling met such a need. Furthermore, intime, the order of gentlemen came to be defined by access to a right of satisfactionthat was denied to others. Duelling came to be one of those acts through which‘social magic always manages to produce discontinuity out of continuity.’15 Socialmagic was accomplished by a form of violence, eventually so specialised andnuanced that, save for the consequences; it scarcely seemed like violence at all.Supporting it ideologically was the belief that all gentlemen possessed a reservoirof inner honour that fitted them for it and a recognition that in a competitivesociety only right of recourse to the duel might preserve the interests of lessergentlemen against the more powerful.

Was it not from the fear of being called on for redress in thismanner, many persons whose fortunes and interest are large,would, without scruple, injure and oppress their inferiors in thoserespects...Money will carry through any thing; power and interest

Stephen Banks

__________________________________________________________________

will work similar effects, but, happy is it, neither will turn apistol ball, nor ward off the thrust of a rapier; otherwisegentlemen who are deficient in riches, would be subject tocontinual injuries and insults. 16

On occasion of course, gentlemen were injured or insulted. One distinguishingfeature of duelling culture was that disputes were not conceptualised as arising outof conflicts over physical material interests. One did not duel over land, or office,or money, one duelled over affronts to one’s honour-though often these affrontsmight arise precisely in the context of such disputes over property or interest.Honour was closely associated with personal courage and perhaps the propositionthat all gentlemen possessed such honourable courage could only be sustained bythe recognition that some might be unfit to remain within the order, the action ofexpulsion validating the claims of those that remained. If one wanted to challengethe right of someone to remain, one might say that he lied since it, ‘is an Affrontthat nothing but Blood can expiate. The Reason may perhaps be, because no otherVice implies a Want of Courage so much as the making of a Lie.’17 One mightstrike a blow since a gentleman resented a blow not, ‘in order to prevent thedisorders in society which would follow from such violence being suffered to gounpunished, but because a Blow dishonours him.’18 In many of the duels I havesurveyed from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries however, a gesture sufficed,one merely displayed a horse-whip in front of one’s opponent. Why so? Becausewho might be whipped, a felon, a slave, a common soldier and so forth, the gesturewas a very poignant attempt at social placing.

The victim of an attempt upon his honour was not however irrevocably placed-had that been so then indiscriminate violence might indeed have followed. Failureto respond appropriately to an insult might lead to social expulsion, but bydeclaring ones willingness to hazard one’s life one could restore and even enhanceone’s honour. By accepting a challenge, the offender in turn might enlarge theirreputation. Fault was not at issue and it is absolutely essential to understandinghow the duel managed to diffuse interpersonal violence to comprehend that theduel was not a system whereby retribution might be visited upon a wrongdoer andit was not a system through which one party might win, in a reputational sense,only at the expense of another.

The genius of the duel was that it focuses the attention of the slighted awayfrom the natural desire to have revenge upon the slighter and back to theredemption of his own honour. Why does an English gentleman who has beenoffended need to redeem his honour? Because men are not struck whom everyoneknows it is impossible to strike, something about the gentleman’s conduct hassuggested that he may be slighted, that he may not respond as a gentleman should.The duty then of a gentleman, is to prove to society that he is in fact worthy toremain; he has indeed to make reparation for the inadequacy of his projected social

__________________________________________________________________

mask. The issuing of a challenge, the indication of a willingness to hazard life wasan act of such reparation. Perhaps paradoxically, the acceptance of that challengewas a step towards the restoration of appropriate social relations since it implied arecognition of the others interests. In many cases this was enough, many morehonour disputes were resolved at this stage than ever progressed on to a duel.19

Where it did however, honour was restored not by giving a thrust or discharging ashot but by hazarding the receipt of one. Consider the case of Sir Jacob Astleywho challenged the man who had had criminal conversation with his wife. Howoutraged Astley was that on the field itself, the miscreant compounded his sins byrefusing to fire at him in earnest-leading the seconds to meet to declare ‘thenecessity of Captain Garth’s giving his pledge to return the Honourable Baronet’snext fire’.20

That the cuckolded husband should insist that the cuckolder try to kill himmight seem somewhat strange but by focussing on restitution of honour byreparation to the group as opposed to personal revenge upon the offender that theanimosities that honour culture might have indiscriminately unleashed werecontained. No doubt strong feelings of animosity were also present but CaptainHervey, a man who had internalised the dictates of honour, did not need to killBlankely to gain personal satisfaction so much as he needed to hazard himself toconvince himself that no stain remained upon him. Blankely might have acceptedhis challenge, in which case the matter could have been resolved as betweengentlemen, it was because he did not that Hervey humiliated him.

Returning then to the early rough days of honour culture in England, one beginsto understand why Creighton had Turner murdered. It was impossible to combatwith Turner, physically one could not fence with one eye and equally importantly,socially Turner was not a gentleman. It was impossible to treat Turner as a merecommoner and have him dealt with by the law-for Turner had done nothingunlawful. Creighton could scarce endure it. He was unable to either requite theharm or to demonstrate that he resented it in such a manner as to expunge any stainupon his honour. ‘Doth the man live?’ was the judgment that impressed uponCreighton the absolute necessity of ensuring that the man who had afflicted himdid not remain in the world. We might call the murder an act of revenge, althoughperhaps this misses the important nuances, in any case it was precisely in order tosatisfy the lust for reparation and turn aside its potential consequences that theformal duel evolved.21

1 TB Howell (ed), A Complete Collection of State Trials, 33 Vols, London, 1809-1826, ii, col. 745.2 Ibid, col. 747.3 Howell, State Trials, ii, col. 751.

Stephen Banks

__________________________________________________________________

4 Castiglione’s Courtier was first translated into English in 1561 and sooninspired home-grown works such as S Robson, The Courte of Ciuill Courtesie(1577), A Romei, The Courtiers Academie (1598) and W Segar, Honor Militaryand Ciuill (1602).5 Between 1603 and 1625 there were about 200 such cases heard in Star Chamber.TG Barnes, List and Index to the Proceedings in Star Chamber for the Reign ofJames I (1603-1625) in the Public Record Office, London, Class STAC8, TheFoundation, Chicago, 1975, pp. 159-163.6 VG Kiernan, The Duel in European History: Honour and the Reign ofAristocracy, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1988, p. 487 M Peltonen, The Duel in Early Modern England: Civility, Politeness andHonour, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003, p. 78.8 T Hobbes, The Elements of Law, Natural and Politics, F Tonnies (ed), FrankCass, London, 1969, p. 34.9 N Tolstoy, The Half-Mad Lord: Thomas Pitt, 2nd Baron Camelsford, Holt,Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1978, p. 91.10 Diary of Colonel Bayley 12th Regiment, 1796-1803 Army and Navy CooperativeSociety, London, 1896, pp. 113-4.11 D Erskine & W Kimber, Augustus Hervey’s Journal: Being The IntimateAccount Of The Life Of A Captain In The Royal Navy Ashore and Afloat 1746-1759, W. Kimber, London, 1953, p. 12.12 ibid., p. 50.13 L Stone, The Crisis of the Aristocracy, 1558–1641, Clarendon Press, Oxford,1965, p. 250.14 S Banks, ‘Killing with Courtesy: The English Duelist, 1785-1845’, The Journalof British Studies, Vol. 47, 2008 pp. 528-558, p. 554.15 P Bourdieu, Language and Symbolic Power, Polity Press, Cambridge, 1992, p.121.16 S Stanton, The Principles of Duelling with Rules to be Observed in EveryParticular Respecting It, Hookham, London, 1790, pp. 21-23.17 The Spectator II, 99 1794.18 R Hey, A Dissertation on Duelling, Magdalen College, Cambridge, 1784, p. 77.19 S Banks, ‘Dangerous Friends: The Second and the Later English Duel’ TheJournal for Eighteenth Century Studies, Vol. 32 (1), 2009 pp. 87-106, p. 91.20 The Times, 16 June 1828 p. 6 col. f.

Bibliography

Banks, S., ‘Dangerous Friends: The Second and the Later English Duel’. TheJournal for Eighteenth Century Studies. Vol. 32 (1), 2009, pp. 87-106.

__________________________________________________________________

—, ‘Killing with Courtesy: The English Duelist, 1785-1845’. The Journal ofBritish Studies. Vol. 47, 2008, pp. 528-558.

Barnes, T.G., List and Index to the Proceedings in Star Chamber for the Reign ofJames I (1603-1625) in the Public Record Office, London, Class STAC8. TheFoundation, Chicago, 1975.

Bayley, Col., Diary of Colonel Bayley 12th Regiment, 1796-1803. Army and NavyCooperative Society, London, 1896.

Bourdieu, P., Language and Symbolic Power. Thompson, J.B. (ed), Polity Press,Cambridge, 1992.

Hervey, A., Augustus Hervey’s Journal: Being The Intimate Account Of The LifeOf A Captain In The Royal Navy Ashore and Afloat 1746-1759. Erskine, D. &Kimber, W. (eds), W. Kimber, London, 1953.

Hey, R., A Dissertation on Duelling. Magdalen College, Cambridge, 1784.

Hobbes, T., The Elements of Law, Natural and Politics. Tonnies, F. (ed), FrankCass, London, 1969.

Howell, T.B. (ed), A Complete Collection of State Trials. 33 Vols. London, 1809-1826.

Kiernan, V.G., The Duel in European History: Honour and the Reign ofAristocracy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1988.

Peltonen, M., The Duel in Early Modern England: Civility, Politeness and Honour.Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003.

Stanton, S., The Principles of Duelling with Rules to be Observed in EveryParticular Respecting It. Hookham, London, 1790.

Stone, L., The Crisis of the Aristocracy, 1558–1641. Clarendon Press, Oxford,1965.

Tolstoy, N., The Half-Mad Lord: Thomas Pitt, 2nd Baron Camelsford. Holt,Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1978.

Stephen Banks

__________________________________________________________________

Stephen Banks is a lecturer in criminal law and legal history at the University ofReading and researches in the area of violence, honour culture and thedevelopment of the doctrine of provocation.

The Anthropology of Revenge, Ancestral Wrath:A Modern Day Dilemma?

Sheila C. Bibb

Abstract:Anthropological thought has frequently encountered and acknowledged the role ofthe ancestors in many societies. This role has varied depending on circumstancesand the specific situation encountered. In many instances this role is assumed to bea relic of a former time and of little real consequence in modern society. However,drawing on my own research together with current literature, I will examine therole of ancestors within Ghana, South Africa, Namibia and Mali, along withsimilar societies in China, Nepal and Tibet, to establish the current ancestralbeliefs, practices and attitudes. I will specifically focus on the impact these mayhave on daily behaviour patterns and their effectiveness as forms of social control.In so doing I will seek to answer the question as to whether the wrath of theancestors and their capacity for revenge might indeed pose a modern-day dilemmafor members of those, and other, societies.

Key Words: Role of ancestors, social control, ancestral wrath, revenge.

1. IntroductionAnthropological thought has frequently encountered and acknowledged the role

of the ancestors in many societies. Although this role varies depending on thesociety, the circumstances and the specific situation encountered, the consensus isthat to become an ancestor is a primary goal during life and, once attained, theduties or obligations may well be considered benevolent and passive. While thismay be considered a safe assumption to make, it is only that – an assumption. Byexamining concepts and practices in both Asia and Africa, I show that there areinstances where the ancestors are believed to be active and display characteristicswhere revenge, not benevolence, is the goal and the fear of incurring this wrathimpacts the daily behaviour of descendants. This in turn forms a means of socialcontrol and both instances indicate a modern-day dilemma affecting beliefs,behaviour and daily life in many societies.

2. Ancestors in AsiaThere are certain ideas associated with ancestors in this part of the world,

which can be summarized as follows. On death the family of the deceased ensuresthat all the necessary funeral rites are carried out, together with ongoingceremonies held at specific times during the following year(s). This not onlyallows the deceased to reach full ancestral status but also facilitates their being able

The Anthropology of Revenge, Ancestral Wrath

__________________________________________________________________

to function fully in their new state. Often a shrine will be built and strategicallyplaced within the home thereby ensuring that the person is remembered, honoured,maybe even worshipped. In such instances the new ancestor will be seen as aguardian, a protector, someone who will look benevolently on their familymembers. However, even within these generalities there can be markeddifferences.

Practices in China serve to demonstrate the point well. Rubie Watson1

describes burial practices among the Ha Tsuen who are primarily based in the NewTerritories, a region in southeastern China adjacent to Hong Kong. Here the focusis on providing a burial place for both the body and the soul. However, since thelocal belief is that the physical remains serve as conduits or conductors for thepowers such as wind and water that originate in nature, then great attention has tobe given to where those remains reside. Here geomancy dominates and the linkbetween the ancestor, his grave and his descendants is strong and has measurableconsequences for all involved. Watson’s research, and also that of Freedman,2

indicates that the ancestors themselves are not thought of as having any specialpowers. A failure to properly align the gravesite may result in a lack of worldlysuccess, but this is ones’ own fault, not that of the ancestor. In contrast, EmilyAhern3 in her studies in northern Taiwan found that it is ‘the ancestor himself, notthe [geomancy] of the gravesite, [which will] bring good fortune.’ Here then, lackof success may apparently be attributed to a disgruntled ancestor.

A further contrast is found in Tibet, where despite the strong Buddhistinfluence, evidence may still be found of an older belief, that of Bon. While thisdoes not directly involve ancestors, it does facilitate a strong belief in spirits,deities and ghosts. Both here and in China ghosts are thought to be the souls of thedead who have died accidentally or who have failed to successfully achieveancestor status. Referring to the Gurungs, originally from Tibet but now foundmainly in Nepal, Mumford states, ‘the dead are nearby and recallable.’4 Here thenwe see an instance of the dead who must be settled for their own sake and also toensure harmony and balance among the living. This is usually accomplished byinvoking the efforts of a shaman. Similarly, in daily living there is a recognizedneed to appease the spirits and this is displayed by the rituals carried out within andaround each home as well as the ritual or symbolic objects that may be locatedthere.

In Nepal, Charlotte Hardman has investigated the strong belief in the influenceof the dead on the living in great detail5 as she examined notions of self andemotion among the Lohorung Rai. In one chapter she describes in detail thenecessity of keeping the ancestors fed and happy. Failure to do so can result insuch diverse conditions as ‘illness’, poor crops, landslides, death of animals anddepression.6 Her book contains many references to the ways in which the ancestorsimpact the daily life of the inhabitants and these are well summarized by DavidGellner in his review of Hardman’s book when he says, ‘The main causal agents,

Sheila C. Bibb

__________________________________________________________________

as far as the Lohorung are concerned, are different categories of ancestors who arebelieved to be capricious and needy ‘like children’…they are a very real presencefor all the Lohorung with whom Hardman was acquainted.’7 These ancestors thenwould seem to be less benevolent entities.

3. Ancestors in sub-Saharan AfricaTurning to the African continent for examples of ancestral behaviour we find

familiar themes, and also some differences in the way the ancestors are bothregarded and dealt with. Starting with Mali, where animism is a central force in thebeliefs of many and is often held along with membership of other religious groups,the role of ancestors is important because they are considered to be the ones whomade the first contacts and arrangements with the spirits of the land and continueto interact with them. Ensuring that good relationships with the ancestors, andtherefore the spirits, are maintained is a priority if the people are to be successful inproducing crops, regulating their lives, and acting as a united social unit.

Moving south to Ghana and specifically to the Akan peoples, we again find therole of ancestors is one to be taken seriously. During my own research in theMampong Ashanti region, I found that while my contacts did not seem overlyconcerned about ancestors, in practice their relationships with them formed anessential part of life events and was of especial relevance when discussing healthand well-being issues. For example, part of my research was focused onTuberculosis and despite the general knowledge that Tuberculosis was air-borne;many people still insisted that often the true cause of the disease was an ancestorwho was holding a grudge. This raises two major issues; the perceived hereditarylink between disease and ancestor, and the fulfilment of proper ritual and respect.The perceived hereditary link results from the fact that in many instances it is notjust one member of a family who is afflicted. Once one member is infected otherfamily members often become sick and if one of them dies then any further casesare usually thought to be as a result of this deceased family member being upset;either because they have failed to make a successful transition to ancestor-hood, orbecause they were not properly honoured or treated correctly as they died. Here itshould be noted that a synonym for Tuberculosis is ‘ghost’ cough because, as oneperson said to me, ‘once you get this cough you will soon be a ghost’. If ‘ghost’ inthis case carries the same connotations as it does among the Tibetans and Chinese,then the deceased fails to reach true ancestral status and may therefore becomevengeful. Also, in Ghana, one of the main purposes of the ceremonies surroundingthe burial of the dead is the necessity to demonstrate publicly the honour andrespect which the family have for the deceased. This they do not only by the size ofthe funeral, the performance of various rituals, and the attendance they can muster,but also by the timing of these events. When all is done in a correct manner, thedeceased can transition smoothly into the next world and his soul can become anancestor with all the rights and privileges this entails. Compromise at any stage is

__________________________________________________________________

likely to jeopardize this passage and it is then that the ancestor may seek to punishhis family.

Additionally, revenge in this society may also be the result of manipulation ofthe ancestors by the living. I was told that there were two types of Tuberculosis –the physical and the spiritual. The physical came from contracting the disease fromair-borne particles while the spiritual could be contracted via the ancestors. Myinformant said:

For example I can sit here and put down my mobile phone andsomebody comes along and steals it. So I can say, ‘OK, you havestolen my phone,’ so what I am going to do maybe is say I willlet all the family members have tuberculosis and I will do it andit will become lasting and you will see that the family membershave tuberculosis all the time. I will call on my ancestors andthey will do this and every man will die and you see that is thespiritual tuberculosis.8

In this instance we see that the ancestors are manipulated by the living and usedas a mean to achieve revenge. This is introducing another dimension to ourunderstanding of ancestral behaviour and the implications here are far-reaching forif a society truly believes that each one has the ability to call upon their ancestorsand ask them to perform certain requests then this must act as a form of socialcontrol – particularly when it seems that these requests can be vengeful. There isno evidence that the ancestors themselves are aware of or encouraging themalicious intent of their descendants, yet the result – a family being stricken withtuberculosis – is very real.

Moving to southern Africa, I wish to look briefly at beliefs among the Himba ofNamibia. Here we find a belief system which centers on Mukuru, an omnipotentdeity to whom the ancestors are subservient. Mukuru himself is believed to be bornof fire and every Himba homestead has an ancestral fire which forms a central partof both daily and ceremonial life, being regulated by specific rules andconventions, one of which is that the fire-keeper will approach the ancestral fire ona weekly basis in order to communicate with Mukuru and the ancestors. Writing onthis subject, David Crandall records a conversation between a Himba father andson:

Then he asked…‘My son, how does Mukuru differ from ourancestors?’…I said, ‘We learn that Mukuru is good, that he onlyblesses us and never curses us as our ancestors sometimes do.’9

Mukuru then does only good but the ancestors are not so constrained.

Sheila C. Bibb

__________________________________________________________________

In neighbouring South Africa much has been noted and written about variousbelief systems and a constant theme has been the need to explain the misfortuneswhich befall a family or individual. Adam Ashforth,10 in various writings,discusses the normal interaction between ancestors and humans and then tells whathappens when the ancestors become angry. The examples he gives indicate thatrather than the angry ancestor actively causing harm to befall the object of hiswrath, he is more likely to withhold or modify the protection which he wouldnormally give.11 This negative application of ancestral protection and guardianshiphighlights another aspect which may feature in our consideration, that ofindifference which may even result in the death of a family member.

4. DiscussionWhether passive or active, benevolent or malicious the ancestors are there and

are a force to be reckoned with. Failure to ensure they are respected, honoured andfully-transitioned to their new status may incur ancestral displeasure at the leastand wrath in some instances, and may well be seen as a cause of currentmisfortune. Occasionally there is the possibility that the ancestor is indeedmalicious and intent on wreaking havoc and inflicting abuse on family membersfrom beyond the grave. In most instances, there are ritual methods of appeasing theoffended ancestor and restoring harmony.

This leads us to consider daily practices and behaviour. If there are daily ritualswhich when observed ensure the continued benevolence and protection of theancestors, then it behoves the family to follow these practices. Similarly, theholding of feasts as well as the attention to graves and other obligations, should beincorporated into normal life. However, these practices do raise questions about theapplicability of acknowledging ancestral wrath in today’s societies. Does thisactually pose a modern-day dilemma?

In all cases discussed the family or individual concerned either acknowledgedtheir belief in ancestral abilities and sought to meet all their obligations on aregular basis thus adjusting their lives to accommodate all the requirements andrestrictions this might impose; or neglected or ignored the ancestor until somemishap occurred. In both instances, there was an acknowledgement that no matterwhat conditions might prevail in their specific society, whether this be advancedtechnology, communication, higher education, medical advancements, travel orany of the other attributes thought to comprise modern day living, these had to beplaced alongside an underlying belief in an invisible agent which impacted lives –the ancestors. Here is where we really become aware of the dilemma in two ways.First the practical application of essential obligations may interfere and even be atodds with other secular demands upon the individual or family. Employers,especially those who do not hold such beliefs, may well be less thanaccommodating towards employees who wish to participate in lengthy or repetitiverituals. Those persons who choose to leave their beliefs behind may nonetheless

__________________________________________________________________

undergo some guilt or mental trauma at having done so. Also, as modern livingoften necessitates working away from home and multiple relationships become thenorm, so families become fragmented and knowledge is lost. Ashforth, speaking ofsome of his Sowetan friends said, ‘None of my friends attended initiation schools.There are no formal institutions devoted to the teaching of custom or tradition inurban areas.’12 So the important ceremonies and rituals, rules and obligations arenot automatically being passed on. A new generation is carrying forward thebeliefs but is unequipped to deal with them.

We have also seen the possibility of a wrathful or malevolent force acting as aform of social control encouraging specific modes of behaviour. Conversely it canalso be abused and used by corrupt political or religious forces as a threat tomaintain power and authority.

5. SummaryUsing examples from Asia and Africa, I have discussed the role of ancestors in

general and the ways in which they remain connected to their descendants. Whilethese are normally positive and benevolent I have also shown that when neglected,the ancestors can become agents of revenge meting out punishment to those whodisregard them in an effort to bring them back into compliance. Whilst it may beargued that the ancestors are not actually malicious, and indeed may even bemanipulated by humans, it remains a fact that if they are thought to be aninstrument of revenge, then all behaviour attributed to them assumes a role of greatimportance. Traditionally it was possible to rectify any lapses by complying withestablished rituals and restoring a balance to the ancestor-human relationship.Today, with fragmented families, an increase in urban dwelling and a subsequentloss of traditional knowledge it is much harder to overcome the perceived effectsof ancestral wrath. At the same time, the existence of these invisible agents ofrevenge can be more easily manipulated and invoked by the unscrupulous and thecorrupt. For many the fear of incurring ancestral wrath may well impact their dailybehaviour, their beliefs, and also form a means of social control.

1 R Watson, ‘Remembering the Dead: Graves and Politics in Southeastern China’,Death Ritual in Late Imperial and Modern China, JL Watson & ES Rawski (eds),University of California Press, 1988, p. 206.2 M Freedman, Chinese Lineage and Society: Fukien and Kwangtung. AthlonePress, London & Humanities Press, New York, 1966, p. 143.3 E Ahern, The Cult of the Dead in a Chinese Village, Stanford University Press,Stanford, 1973, p. 185-188.

Sheila C. Bibb

__________________________________________________________________

4 SR Mumford, Himalayan Dialogue: Tibetan Lamas and Gurung Shamans inNepal, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison WI, 1989, p. 181.5 C Hardman, Other Worlds: Notions of Self and Emotion among the LohorungRai, Berg, Oxford, 2000, pp. 41- 56.6 ibid. p. 45.7 DN Gellner, Review of Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, (N.S.)Vol. 9, 2003, p.601.8 SC Bibb, Ghana Fieldnotes, Unpublished, 2005.9 DP Crandall, The Place of Stunted Ironwood Trees, Continuum InternationalPublishing Group, New York, 2000, p.185.10 A Ashforth, Witchcraft, Democracy and Violence in South Africa, University ofChicago Press, Chicago, IL, 2005, pp.202-206.11 ibid. P.20212 ibid pp.203-204.

Bibliography

Ahern, E., The Cult of the Dead in a Chinese Village. Stanford University Press,Stanford, 1973.

Ashforth, A., Witchcraft, Democracy and Violence in South Africa. University ofChicago Press, Chicago, IL, 2005.

Bibb, S.C., Ghana Fieldnotes. (Unpublished), 2005.

Crandall, D.P., The Place of Stunted Ironwood Trees. Continuum InternationalPublishing Group, New York, 2000.

Freedman, M., Chinese Lineage and Society: Fukien and Kwangtung. AthlonePress, London & Humanities Press, New York, 1966.

Gellner, DN. ‘Review’. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol. 9,2003.

Hardman, C.E., Other Worlds: Notions of Self and Emotion among the LohorungRai. Berg, Oxford, 2000.

Mumford, S.R., Himalayan Dialogue: Tibetan Lamas and Gurung Shamans inNepal. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI, 1989.

__________________________________________________________________

Watson, R., ‘Remembering the Dead: Graves and Politics in Southeastern China’.Death Ritual in Late Imperial and Modern China. Watson, J.L. & Rawski, E.S.(eds), University of California Press, 1988.

Sheila C Bibb, MPhil (Oxon) in Medical Anthropology, teaches Anthropology atBrigham Young University, Utah. Her current research includes projects based inSouth Africa, Utah, Tonga, and the United Kingdom and all reflect her interests intopics such as Boundaries, Identity, Global Flows, and Belief Systems.

‘If you don’t come to me, I’ll come to you’: Primal Injury andRevenge in the Ghost Stories of M.R. James

Terry Scarborough

AbstractRecent scholarship attempting to elucidate the nature of revenge has identifiedrecurring patterns in cycles of vengeance and questioned their connections tojustice. Notably, Jennifer L. Culbert identifies a perpetual cycle of reprisal, whichin its retaliatory nature suggests an incessant chain of vengeful acts rooted inprimal injury. Many attempts have been made to trace this cycle to primitivecultures, and even to animals, through surveying cultural attempts to disrupt thischain through blood sacrifice and other ritual practices. Culbert demonstratesthrough her diction the very essence of revenge as unknown, haunting and fearfulthrough reference to a ‘specter’ to be ‘exorcized.’ Such attempts to understand andmaster revenge then naturally suggest the ghost, specifically the ghost story, as ameans to mediate fear of revenge as a haunting reminder of and reaction to pastinjustice and primal injury. Following contemporary theories connecting revengeand justice, this paper will examine revenge as reflected in the ghost stories ofMontague Rhodes James. The analysis will span recent and Victorian analyses ofrevenge to reveal James’s fascination with primal vengeance and reprisal asreflected in the ghost story. I will examine James’s fixation on antiquarianism,specifically the Gothic trope of the found manuscript and archeology, to reveal anintricate commentary on the primal nature of anxieties surrounding revenge.Positing that the ghost or specter functions for James as an archetypal reflection ofthe human fear of vengeance and its resultant violence, I will address the commonclaim that James’s ghosts are vengeful, and explain the nature and function of thisdrive.

Key Words: Revenge, Reprisal, Haunting, Ghosts, Victorian, Gothic, Justice.

Recent scholarship attempting to elucidate the nature of revenge has identifiedrecurring patterns in cycles of vengeance and questioned their connections tojustice, and attempts have been made to trace these cycles to primitive culturesthrough surveying cultural efforts to disrupt this chain through blood sacrifice andother ritual practices. Accordingly, it has become commonplace for critics toemploy diction which connotes the very essence of revenge as unknown, hauntingand dreadful through references to spectres, ghosts and exorcisms. Such attemptsto understand and master revenge then naturally suggest the ghost story as a meansto mediate fear of revenge as a haunting reminder of and reaction to past injusticeand primal injury, and the threat of reprisal in the form of ghostly returns.

‘If you don’t come to me, I’ll come to you’

__________________________________________________________________

Following contemporary theories connecting revenge and justice, this paperwill examine revenge in the ghost stories of Montague Rhodes James. The analysiswill span Victorian and recent analyses of revenge to reveal James’s fascinationwith cycles of vengeance and reprisal and their articulation in distinct patternsthroughout ‘The Mezzotint,’ ‘The Ash Tree,’ and ‘A School Story.’ I will examineJames’s fixation on redress, anger and social and personal conceptions of justice, toreveal an intricate commentary on the primal nature of anxieties surroundingrevenge. Positing that the ghost or spectre functions for James as an archetypalreflection of the human fear of vengeance and its resultant violence, I will addressthe common claim that his ghosts are vengeful, and explain the nature and functionof this drive in relation to its cyclical nature. I contend that James formulates atheory of revenge which necessitates the inclusion of a party external to theoriginal injury to witness and perpetuate knowledge of the act of vengeance toneutralize rage and put to rest the haunting threat of an ongoing cycle of revenge-reprisal.

The concept of revenge has flourished within the world of Gothic literature informs ranging from villains and criminals to ghosts and revenants, and oftencomments on the workings of social and personal conceptions of justice. In ‘TheCask of Amontillado’ (1846), Edgar Allen Poe famously elucidates his philosophyof revenge. His vengeful protagonist Montresor states, ‘A wrong is unredressedwhen retribution overtakes its redresser. It is equally unredressed when the avengerfails to make himself felt as such to him who has done the wrong.’1 Here, Poesuggests the essence of revenge lies not merely in the injured party’s punishmentof the injurer, but also in the latter’s realization that the avenger has appropriatelyachieved vengeance. However, Poe does not make explicit an important element ofhis philosophy, one which may help explain Montresor’s otherwise ambiguousmotives: the extension of the knowledge of the vengeance to a party external to theoriginal injury. Poe’s philosophy offers insight into a similarly implicitcommentary on this external component of the process of revenge in M.R. James’sghost stories, specifically those of his first collection, Ghost Stories of anAntiquary (1904). Through careful examination of specific narrative cycles ofrevenge in these stories, James’s own philosophy of revenge and its requisiteextension to a third party may be brought to light.

Contemporary criticism has duly identified that James’s ghosts are generallyvengeful in nature; however, the motivations behind this drive for revenge havebeen strangely neglected. Like Poe, James employs ambiguity as a significant toolin creating horror, often through the reader’s questioning the avenger’s motives.But careful examination of this technique reveals a significant pattern in hisghostly cycle of revenge as characters are haunted, and even killed, due toseemingly innocuous actions. In fact, these actions often do not extend far beyondmere disturbance, whether through curiosity or chance circumstance. Althoughthese seemingly ambiguous incongruities between disturbance and punishment

Terry Scarborough

__________________________________________________________________

have remained an issue of debate, several details offer insight into the uniquequalities of James’ hauntings.

In ‘The Mezzotint,’ the seeming victim Mr. Williams purchases ‘a ratherindifferent mezzotint’2 for his museum and is ‘unexpectedly introduced’3 to aprocess of past revenge, which is completed through a horrifying experience with achanging picture. Williams is driven to locate the scene of a long past crime ofwhich he learns through investigation of the haunting that a Mr. Arthur Francis, inattempt to expel a poacher from his estate, entered a dispute with one Gawdy inwhich the latter ‘was unlucky enough…to shoot a keeper.4 ‘The last remains of avery old family…[who were] lords of the Manor at one time,’5 Gawdy is hangedand ‘buried on the north side of the church.’6 As the injury is compounded byinsult (not unlike the injury in Poe’s ‘Cask’), the outcome of Gawdy’s revengeseems fitting; the mezzotint enacts his return and making away with Francis’s onlyheir, ‘putting an end to his line, too.’7 However, a closing detail poses an importantpoint: we learn that ‘although carefully watched, [the mezzotint] has never beenknown to change again.’8 The cessation of the haunting (one through which theobserver experiences much distress) suggests the necessity of a third and quiteinnocent mortal party witness and maintain the act of revenge-through the veryknowledge of its occurrence-to complete the cycle.

As ‘The Mezzotint’ demonstrates the necessity of a third party in the process ofrevenge, it also elicits the problem of justice in its execution. The reader learns thatGawdy ‘always kept just on the right side of the law – until one night the keepersfound him at it…[on] the estate.’9 During the confrontation Gawdy is ‘unluckyenough…to shoot a keeper’10 and we discover that, along with a jibe at ‘grandjuries – you know what they would have been then,’11 Gawdy’s prosecution is‘what Francis wanted.’12 Here, supernatural vengeance supersedes social justice togive rise to what Jennifer L. Culbert refers in ‘Reprising Revenge’ as ‘a completelynew set of circumstances,’ arguably through which the ‘ cycle of vengeance…maybe disrupted.’13 Culbert references a perpetual cycle of reprisal, which in itsretaliatory nature suggests an incessant chain of vengeful acts rooted in primalinjury and claims that ‘The spectre of being held captive in a cycle of vengeancehaunts accounts of the limits of sovereign power.’14 Basing her study on ReneGirard’s famous statement that ‘vengeance is a vicious circle that is broken onlywhen the power to seek reprisal is consolidated in a sovereign authority,’specifically ‘a judicial system in conjunction with a firmly established politicalpower,’15 Culbert asserts that when such authority is questioned, ‘what follows is areturn to a timeless state of nature in which people are once again perpetuallyobliged to settle their own scores.’16 That is, she suggests that rather than removeany form of victim, who will ostensibly retaliate against injury, such interference inthe process of revenge may revert the feeling of self-injury to a primal state. Inlight of this theory, James’s emphasis on a questionable sovereign authority in thegrand jury and the suggestion that ‘Squires could do a lot of things then that they

__________________________________________________________________

daren’t think of now’17 thus exposes a pattern through which he suggests cycles ofreprisal may be broken, or at least disrupted, by way of extended and continuedknowledge of their existence. As the law seeks to displace the injured party andthereby halt cycles of reprisal through a neutralized form of vengeance, James’haunted image introduces an innocent third party to make public and complete theprocess of revenge.

‘The Mezzotint’ establishes the first step in tracing this pattern, but it expandsto a more problematic inclusion of an innocent third party in ‘The Ash Tree.’Here, one Mrs. Mothersole is tried and executed as a witch. A ‘victim,’ Mrs.Mothersole is in a more ‘influential position’ than the other accused witches and‘Efforts are made to save her by several reputable farmers of the parish.’18 SirMatthew Fell, the master of Castrigham Hall, provides the ‘fatal’19 evidence andincites her ‘poysonous rage’20 as she is burned alive. Accordingly, Fell becomesthe target of vengeance and draws attention to the sovereign authority of the lawwhose favour is influenced by social rank (the favour of several farmers isoutweighed by the testimony of one man of higher social status). Mothersole’scrime of ‘gathering sprigs “from the ash-tree near [Fell’s] house”’21 provides thevehicle through which she exacts her revenge. Fell is dispatched in similar fashionto Mothersole as several creatures resembling large spiders enter Fell’s chambervia the tree branches and leave the corpse ‘in Great Swelling and Blackness . . .[and] “twisted after so an extream” suggesting that he expir’d in great Pain andAgony.’22

Mothersole’s revenge seeks to rectify both the incongruous relation betweencrime and punishment and the failure to question the sovereign authority of thelaw, and points to James’s intricate understanding of the complexity of the revengeprocess through the significance of anger. Mothersole’s revenge is directed towardher injurer in Fell, but the legal authority remains unpunished. As Fell’s son, SirMatthew the second, succeeds the estate, there begins a ‘curiously constantmortality among his cattle and live-stock in general, which show[s] a tendency toincrease slightly as time [goes] on.’23 After containing the animals indoors and inparks, the ‘disorder’ is confined to ‘wild birds, and beasts of the chase,’ resulting inthe local farmers coining the occurrences the ‘Castringham sickness.’24 In an 1898review in Mind, Edward Westermarck distinguishes ‘sudden anger’ fromrevenge.25 According to Westermarck, the former can occur as an ‘outburst of awounded ‘self-feeling’, which, when not directed against its proper object, canafford only an inadequate consolation to a vengeful man.’26 Westermarck’ssuggestion, with which James may have been acquainted, reveals a salient clue inJames’s cycle of revenge. Inadequately consoled by her revenge on Fell,Mothersole’s ‘poysonous rage’27 is projected outward in attempt to heal her‘wounded self-feeling’ and is eventually directed on to the third generation ofFells, Sir Richard.

Terry Scarborough

__________________________________________________________________

Sir Richard’s demise, which results like his grandfather, in his lying ‘dead andblack in his bed,’28 is triggered by his order to exhume Mothersole’s corpse (whichis strangely absent) and burn her coffin. As the original injury is compounded byinsult,29 Mothersole’s rage is again focused on the Fell family line. At this point isit important to note that Mothersole’s corpse is inside the very ash tree with whichFell’s testimony connects her. Only upon destroying the tree-importantly, it isaccidentally burned to the ground-does the cycle of rage-revenge halt, suggestingMothersole’s inability to repair, in Westermarck’s terms, ‘the ‘self-feeling’ whichhas been lowered or degraded by the injury suffered.’30 Through its destruction, thetree metonymically equates to both the incongruity between Mothersole’s crime(gathering sprigs from its branches) and the sentence bestowed on her by the law(death by live burning). Upon examination of the roots is found ‘the anatomy orskeleton of a human being, with the skin dried upon the bones…which waspronounced…to be undoubtedly the body of a woman, and clearly dead for aperiod of fifty years.’31

The documenter, one Bishop of Kilmore, who is in a position which althoughnot legal suggests sovereign authority, assumes the third party in James’s revengecycle, which corresponds to Culbert’s assertion that ‘The spectre of being heldcaptive in a cycle of vengeance haunts accounts of the limits of sovereignpower.’32 As the incongruity between crime and punishment is made publicthrough documentation by an ecclesiastic authority, albeit ambiguously, the failureto halt an ongoing cycle of violent reprisal results in its perpetuation not merelythrough continued knowledge of its occurrence, but through understanding of itsorigin. That is, as the third party provides and preserves clues as to who and howthe redresser achieves revenge, Mothersole’s unfocussed rage is displaced byJames’s cycle of injury, reprisal and externalisation by a third party.

In ‘A School Story,’ James enacts what is perhaps his most overt rendering ofthe revenge cycle. In a retrospective narration of a childhood experience with thesupernatural during his school years, the narrator recounts a tale of a vengefulmurder victim returned to claim his assassin. In typical Jamesian fashion, the ghostor revenant communicates through Latin; but, in a significant gesture toward theinclusion of a third party, this communication takes place through a medium, astudent and friend of the narrator. In a self-reflexive gesture, James cataloguespopular types of the bogey tale, and begins his cycle. Sampson, a masterinstructing Latin grammar, encounters a haunting communication with his victimthrough a student’s Latin exercises. Teaching ‘how to express remembering,’ heinstructs the students to construct a sentence using ‘the verb memini.’33 A veryaverage student McLeod constructs ‘Remember the well among the four…yews,’34

which excites a worried and inquisitive response in Sampson. The next message,which appears without the aid of McLeod, threatens, ‘Si tu non veneris ad me, egoveniam ad te,’ which means…‘If you don’t come to me, I’ll come to you.’35 AsSampson faces violent reprisal, McLeod is mysteriously drawn to the window,

__________________________________________________________________

notably without ‘hear[ing] anything at all.’36 McLeod and the narrator experiencethe occurrence, the latter second hand, but are not fully aware of the circumstance;thus, the cycle of revenge is incomplete as we learn that the observers did notmention what they ‘had seen to any third person whatever.’37

At this point in his enactment of the revenge cycle, James appends a sequelthrough which the cycle is successfully completed in an overt commentary on thenecessity of an external party. The reader learns that ‘there had been more than onelistener to the story, and, in the latter part of the same year…one such listener wasstaying at a country house in Ireland.’38 The unnamed external party chances uponan engraved gold coin, which the reader learns earlier belonged to Sampson.Learning that his host, upon cleaning an old well in a yew thicket, found the coinon one of the remains of two bodies at the bottom, the speaker ‘experience[s] anodd sense of nervousness’39 upon recognizing the coin engraved with Sampson’sinitials. Similar to the function of the tree in ‘The Ash Tree,’ the coin functions asa metonym for the now ongoing cycle of revenge. Although the well is filled ‘fastenough,’40 the coin containing distinct evidence pertaining to the initial narrative isretained and discovered by the third party, thereby revealing the explicit details ofthe school story, and perpetuating knowledge of the successful execution ofvengeance.

James’s fixation on the ability to disrupt haunting cycles of revenge throughtheir very perpetuation provides insight into tropes of haunting in the languagesurrounding revenge. Furthermore, his ghost stories enact implicit commentary oncontemporary theories of revenge and their connections to justice and offer insightinto the cyclical nature of reprisal. Such intricate focus on revenge in Gothicliterature remains an important area of debate among scholars, one which retainsclose proximity to the concepts of haunting and ghosts. Following Poe’sphilosophy of revenge, James articulates and expands upon the problematicconstruction of a revenge cycle through which he emphasizes the externalisation ofthe knowledge of vengeance through the necessary inclusion of a third party.Perhaps such understandings of these cycles will offer insight into revenge and itsconnections to justice; in so doing, perhaps the spectre of revenge can be brought,at least for a moment, to the light of day.

1 EA Poe, ‘The Cask of Amontillado’, The Portable Poe, Penguin, Ontario, 1973,p. 309.2 MR James, ‘The Mezzotint’, Count Magnus and Other Ghost Stories, Penguin,Toronto, 2005. p .27.3 Ibid., p. 25.4 Ibid., p. 36.5 Ibid., p. 35.

Terry Scarborough

__________________________________________________________________

6 Ibid., p. 36.7 Ibid., p. 36.8 Ibid., p. 36.9 Ibid., p. 36.10 Ibid., p. 36; emphasis added.11 Ibid., p. 36.12 Ibid., p. 36.13 JL Culbert, ‘Reprising Revenge’, Law, Culture and the Humanities, Vol. 1,2005, pp.302-315.14 Ibid., p. 313.15 Ibid., pp. 302-303.16 Ibid., p. 313.17 James, op. cit., p. 35.18 MR James, ‘The Ash Tree’, Count Magnus and Other Ghost Stories, Penguin,Toronto, 2005, p. 38.19 Ibid., p. 38.20 Ibid., p. 39.21 Ibid., p. 38.22 Ibid., p. 41.23 Ibid., p. 43.24 Ibid., p. 43.25 E Westermarck, ‘The Essence of Revenge’, Mind: A Quarterly Review ofPsychology and Philosophy, Vol. 7.No. 27, 1898, p 289-310.26 Ibid., p.295.27 Ibid., p. 29528 James, ‘The Ash Tree’, loc. cit.29 Poe distinguishes in ‘The Cask’ between injury and insult, the latter being the farmore serious offence. Montresor states, ‘The thousand injuries of Fortunato I hadborne as best I could, but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed revenge.’30 Westermarck, op. cit., 19.31 James, ‘The Ash Tree’, p. 50.32 Culbert, emphasis added, p. 313.33 MR James, ‘A School Story’, Count Magnus and Other Ghost Stories, Penguin,Toronto, 2005, p. 123.34 Ibid., p. 12435 Ibid., p. 12536 Ibid., p. 12637 Ibid., p. 12638 Ibid., p. 12739 Ibid., p. 12740 Ibid., p. 127

__________________________________________________________________

Bibliography

Culbert, J.L., ‘Reprising Revenge’. Law, Culture and the Humanities. Vol. 1, 2005,p. 302-315.

James, M.R., ‘A School Story’. Count Magnus and Other Ghost Stories. Penguin,Toronto, 2005.

–––, ‘The Ash Tree’. Count Magnus and Other Ghost Stories. Penguin, Toronto,2005.

–––, ‘The Mezzotint’. Count Magnus and Other Ghost Stories. Penguin, Toronto,2005.

Poe, E.A., ‘The Cask of Amontillado’. The Portable Poe. Penguin, Ontario, 1973.

Westermarck, E., ‘The Essence of Revenge’. Mind: A Quarterly Review ofPsychology and Philosophy. Vol. 7, No. 27, 1898, pp. 289-310.

Terry Scarborough is College Professor in the Department of English atOkanagan College. His research interests include fin-de-siecle Gothic literature andVictorian representations of crime and urban exploration.

PART II

Literature and Poe-Tic Revenge

The Mixed-Blood Settles Scores: The Question of Racial Justicein Georges by Alexandre Dumas

Claudie Bernard

AbstractThe English word revenge has two equivalents in French: vengeance (revengeproper), and revanche (a settling of scores). This paper examines the functioning ofthese two concepts, as well as that of reprisals (the revenge of a group againstanother group), and their bearing on the question of racial justice in the novelGeorges by Alexandre Dumas (1843). Georges is a free mixed-blood fromMauritius who dreams of ‘killing the colour prejudice’ against the mulattos. Inorder to prove to the whites that he is equal and even superior to them, he plans ashining settling of scores: the conquest of the white lady. His settlement turns torevenge when the whites threaten him, and, when they treat him like a ‘Negro,’pushes him to lead the reprisals of the black slaves against their masters. In theend, can the protagonist claim to have ‘killed the colour prejudice’ against themulattos? Obviously not. I interrogate the reasons of this failure, linking it to theheroic model cultivated by the mixed-blood, that of the proud (white) knightfighting a monster.

Key Words: Revenge, justice, race, Alexandre Dumas, adventure novel.

The word revenge in English comes from an old French word (revengier), itselffrom a Latin root (vindicare). Revengier has given two terms in modern French:vengeance, and revanche. Vengeance (revenge proper) is a retaliation, whichresponds to an offence, and renders a wrong for a wrong, in order to re-establishthe balance of justice. Revanche, which I will translate as a settling of scores,responds not so much to an offence as to a humiliation, and consists in taking theupper hand after having been defeated. Revenge hurts by returning the wrong doneby the other; revanche hurts by doing better than the other. In revenge, this other isan offender, an enemy; revanche deals with an adversary, whose tactics it borrows;for, in contrast to revenge, revanche presupposes an initial parity between theparties. In addition to these two concepts, my paper will make use of that ofreprisals, which I reserve for the revenge of a group against another group.

I would like to examine the functioning of these notions and their bearing onthe question of racial justice in Georges, an adventure novel replete with exotic andmelodramatic elements, published by Alexandre Dumas in 1843. Dumas, a prolificauthor of popular novels in the Romantic era, was a quarter black by his paternalgrandmother, a slave from the Caribbean island of Saint-Domingue (today’s Haiti).After the bloody insurrection in Saint-Domingue in 1791, slavery was abolished by

The Mixed-Blood Settles Scores

__________________________________________________________________

the French Revolution in all its colonies, but reinstituted by Bonaparte in 1802, onthe pressure of the planters’ lobbies, in spite of the resistance of rebel leaderToussaint Louverture and the proclamation of Haiti’s independence in 1804. Thetriangular trade was forbidden in 1815 - which did not prevent it from continuingillegally -, and, following the example of the United Kingdom, the IId Republic putan end to slavery, for economic as well as humanitarian reasons - a measure whichdid not, however, put an end to imperialism, exploitation, and pigmentocracy. InParis, the debates surrounding these issues were very lively, and had strongrepercussions in literature: the Black, as cursed figure, superlative victim orexceptional hero, made a good Romantic character, while urgently raising thequestion of distributive and retributive justice (in Ourika by Mme de Duras,Tamango by Mérimée, Toussaint Louverture by Lamartine, Bug-Jargal by Hugo).

Mulattos had been present in the colonies from their inception. Whereas arelationship between a white female, precious property of the colonials, and a blackmale was unacceptable, the fornication of white masters with their black femaleslaves was common. The degree of hybridism of the offspring was carefullyclassified, the slightest stain in the blood precipitating them into métissage.Mulattos could be servile or free, free by birth or by emancipation. In spite of theirjuridical rights, the free mulattos suffered multiple forms of discrimination;demographically and economically active, occasionally slave owners, they wereperceived both as allies, and as a threat by the white minority. Their rancouragainst this elite was all the more bitter as they dreamed of integrating into it, andtheir brutality vis-à-vis the inferior masses was all the harsher as they wanted toseparate from them. In the Romantic period, the duality of the mulatto can elicit adream of ethnic reconciliation; more often, he is depicted as torn between his bloodlines, or as trying to assimilate to one while denying the other; too black for some,too white for others, he accumulates the vices of both races, and excels in the roleof traitor (Habibrah in Bug-Jargal). And the female mulatto is all the moredisquieting as she is particularly erotic (Toni in Die Verlobung in Santo Domingoby Kleist).

And Dumas? His rapport to his black ascendancy, which in no way preventedhis mundane, amorous, and literary success, is ambiguous. In his Memoirs, heeither omits it, attenuates it, or jokes about it. More disappointingly, he did notsupport the négrophiles or the abolitionists, and only on a few occasions took aposition in favour of his ‘coloured brothers.’ Can one surmise that, along with hiscontradictions, he bequeathed to his fictional hero Georges a share of his hiddenfrustrations, and entrusted him with his revanche?

Georges is a free mixed-blood from Ile de France, a French colony in the IndianOcean, conquered by the British in 1810, and rebaptized Mauritius. Georges hasassigned himself a mission: ‘I came back here to realize a destiny […] I have aprejudice to fight. Either it will crush me, or I will kill it.’1 This pre-judice, thecolour prejudice against the mulattos, is not only a hasty, false judgment: it is an

Claudie Bernard

__________________________________________________________________

unjust judgment, in view of a conception inherited from the Enlightenment and theFrench Revolution, which declares that all men are born equal. Fighting racismwill be fighting for justice.

The novel starts with a bucolic description of the tropical island which thenarrator persists in calling Ile de France, a utopian, timeless topos. Unfortunately,the island has been invaded by history. After evoking the nearby rock of SaintHelena haunted by the ghost of Napoleon, ‘the modern Prometheus,’ the narratordescribes the heavily felt presence of the new masters of the territory. And thebeginning of the plot brings us back to the battle of 1810, in which the perfidiousAlbion defeated the French.

It is in this context that Georges, then a child, goes through an original trauma.His father, a rich mulatto ordinarily subservient in front of the master race - ‘heended up considering this supremacy not only as an acquired right, but as a naturalsuperiority’,2 yet hoping that colour preferences will be forgotten for the sake ofthe endangered fatherland, offers his services to the Creole commander, M. deMalmédie: he is scornfully rejected. The old man then takes the lead of a band ofNegroes and wrenches a flag from the enemy, which he gives to Georges to keep.But Georges is beaten up by Malmédie’s son, Henri, who steals the trophy, strikeshim with his toy sword, and calls him ‘mulatto!’ To which Georges replies:‘coward!’ an epithet which, beyond the hue of the skin, qualifies the very nature ofthe person, the worth of his blood. The adults promptly re-establish colonial, thatis, white order. Georges, who has internalised the incident, looks beyond revenge:what would revenge change in the colonial situation? He intends to confront theprejudice which infects both the persecutors and the persecuted, ‘to fight with ithand to hand like Hercules against Antaeus […]. Young Annibal, spurred by hisfather, had sworn to eternally hate a nation; young Georges, in spite of his father,swore to fight to the death with a prejudice.’3

Instead of revenge, Georges plans a shining settling of scores: he will prove tothe whites that he is equal and even superior to them, and, by his example, that themulattos are as worthy as them. During the fourteen years of his exile in Franceand England, he strives to make of himself, through a series of physical andpsychological preliminary trials, a superman, and comes back to Mauritius in 1824,a highly educated and accomplished young man, ready to ‘kill single-handedly theprejudice which no coloured man had dared fight.’4 In the posture of an epic hero,Georges will confront the prejudice as if it were a dragon. And in so doing, in theposture of a courteous knight, he will conquer the treasure that the dragon keepswith the utmost care: the white Lady.

The white Lady, the most desirable Creole on the island, is the niece of M. deMalmédie, and the fiancée of Henri. In his quest for Sara de Malmédie, Georgesgoes through several qualifying trials: the killing of a sea monster, the overcomingof a tropical tempest, and finally the winning of the horse races, a contest in whichhe appears as glorious in his immaculate costume as Lancelot in his first joust.

__________________________________________________________________

Gradually, Sara, whose life he has saved, recognizes his gallantry, falls for him,accepts to be his wife. Yet, when he asks her guardians for her hand in marriage,they scoff at him; Henri even shakes his cane at him just as, fourteen years before,he had his toy sword. This gesture, which reactivates the original trauma,transforms Georges’s desire for revanche into a thirst for revenge. Not theimpulsive revenge dictated by crude resentment though, but the more refined andcodified form current among high born people: the duel. The duel, a chivalricinstitution, initially appeared as a way to control the violence elicited by animositybetween noble peers; as revanche, it presupposes parity between the parties. This iswhy Henri, the pure blood, refuses to take up the sword against a mixed blood. Toforce him to do so, Georges publicly administers him a lash of his horse whipwhich, in his mind, constitutes ‘not only a provocation to a rival, but a declarationof war to all the whites,’5 in his larger duel against the colour prejudice. Alas,Henri’s response is to threaten his opponent with a flogging…‘a negro’spunishment!’6

Treated like a black, Georges will turn to the blacks to pursue his enterprise. Adecision all the more complicated, as his father is an affluent slave owner! Ofcourse, accustomed to the ways of England and France, Georges treats his laborersin a paternalistic way; he carefully distributes punishments and rewards, does notlet them be bullied by their guards, gives them decent living and workingconditions, in short, exerts a conscientious retributive and distributive justice - yetthe justice of a slave-holder! In its comic description of the primitive comportmentof the blacks - to the dismay of modern readers - the text participates in theprejudice against them. The ambivalence of Georges’s position is embodied in thenovel by his two antithetical ‘brothers.’ His older, biological brother, is a slavetrader; a figure of the Romantic adventurer, he is presented as a good relative and agood person, and, although heavily ironic in its account of him, the text avoidscondemnation as well as approbation of his traffic in human flesh. Georges’syounger, spiritual brother, is a slave; he belonged to the brutal M. de Malmédieuntil Georges, recognizing in him a generosity (from genus, extraction, race)typical of a good blood, bought and freed him. This character, a mixed blood in hisown right (half Black, half Arabic), physically and morally superior, andhopelessly in love with Sara de Malmédie, appears as a modest double of theprotagonist. He, too, is keen on fighting the colour prejudice - not in the camp ofthe mulattos, but in that of the blacks.

This Mauritian Spartacus does not seek revanche, but revenge, collectiverevenge, that is, reprisals; thirty years after the Santo Domingo insurrection, heprepares the revolt of the oppressed masses, and designates Georges as their leader.Whereas revanche and revenge pitted Georges against the guardians of his Lady,the reprisals bring him up against the guardian of the public order: the Britishgovernor. Anxious to maintain the status quo between the ethnic components of thesegregationist society, the governor was ready to force Malmédie to give his niece

Claudie Bernard

__________________________________________________________________

to Georges, in the hope of aggregating the mulattos to the Creole minority; whenGeorges sides with the insurgents, the governor has him arrested. And to stop themutiny, he avails himself of a ruse: he has alcohol distributed to the brutes so as todivert their vindictive violence; their ‘clamours of rage and vengeance’7 turn into ahideous turmoil, and the heroic enterprise into a grotesque farce.

While his last companions are massacred by the governor’s troops, Georgesfaces his supreme trial: a judicial trial, at the hands of a hostile tribunal which,rather than inflict an impartial penalty, imposes the vengeance of a class. Themixed blood receives his condemnation without flinching, and offers a last ‘lessonof courage’ to his antagonistic public.8 At this point though, in conformity with thepattern of the heroic quest, Georges’s supreme trial converts into a triumphal onewhen his paramour, Sara de Malmédie, publicly proclaims that she is ready tomarry him. This event restores to Georges his epic aura:

he was a victor laid low at the moment of his victory.’ ‘By thesheer influence of his personal value, he, the mulatto, hadconquered the love of a white lady […] Now, Georges could die;[…] he had fought hand to hand with the prejudice, and, whilecosting Georges his life, the prejudice had been killed in thestruggle.9

The mixed blood has settled his scores. Better even, since a novel ofmelodramatic adventures requires a happy ending, Georges’s father and brothersuddenly come up and help the newlyweds escape by sea.

Let us ponder this ending. If Georges has settled his own scores against thewhites and, in particular, against the Malmédies, obviously, the prejudice has notthereby been killed. What about the liberation of the blacks? It looks as if the slavebrother had been the sacrificial victim whose immolation allows the hero tosurvive, as if the haemorrhage of black blood had symbolically cleansed his mixedblood. And what about the crusade on behalf of the mulattos, only represented inthe text by Georges and his family? However mortified, the Malmédies and theirilk remain the masters of the ideological terrain - that of prejudice, precisely. Infact, Georges has been trapped in the heroic model, which informs his revanche:the myths of Hercules, of Annibal, of Napoleon, of the knight crushing thedragon…Firstly, it is never clear whether the champion of the mulattos, andoccasionally of the blacks, is fighting for the collective cause - ‘these men are mybrothers’,10 as a new Toussaint Louverture, or primarily for himself, savouring‘that great revenge he was to draw from society, that great compensation fate wasto give him’?11 Obsessed with the healing of his narcissistic wounds, that is, of theprejudice of inferiority from which he has suffered, he is eager to wrest a judgmentof superiority from the whites; the need for recognition pushes him to cultivate hisexceptionality, while the very formula of revanche incites him to adopt his

__________________________________________________________________

adversaries’ criteria and models - among which the chivalric one - and, as hiswhiteness is visibly imperfect, to exaggerate them; he is elegant to the point ofdandyism, generous to the point of prodigality, courageous to the point of temerity.His pride and his pose isolate him from the blacks, which are at the crux of hismixed nature, and at the core of the racial question.

Secondly, the heroic model locks him in retributive justice. In order toeradicate a prejudice, a judgment intellectually erroneous and morally unfair, directconfrontation is not enough. If the prejudice is a monster, it is a protean,ubiquitous, treacherous one; in order to destroy it, one has to scrutinize and attackthe socio-economic infrastructures which generate it, the cultural foundationswhich feed it; reforming them is the only way to extirpate the monster. In short,beyond retributive justice, one has to address distributive justice.

Georges ends on an idyllic note. The mixed-blood and the white Lady gotmarried, seemed bound to live happily ever after, and to have many children -children whiter than their father... In the meantime, where will the fugitive directtheir boat? Towards France? The mixed-blood do not belong to the ‘pure’ blood ofthe Nation. Towards Europe, the land of the white lords? Towards Africa, the landof the black supplies? Towards America, a land of immigration but also, in 1824,of slavery? The novel abandons them in the void of the ocean, as if they had noplace anywhere. The novel of the mixed-blood is, finally, not as black and white asit might seem.

1 A. Dumas, Georges, Gallimard, Folio, Paris, 2003, p.270. My translation.2 Ibid., p.349. My translation.3 Ibid., p.105. My translation.4 Ibid., p.121. My translation.5 Ibid. p.291. My translation.6 Ibid., p.301. My translation.7 Ibid., p.341. My translation.8 Ibid., p.410. My translation.9 Ibid., p.415. My translation.10 Ibid., p.334. My translation.11 Ibid., p.318. My translation.

Bibliography

Dumas, A., Georges. Gallimard, Folio, Paris, 2003.

Claudie Bernard

__________________________________________________________________

Claudie Bernard, a professor at New York University, is the author of severalbooks and many articles on the historical novel, the question of family, and thetheme of justice in nineteenth-century France.

Analysing Darker Motives or Delving Robert Browning’s‘Poetry of Revenge’

Paula Guimarães

AbstractLiterature generally likes to illustrate the noble passions and not the more evil andignoble ones, like envy, jealousy, avarice, hatred or revenge. When these areportrayed in the plays of Shakespeare or in a novel such as Emily Brontë’sWuthering Heights, they are driven by the emotion that so fiercely and swiftlyaccumulates around them, they master the body and soul, the intellect and the will,like some furious tyrant, and in their extremes hurry their victim into madness.Robert Browning (1812-1889) took some of those terrible powers and made themobsessive subjects in his poetry. Short, sharp-outlined sketches of them occur in hisdramas and longer poems but also in the smaller compositions. The combination,for example, of envy and hatred resolved in vengeance in The Laboratory is toointense for any pity to intrude. But in A Forgiveness our natural revolt against thework of hatred is modified into pity even though the ‘justice’ of revenge isaccomplished. Unlike many of his Victorian contemporaries, Browningdeliberately populated his poetic creations with evil people – who not only commitcrimes and sins, ranging from simple hatred to cold-blooded murder, but who arealso crafty, intelligent, argumentative and capable of lying. In this sense, the poemswe propose to analyse provide interesting snapshots of his speakers and their oftenderanged personalities. By channelling the voice of a character, Browning exploresevil without actually being evil himself, allowing several forms of consciousnessand self-representation to emerge. He thus seems to question the artist’sresponsibilities (in his creations) and the direct relationship between art andmorality, issues that were only developed later in the century.

Key Words: Revenge, forgiveness, poetry, drama, Browning, Brontë, good, evil,adultery, death.

Good, to forgive;Best, to forget!Living, we fret;Dying, we live.

Fretless and free,Soul, clap thy pinion!Earth have dominion,

Body, o’er thee!(R. Browning, 1878)

Analysing Darker Motives

__________________________________________________________________

The American philosopher Martha Nussbaum has written wisely andsensitively of the psychological, moral and cultural foundation for revenge:

The primitive sense of the just – [...] – starts from the notion thata human life is a vulnerable thing, a thing that can be invaded,wounded, violated by another’s act in many ways. For thispenetration, the only remedy that seems appropriate is a counterinvasion, equally deliberate, equally grave.1

But in terms of the philosophical debate, and as Nussbaum states in a laterwork, the pro-compassion person tends to recognize that private revenge can be anespecially unsatisfactory, costly way to effect the punishment of offenders, oftencausing the exchange of damages to perpetuate without limit.2

As both a structural and a thematic centre for literature, especially literarytragedy, revenge has nevertheless much to recommend it.3 For the writer, therevenger’s position, necessarily secretive, solitary, and extreme, is conducive tointrospection. It encourages meditation on the anomalies of justice, both humanand divine, on past time, and on the value of life and human relationships. Besidesdramatists, several English novelists and poets have thus recognized the peculiaraesthetic value of the topic of revenge, seeing the manifestations of vengefulnessas part of the human potential.

In the oldest epic poem in English, Beowulf (eighth century), vengeance is partof the pagan heroic code and is strictly adhered to, despite the fact that it is writtenby an anonymous Christian author. The poet acknowledges the perspective of theavenger by allowing him to express his motivations, desires, and justifications.Alongside this, however, is the author’s own reflection on the repercussions ofthose actions, the destructiveness of the blood-feud.4

The feelings of envy and deep hatred which can ultimately lead to revenge areanalysed by William Blake in ‘A Poison Tree’ (1794), one of his Songs ofExperience. Here, revenge is no longer part of a heroic code but is seen as a long-protracted and complex feeling that consumes the speaker and is symbolicallyrepresented by a growing tree bearing a poisonous ‘apple’. The poet describes howinstead of making an attempt to solve that wrath by simply telling it, the speakerallows the negative feeling to grow and develop inside of him.5 Sweet revenge isfinally fulfilled when the foe comes into the man’s ‘garden’ under the disguise ofnight and eats the envied fruit, dying on the spot. Blake thus skilfully brings intohis poem the central motives associated with the topic of revenge: hatred,premeditation, concealment, envy and gleeful fulfilment.

Another paradigmatic work on the theme of unresolved hate and revenge isEmily Brontë’s novel Wuthering Heights (1847), in which retaliation extends totwo generations and two families. Although Heathcliff is undoubtedly the mainavenging force in this story of unrequited love, and he gives himself

Paula Guimarães

__________________________________________________________________

wholeheartedly to acts of sadistic destruction and usurpation, he is not the onlyone.6 At least one of the female victims, in the person of Catherine Linton, iscapable of returning the avenging curse of her formidable abuser and usurper, thusdisallowing any pardon-like speech:

On only one condition can I hope to forgive him. It is, if I maytake an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, for every wrench ofagony return a wrench, reduce him to my level.7

But other writings by Brontë, namely her Gondalian poems and Belgian devoirs,contain those elements.8

Like his contemporary, Robert Browning (1812-1889) was a poet who saw alllife as a conflict, not only between good and evil but also between instinct andintellect, the masculine and the feminine, trying to resolve the artistic dilemmaposed by a double awareness of things: moral and aesthetic. Like Brontë, hedeveloped a form of dramatic perception, in which inner and outer consciousnesscould either split or become fused into unity by a single act of apprehension. Whathis dialectical poems progressively offer is not so much the throb of passion, but‘the psychoanalytic investigation of motives behind impulses which neverthemselves get actualized.’9 Browning was interested in exposing the devious waysin which our minds work and the complexity of our motives, but he tends ‘at onefurther remove to refuse emotional involvement in the situations he evokes.’10

Like Emily Brontë, Browning believed that God had created an imperfectworld – one of falsehood and violence – as a kind of testing ground for man.11

There are few forms of human character the poet does not study, catching eachindividual at the supreme moment of his life, and in the hardest stress ofcircumstance, under which the inmost working of his nature is revealed.12 Inparticular, Browning’s gallery of villains – murderers, sadistic husbands, mean andpetty manipulators – is a surprising and extraordinary one.13 Browning is interestedin demonstrating the moral-aesthetic dimension of this grotesque and violent worldmainly through the dialectics of human relationships, in particular those betweenman and woman, inside and outside the institution of marriage.

We must now follow him into this region, in which he attempts to deal directlywith the speculative difficulties that crowd around the conception of evil, or thatwhich lurks within a being’s mind waiting to be inadvertently released by speech.14

Browning’s dramatic monologues start suddenly in the midst of things; the readeris plunged abruptly into the midst of a consciousness, voicing its own assumptionsand limitations. His monologists go down layer after layer until they reach the truthwhich is hidden in their hearts. 15

‘The Laboratory’ (1844), as its subtitle ‘Ancien Régime’ suggests, takes placein France before the French Revolution and is in many ways a really sinisterpoem.16 Browning presents a high society woman around the King’s court, who

__________________________________________________________________

has been betrayed by her husband or lover with another woman and is determinedto get her revenge. She secretly visits a chemist who agrees, for a large pay, tomake her a deadly poison, with which she will be able to kill her rival. In a mereforty-eight lines, the story develops full of vivid detail and we literally enter intothe psychopathic mind of the speaker, witnessing not only her raging jealousy andsense of betrayal but also her utter fascination with the chemist’s work in thelaboratory (characterized as a ‘devil’s-smithy’). Masked for both protection andconcealment, she is delighted at the idea that the poison could be hidden away in aring and she wants actually to witness the moment of her rival’s death and the wayher face contorts in agony:

Not that I bid you spare her the pain;Let death be felt and the proof remain:Brand, burn up, bite into its grace –He is sure to remember her dying face!17

Although she sounds deranged and seems to have forgotten any moral norms,the reader has to think of the corrupt world of eighteenth-century Frencharistocracy and that this woman is determined not to be done down. In accordancewith the woman’s highly excited state of mind, the strong dactylic beat creates afast intense movement in the verse; in the same way, the poem’s combination ofenvy and hatred resolved on vengeance becomes too intense for any pity to intrude.Likewise, in ‘My Last Duchess’ (Dramatic Lyrics, 1842), the feelings of pity andforgiveness seem inexistent on the part of the avenger: the lack of a final judgmentfurther implying that vice escapes unpunished. The speaker of the poem is apowerful Italian ruler, who the poem suggests has had his ‘last Duchess’ put todeath for her familiar manner with other men, as a matter of masculine pride andhonour.18 But his late wife, though dead, has become a permanent part of his artcollection: ‘That’s my last Duchess painted on the wall, / […] I call/ That piece awonder’.19 The Duke claims she flirted with everyone (‘her looks wenteverywhere’) and did not appreciate his ‘gift of a nine-hundred-years-old name.’20

Nevertheless, his words betray the fact that the Duchess’s genuine depth andpassion contrast greatly with the Duke’s coldness and artfulness. As his monologuecontinues, the reader realizes with ever-more chilling certainty that the Duke infact caused the Duchess’s early demise: when her behaviour escalated, ‘[he] gavecommands; / Then all smiles stopped together.’21 Having made this disclosure, theDuke returns to the business at hand: arranging for another marriage; the moralhorror is thus concealed until the last lines when the visitor he is addressing isrevealed as the emissary for this new arrangement. The smoothness and polish ofthe Duke’s discourse contrasts with his perfidious and deranged character. He is‘helped’ not only by Browning’s tactful use of understatement and omission but

Paula Guimarães

__________________________________________________________________

also by the flowing fluidity of the poet’s rhyming couplets and the use ofenjambment, a subtle driving force behind the duke’s compulsive revelations.

In other poems of the evil passions the relieving element is pity, as in the twocompositions entitled ‘Before’ and ‘After’ (Men and Women, 1855), in whichBrowning refers to the moments just before and after a duel.22 The first poem is astatement of one of the ‘seconds’ that the duel is absolutely necessary. Thechallenger has been deeply wronged and he cannot and will not let forgivenessintermit his vengeance. Although the male reader may identify with that feeling,his Christian or more feminine side seems to say, ‘Forgive, let God do thejudgment’. But, in the end, the passion of revenge will have its way and the guiltyone falls dead. In the follow-up poem, After, the perspective changes becauseforgiveness begins to seem right and the vengeance-fury wrong; it appears that forBrowning the dead man has escaped (to heaven) while the living one cannot escapethe wrath of conscience; pity then becomes all that is left for the tragic survivor:

How he lies in his rights of a man!Death has done all death can.

And, absorbed in the new life he leads,He recks not, he heeds

Nor his wrong nor my vengeance; both strikeOn his senses alike,

And are lost in the solemn and strangeSurprise of the change.

Ha, what avails death to eraseHis offence, my disgrace?23

While the first poem seems to state the universal impunity of the moral sinrepresented by the duel – ‘When the sky, which noticed all, makes no disclosure, /And the earth keeps up her terrible composure’,24 the second one questions theeffectiveness of the deed for both the subject and his victim.

In The Ring and the Book (1868-9) Browning found his theme in the courtrecords of an old criminal trial: the case history of Count Guido Franceschini’smurder of his allegedly adulterous wife.25 This is the poet’s treatment of theconflict between good and evil in terms of domestic tragedy. For E. D. H. Johnson,‘It not only presents a full-scale vindication of Browning’s intuitional psychology,it also embodies the author’s moral and aesthetic philosophy.’26 But the interestcould be said to reside as much in its villains and half-villains. The conflictinginterpretations of the characters directly involved in this seventeenth-centurymurder drama are skewed by their respective moral formations. ‘Half-Rome’, orthe representative of patriarchy run mad, concludes that Franceschini was withinhis rights to murder his wife, Pompilia, presumed to have been having an affair.The sentimental would-be feminist voice, representing the ‘Other Half-Rome’,

__________________________________________________________________

asserts that the wife was both honest and innocent and that the husband was amurderer. The first speaker clearly aligns himself with the discriminating code ofrevenge that is fashionable in their social circles:

But she took all her stabbings in the face,Since punished thus solely for honour’s sake,Honoris causa, that’s the proper term.A delicacy there is, our gallants hold,When you avenge your honour and only then,That you disfigure the subject, fray the face,Not just take life and end, in clownish guise.27

‘Half-Rome’s phrasing is not only superiorly aloof but also narcissistic andcruel: language acting as an index of character and moral insight. He supportsFranceschini’s revenge for its control and exactness and is oblivious to the sadismimplicit in his own viewpoint. Browning thus portrays Tuscan society as ruthlesslystratified, filled with corrupt aristocrats, where women are traded in marriage.28

The same theme of adultery would emerge in A Forgiveness (fromPacchiarotto, 1876), a sustained and subtle analysis of contempt, hatred andrevenge. Its ambiguous title marks how the feeling of pity accompanied andfollowed the revenge, even if the justice of the act was finally accomplished on thewoman. The wife of a prominent Spanish statesman, jealous of her husband’sdedication to his work, decides to take a lover as a form of retaliation: ‘Since myright in you seemed lost, / I stung myself to teach you, to your cost,/ What yourejected could be prized …’29 The unsuspecting husband is unable to carry out hisrevenge there and then because he only feels a cold contempt for her: ‘I have toomuch despised you to divert / My life from its set course by help or hurt of yourall-despicable life.’30 After some years of keeping up appearances, the wifeconfesses her love for the deceived husband; but the dramatic disclosure of truthcauses a sudden change in the husband’s attitude, who now becomes obsessed withthe idea of killing:

[…] things that rend and rip,Gash rough, slash smooth, help hate so many ways,Yet ever keep a beauty that betraysLove still at work with the artificerWith his quaint devising […]31

Now was finally the time, he thinks, to accomplish his just revenge; he is readyto forgive his wife if she dies there and then (a dagger in her heart) and writes hispardon with her own blood.

Paula Guimarães

__________________________________________________________________

The identity of the mysterious lover (symbolized by the cloak wrapped abouthis head) is finally revealed when, in cold-blood, the husband suddenly kills themonk in the confessional. Ironically, this is the same ‘Father’ to whom he had been‘confessing’ the details of his revenge. These moments are thus postponed to thevery end, in accordance with the maxim ‘revenge is a dish best served cold’. Thehusband comments that he despises a crime of passion, preferring those avengersthat wait for the right moment:

The thing I pity mostIn men is – action prompted by surpriseOf anger […] Once the foe prostate, […]Prompt follows placability, regret,Atonement. Trust me, blood-warmth never yetBetokened strong will! 32

This close knowledge of the revenger’s mind allows Browning to conclude thatman can be good or evil and that it is the liberty of doing evil that gives the ‘doinggood’ a grace. Revenge and forgiveness are thus intimately associated for the poet.It is this apparent mixture of shade and light in life, the conflict of seeming goodwith seeming evil in the world that makes it a testing ground:

Type needs antitype:As night needs day, as shine needs shade, so good

Needs evil: how were pity understoodUnless by pain?33

For Browning, good and evil are relative to each other, and each is known onlythrough its contrary: ‘Type needs antitype.’ How would forgiveness be understoodwithout the presence of revenge? The extinction of one of the terms would implythe extinction of the other.

1 This feature is ‘remarkably constant from several ancient cultures to moderninstitutions;’ so that the balance can be truly righted, Nussbaum adds, ‘theretribution must be exactly, strictly proportional to the original encroachment.’ MNussbaum, ‘Equity and Mercy’ in Sex and Social Justice, Oxford University Press,Oxford and New York, 1999, pp. 157-58 (my emphasis).2 M Nussbaum, ‘Revenge and Mercy’, Upheavals of Thought: The Intelligence ofEmotions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003, p. 396.3 The first great tragedies which have survived from ancient Athens and fromElizabethan England – the Oresteia of Aeschylus and Shakespeare’s Hamlet – are

__________________________________________________________________

revenge plays. Both tragedies involve the shameful killing of a great king and theadultery of his consort; both impose upon the son of the dead man a task whicheither way will cost him dear.4 In the primitive conflict of Beowulf and Grendel, the duty to avenge a slainkinsman is absolute; but even Grendel’s mother seems to receive some sympathyfor her vengeance-raid and Grendel pity as a disinherited exile.5 ‘I was angry with my friend: / I told my wrath, my wrath did end. / I was angrywith my foe: / I told it not, my wrath did grow.’ W Blake, The Norton Anthology ofEnglish Literature, W. W. Norton & Company, New York and London, 1993, p.40, 1-4 (my emphasis).6 As Hillis Miller has stated, ‘both God and man are represented as waiting, withill-concealed impatience, through the legally required time of mercy andforgiveness, until they can get down to the ‘pleasant’ business of doing justifiedviolence on one another to the limit of their powers.’ The Disappearance of God,1963, p. 189.7 Brontë, op. cit., Volume II, Chapter III, p. 159 (my emphasis).8 The state of existence as a ‘fall’, which is described in the first chapters of thenovel, matches that of Emily’s Gondal poems, with their wars and rebellions andsadistic cruelties. Love in the poems and the novel is a form of destruction, themost shocking example of the law of nature which says that every creature must bethe relentless instrument of death to the others or himself cease to live.9 EDH Johnson, The Alien Vision of Victorian Poetry: Sources of the PoeticImagination in Tennyson, Browning and Arnold, Princeton University Press,Princeton, 1952, p. 139.10 ibid, p. 140. For example, the skill with which the protagonist in Fifine at theFair (1872) rationalizes his selfish desires, and thereby reduces morality toconform to private convenience, shows how the emotions become the plaything ofintellectual casuistry when deprived of any ethical sanction (139-40).11 Like Brontë, Browning was interested in dramatizing spiritual destinies. But,unlike Brontë, was well aware that he had brought upon himself the hard task ofshowing that pain, weakness, ignorance, failure, doubt, death, misery, and vice, inall their complex forms, could somehow find their legitimate place in a scheme oflove.12 Theories of the relation of mind and body, mental health and personalityabounded at this time, namely Thomas Brown’s Lectures on the Philosophy of theMind (1820). Browning seems to have been aware of the developments ofnineteenth-century psychology, namely A Bain, The Senses and the Intellect,published in London in 1855, and Emotions and the Will (1859), which togethercould be said to mark the advent of modern psychology.13 Browning appears to have been inspired by the Roman Stoic philosopher LuciusAnnaeus Seneca (1st century A.D.), who wrote a set of rhetorical plays based on

Paula Guimarães

__________________________________________________________________

Euripides’ dramas. In particular, the style of his declamatory, moralizing,bombastic narrative accounts, detailing horrible deeds and containing longreflective soliloquies, was recovered to a certain degree by Browning in his owndramatic monologues and soliloquies.14 Few disciplines had the ability to convince their followers that unknownexistences lurked under familiar shapes like those branches of psychologyconcerned with obscure cerebral disorders. In 1860, Forbes Winslow assembled histheories on insanity in an eccentric volume, On the Obscure Diseases of the Brainand Disorders of the Mind, in which he warned that no individual is exempt fromthe advance of insanity and irrational behaviour. It is perhaps no coincidence thatone of Browning’s earliest publications was called precisely Madhouse Cells(1836), a title that emphasized the abnormal state of mind of the speaker.15 ‘Let any man, however clever and full of subterfuge, speak long enough,Browning believes, and he will expose his deepest secrets, allow us access allunwittingly to what is most inexpressible in his life – the very mark or note of hisunique selfhood.’ JH Miller, ‘Robert Browning’, The Disappearance of God: FiveNineteenth-Century Writers, University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago,1963, p. 127 (my emphasis).16 The poet apparently found out that, in the 1670’s, a police investigationdisclosed that an extraordinary number of women and men attached to King LouisXIV’s court had been disposing of rivals and enemies by poisonings and that someof the accused courtiers and poison dealers were punished with death.17 R Browning, The Works of Robert Browning, Wordsworth Editions, Ware, 1994,p. 212, 37-40 (my emphasis).18 The poem is based on real incidents in the life of Alfonso II, fifth duke of Ferrarain Italy, whose first wife Lucrezia de Medici, a young woman of fourteen, died in1561 after only three years of marriage. Following her death, probably of poison,the duke negotiated through an agent to marry a niece of the Count of Tyrol. In thepoem, Browning represents the duke as addressing this agent, whose name wasNikolaus Madruz.19 Browning, op. cit., p. 318, 1-3 (my emphasis).20 ibid, 33.21 ibid, 45-6 (my emphasis). Browning might have meant with ‘gave commands’that the duchess was either put to death or shut up in a convent forever. But thelatter procedure was common enough at the time and it probably amounted to asimilar result.22 In letters of April 1846 Browning had supported duelling, while his wife,Elizabeth Barrett, had opposed it, D Karlin, Robert Browning, Elizabeth Barrett:The Courtship Correspondence, Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York,1990, pp. 234-243). The initial opposition to this form of honour settlement and

__________________________________________________________________

Browning’s afterwards move to his wife’s views are reflected in ‘Before’ and itscompanion.23 Browning, op. cit., p. 243-44, 3-12 (my emphasis).24 ibid,15-16 (my emphasis).25 The middle-aged Guido grows dissatisfied with his young wife, Pompilia, andaccuses her of having adulterous relations with a handsome priest who, like St.George, had tried to rescue her from the dragon’s den in which her husbandconfined her. Eventually Guido stabs his wife to death and is himself executed. In aseries of twelve books, Browning retells this tale of violence, presenting it from thecontrasting points of view of the participants and spectators. In its experimentswith multiple points of view, the work anticipates later novels.26 Johnson, op. cit., p. 120.27 Browning, op. cit., p. 627, 26-32. This code claimed that the deceived husbandhad the right not only to take his wife’s life but also to disfigure her.28 ‘The reader is appalled to realize that this world should after all provide so fair afield for the exercise of man’s infernal potentialities.’ Johnson, op. cit., p. 126.29 Browning, op. cit., p. 538-543, 73-76.30 ibid, 80-83.31 ibid, 90-94 (my emphasis).32 ibid, 121-126 (my emphasis). In the case of Sebald and Ottima in Pippa Passes(1841), a collection of sordid tales of adultery, pity also rules in spite of the factthat those two have slaked their hate and murdered Luca, Ottima’s husband. Theircrime only creeps like a snake, half asleep, about the bottom of their hearts. Theoutburst of horror and repentance may be the greater in the end as Browningintroduces the pity of God.33 Browning, from Francis Furini, 1881, op. cit., pp. 835-850, 39-42 (myemphasis).

Bibliography

Abrams, M.H. (ed), The Norton Anthology of English Literature. W. W. Norton &Company, New York and London, 1993.

Alexander, M. (ed.), Beowulf (A Verse Translation). Penguin Books, London,1973.

Bacon, F., ‘Of Revenge’. The Essays or Counsels, Civil and Moral, of Francis Ld.Verulam Viscount St. Albans. Authorama Public Domain Books, Viewed on 8 May2010, <http://www.authorama.com/essays-of-francis-bacon-5.html>.

Paula Guimarães

__________________________________________________________________

Brontë, E., Wuthering Heights. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York,1998.

Browning, R., The Works. The Wordsworth Poetry Library, Wordsworth Editions,Ware, 1994.

Hawlin, S., The Complete Critical Guide to Robert Browning. Routledge, Londonand New York, 2002.

Johnson, E.D.H., The Alien Vision of Victorian Poetry: Sources of the PoeticImagination in Tennyson, Browning and Arnold. Princeton University Press,Princeton, 1952.

Jones, H., ‘Browning’s Solution of the Problem of Evil’. Browning as aPhilosophical and Religious Teacher. Authorama Public Domain Books. Viewedon 21 May 2010, <http://www.authorama.com/browning-as-a-religious-teacher-1.htlm>.

Karlin, D. (ed), Robert Browning, Elizabeth Barrett: The CourtshipCorrespondence 1845-1846. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York,1990.

Langbaum, R., The Poetry of Experience: The Dramatic Monologue in ModernLiterary Tradition. Penguin University Books, Harmondsworth, 1974.

Miller, J., ‘Robert Browning’. The Disappearance of God: Five Nineteenth-Century Writers. University of Illinois Press, Urbana and Chicago, 2000, pp. 81-156.

Nussbaum, M., ‘Equity and Mercy’. Sex and Social Justice. Oxford UniversityPress, Oxford and New York, 1999, pp. 157-58.

—, Upheavals of Thought: The Intelligence of Emotions. Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge, 2003.

Petch, S., ‘Equity and Natural Law in The Ring and the Book’. Victorian Poetry.Vol. 35, No. 1, Spring 1997, pp. 105-111.

Shakespeare, W., Hamlet. Penguin Books, London, 1980.

__________________________________________________________________

Paula Guimarães is Auxiliary Professor at the Department of English and North-American Studies of University of Minho, Portugal, where she lectures EnglishPoetry to graduate and postgraduate courses. Her research interests include Britishwomen’s writing and its connections with the male canon in Romanticism,Victorianism and Modernism, particularly the notions of ‘influence’ and‘intertextuality’. Other interests include ethics and the analysis of emotions andstates of mind as applied to literature studies.

The Servant as an Agent of Retributive and Restorative Justicein Wuthering Heights

Esra Melikoğlu

AbstractThe ghosts, in Brontë’s Wuthering Heights, attest to an unacknowledged culturalcrime- and consequent trauma- that must be both remembered and revenged: class-division. Brontë’s servant character Ellen Dean’s story of masters/mistresses andservants, into which she inserts the story of her own underprivileged life, expandsto a history of the crimes committed by both the feudal yeomanry and industrialmiddle class against servants. This article aims at examining the servant’s role asNemesis, in which she unleashes her desire for retribution for the wrongdoing,hubris and undeserved good fortune of her social superiors. Her surname, ‘Dean’,alludes to the fact that she wreaks her retribution not merely as an individual, buton behalf of an institution or community. Yet as the agent of retribution, Ellenmust renounce lawless retaliation. Genteel Lockwood lets blood, as punishment forhis class-arrogance, but the desire for bloodthirsty revenge is checked by theconcept of proportionate revenge or measure for measure. Lockwood is subjectedto humiliation, expropriation and exclusion, which are the traditional crimescommitted against the servant. It will also be argued that revenge is, however, onlythe prelude to reconciliation. Story-telling is not only instrumental in the act oftaking revenge, but also in coping with trauma and reconciling the victim with theoffender. We see a foreshadowing of the concept of modern restorative justice, forcriminal Lockwood shall be reformed through Ellen’s tale. Restorative justiceencourages both the victim and offender to narrate the full impact of the crime onhis/ her life. Indeed, Ellen and Lockwood enter into dialogue as narrator andrecipient of a story, respectively. Although this dialogue suggests the possibility ofreconciliation, social reform, as envisioned by future-facing restorative justice,remains a utopia.

Key Words: Emily Brontë, servant, class-conflict, Nemesis, retribution,reconciliation, story-telling.

Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights opens with a date, 1801, which ushers inmillennial fears, superstitious belief and the ghosts of an unresolved past. Like theghost of Hamlet’s father, Brontë’s ghosts haunting the Yorkshire moors attest to anunacknowledged or half-acknowledged crime that must be remembered, revengedand righted, for the future to begin. In Wuthering Heights, the ghosts attest to acollective crime: class-division.

The Servant as an Agent of Retributive and Restorative Justice

__________________________________________________________________

The dispossessed servant, Heathcliff, speaks of ‘‘painting the house-front withHindley’s blood’’1, but bloodthirsty revenge, despite the raging class-conflict,plays surprisingly little role in the novel. The weapons Heathcliff uses against hisgentrified oppressors, Arnold Kettle states, ‘are their weapons of money andarranged marriages.’2 Ellen Dean emerges as another underprivileged servantcharacter that adopts the strategy of like for like or proportionate revenge orretributive justice. It is, principally, in her role as Nemesis, the dispenser of dues,that Ellen exacts retribution for her social superiors’ excessive pride andundeserved good fortune. Yet this proportionate revenge is only the prelude toreconciliation.

The exchange of like for like, ideally, restores the balance of equality betweenvictim and offender. What Nemesis, in her role as arbiter of class-conflict,redresses is not merely the balance between two individuals, but the classes in acommunity. In Wuthering Heights, this balance is also redressed by aforeshadowing of modern restorative justice practice. Carrie Menkel-Meadownotes that this practice encourages both the victim and offender to narrate the fullimpact of the crime on their lives. The objects are to make possible direct anddemocratic participation, foster empathy between victim and offender, throughdialogue, and reform the offender and reintegrate him or her into the community.3

In the novel, both Ellen, the victim, and the pompous, genteel Lockwood, theoffender, engage in such story-telling. Yet, in the novel, this involves a certainambiguity. Story-telling is, at once, Ellen’s principal means of wreaking herrevenge on the recipient of her story, Lockwood, who is brought low by herexposure of the pomposity and cruelty of his class as well as a means of fosteringin him sympathy for slighted servants.

Wuthering Heights, thus, brings together all the parties affected by the crime ofclass-division and the tear in the social texture, in an attempt to restore a kind ofequilibrium: the victim, offender and the community as represented by theVictorian and post-Victorian readers, who have access to both Ellen’s andLockwood’s narratives and act as the public conscience weighing each narrativeagainst the other. The collective injury, its root causes, implications for thedifferent parties, the proper balance between crime and punishment and thepossibility of restitution for the victim and reintegration for the wrongdoer andsocial reform are contemplated collectively and dialogically.

The novel also ponders the question of who shall have control over crime,punishment and reconciliation: the victim, offender, community, larger society orthe state? Ellen, in fact, is, at once, victim, prosecutor, advocate, judge andexecutor of the punishment, which is, precisely, what the law upholdingimpartiality tries to prevent. On the other hand, restorative justice, Menkel-Meadow notes, argues for a ‘Personalized and direct participation’ of the affectedparties.4 Certain circumstances, moreover, appear to justify this privatisation ofjustice. Ellen, actually, steps into a vacancy, since the law in Wuthering Heights,

Esra Melikoğlu

__________________________________________________________________

proves to be corrupt- Heathcliff bribes the lawyer, Green, in order to seize EdgarLinton’s possessions- and legislation regulating the servant-master/mistressrelationship non-existent. Cruel class-division is also a crime that quite someportion of society and the law do not recognise as such. R. Posner observes that ‘Ina world without government and legal system’ or one that does not operateproperly, ‘the practice of revenge complements that of self-protection.’5

Again, Ellen is not merely an individual, but a representative speaking onbehalf of the professional group of servants. Her representational function as wellas the legitimacy of her judicial role are alluded to by both her surname, Dean,which suggests a dignitary or senior member of an ecclesiastical or lay body, andher role as trustee of Cathy’s and Hareton’s estate, trustees often being chosenfrom among highly esteemed lawyers. It is, then, not merely the role of anindividual but a public servant that she occupies.

Ellen, ultimately, derives her legitimacy from a divine source, Nemesis. Someof the goddess’s many attributes are also hers: Nemesis’ apple-branch is alluded toby the apples that Mr. Earnshaw promises to bring Ellen from Liverpool, while heravenging sword is translated into Ellen’s knitting needles. The act of knittingfunctions as a metaphor for narration, which, as noted above, constitutes theservant’s principal means of taking revenge. Nemesis, is, moreover, associatedwith Fate. The implicit thread, thus, alludes to the thread of a story and of life, hereknit, rather than spun, by Ellen, in her role as Fate. Servants, who are said to peepthrough keyholes and eavesdrop, possess a god-like omniscience, whichencourages, as Bruce Robbins states, ‘the notion of the servant as Fate, at onceavenging and arbitrary.’ The servants’ hands that feed their masters and mistressesmight, at any given moment, strike against them.6

Margaret Atwood answers her question of why she writes with a long list ofmotives, among them: ‘To satisfy my desire for revenge’.7 It is in the space of herstory that Ellen exposes the cruelty of her superiors and her own suffering. AdamPhillips points to the therapeutic nature of both revenge and story-telling: ‘If ragerenders us helpless, revenge gives us something to do. It organizes our disarray.Revenge is one way of making the world or one’s life make sense. Revenge turnsrupture into story.’8 Ellen’s revenge exacted through story-telling, helps her tocope with trauma, caused by her social superiors’ refusal to acknowledge her as anequal. Trauma traps individuals into, usually, non-verbal, mechanical re-enactmentof it; it is through, eventually, putting the story of their injury into empowering andliberating words that they recover a sense of agency and control and turn ruptureinto a meaningful story. Her narrative of masters/mistresses and servants, intowhich Ellen, covertly, inserts the story of her own underprivileged life, expands toa history of the crimes committed by both the feudal yeomanry and middle classagainst the dispossessed servants, who, in the Victorian period, represented one ofthe largest and, at times, the largest professional group. Ellen is recruited from apoor family to drudge as a legally unprotected and unpaid child servant in the

__________________________________________________________________

Earnshaw household. Servants were expected to self-sacrificially serve theirsuperiors; consequently, Ellen does not have a life and family of her own. As anadult, she neither marries nor bears any children.

A crime involves damage to a person’s body, psychology, capacities tofunction, life, plans, and/or resources. Joshua Searle-White, however, accentuatesthat ‘Revenge seeks to right not the physical aspect of the injury, but thepsychological ones’ by restoring a balance of equality between victim andvictimiser. The aggrieved individual takes revenge ‘preferably by changing theaggressor’s evaluation of the aggrieved. I want the mugger to recognize that he isnot better than me.’9 The desire for revenge is, basically, a desire for equilibrium.What is restored, in Wuthering Heights, is, as noted above, not merely the balanceof equality between victim and victimiser, but the classes. Nemesis is an arbiter inmatters of class-conflict. Robert Graves states that ‘But if it ever happens that aman, whom [Tyche or fortune] has favoured, boasts of his abundant riches andneither sacrifices a part to the gods, nor alleviates the poverty of his fellow-citizens, then the ancient goddess Nemesis steps in to humiliate him.’10 Ellen, asNemesis, brings low the wrongdoer, who believes that he or she is of greater valuethan the socially underprivileged victim. She relates to the excessively proudLockwood: ‘I vexed [Catherine]’, that is, the daughter of the house, ‘frequently bytrying to bring down her arrogance.’11 The notion of equality also dictates thenature of Ellen’s revenge: she must exact proportionate class revenge or measurefor measure. Joycelyn M. Pollock states that ‘retributive justice […. ] in an extremeform…takes the form of lex talionis, a vengeance-oriented justice concerned withequal retaliation (‘an eye for an eye; a tooth for a tooth’).12

Lockwood is, consequently, subjected to humiliation, expropriation andexclusion, which are the traditional crimes committed against the servant. That heis, indeed, on trial is suggested by his dream, in which he is publicly exposed andexcommunicated’, in a chapel. The sin Lockwood is guilty of is not disclosed, butthe fact that the congregation consists of the poor and that a servant, Joseph, provesthe first to physically assault him, suggests class revenge in adherence to the OldTestament dictum of ‘an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth’. Lockwood, earlier inthe novel, attempts to acquit himself of the crimes of ‘underbred pride’ and‘heartlessness.’13 He not only refers to Ellen, his housekeeper, at the Grange, as‘My human fixture’14, but relates that his second visit to Wuthering Heights wasmotivated by his disgust with a servant-girl raising dust in his room.

Brontë, too, emerges as Nemesis, as she, in an act of retributive story-telling,treats or permits her servant characters to treat Lockwood like a servant. Robbinsstates that the servant characters in literature are often reduced to butts ‘with muchthe same repertory of comic gestures’, rather than being allowed to display anypotential for heroism and genuine suffering.15 George J. Worth states that‘Lockwood is the only genuinely comic figure in Wuthering Heights.’16 Theservants ignore Lockwood’s wishes and treat him like a servant. In fact, the

Esra Melikoğlu

__________________________________________________________________

servant-girl’s raising of dust, which threatens to rain down on him and therebypollute him, is not only reminiscent of the popular ‘motif of servant contagion’-transmitted, as Robbins states, usually, through illness as a form of ‘accidentalclass revenge’17- but will also reduce him to a sooty servant, who provokes fearand disgust in the gentility. Ellen, moreover, turns a deaf ear to his request to beserved his dinner at a late hour, and the maidservant extinguishes the fire, therebycrossing his ‘lazy intention’18 to spend the afternoon by the fire. Both servantsdisrupt his leisurely life-style and treat him like air. Ellen, towards the end of thenovel, gives an irritated but complying Lockwood, who is going to the Heights, anote for Cathy. A servant is treating a gentleman like a messenger boy.

At Wuthering Heights, the slapstick comedy culminates in Lockwood’s beingapprehended as a thief, by a servant, Joseph- in a reversal of the traditionalsituation, in which the servant is accused by the master of stealing things in thehouse- assaulted by the dogs of the house, pulled into the servants’ kitchen, andpoured over with ice-cold water by another servant, Zillah, to cure his nosebleed.Lockwood must let a little symbolical amount of blood, despite the check on thedesire for bloodthirsty revenge. The gentrified ex-servant, Heathcliff, threatens tocast Lockwood out on the marshes, in a raging snowstorm, as suggestive ofLockwood’s subjection to the servant’s traditional fate of expropriation andexclusion, and Zillah, finally, makes him sleep in the haunted room.

The servants’ collective revenge, in fact, not merely represents release of theirrepressed frustration and fury, but prepares Lockwood for his role as recipient of aservant’s reformatory story of the intertwined lives of servants andmasters/mistresses. Lockwood is forced into recognition of the servant’s existenceand tempering his pride. Yet he must also be incapacitated or laid low throughillness in order for him to prove willing to listen to a servant’s story. His severecold is as much the result of the contagious dust that the servant girl raises and thecold water Zillah pours over him as it is of the cold weather.

Ellen and Lockwood commit themselves to a ‘Personalized and directparticipation in a process of speaking and listening’, which is, as Menkel-Meadownotes, central in modern restorative justice practice.19 J. Hillis Miller points toLockwood’s role as reader, albeit an, at times, inept one.20 Yet the victim’s story ofthe full impact of the crime on her life does succeed in re-educating the offender.Modern restorative justice, Menkel-Meadow comments, ultimately, aims at healingfor the offender, the victim and the community in which they are embedded. It‘usually involves direct communication,’ or mutual story-telling, ‘often with afacilitator, of victims and offenders, often with some or full representation of therelevant affected community.’21 Both Ellen and Lockwood tell their stories, butEllen, has no access to the offender’s story. Margaret Homans also points to thepossibility that Lockwood might have tempered with Ellen’s story.22 A ‘facilitator’is absent, while the Victorian readers represented the ‘affected community’ andcontemporary readers, a global community. Despite some divergences, modern

__________________________________________________________________

restorative justice practice is foreshadowed in the novel. Lockwood’s remark: ‘I’llextract wholesome medicines from Mrs Dean’s bitter herbs’23, alludes to both theservant’s story-telling as a means of revenge and of reforming the wrongdoer.Towards the end of the novel, on his journey to a friend in the north, a suddenimpulse takes Lockwood, once again, to the Grange. His leaving behind his servantand great civility to both the unnamed old housekeeper and Ellen attest to hisreformation. His gift of sovereigns to Ellen and Joseph, which he, with a newconsideration for the servants’ delicacy of feeling, evaluates as ‘rudeness’24, on hispart, shows that he is no longer the rich man who refuses to alleviate the poverty ofothers and is, consequently, brought low by Nemesis. This gift also accords withthe practice in restorative justice to encourage the offender to offer ‘apologies andmaterial exchanges or payments’ to the victim.25 Ellen’s welcoming attitude andoffer of nourishing food and drink to Lockwood suggests healing and forgiveness,on her part. His reformation and her forgiveness also pave the way to Lockwood’sreintegration into the community. The man who recoiled from humancompanionship, has already accepted an invitation to stay with a friend.

Yet modern restorative justice aims, as Menkel-Meadow points out, at larger‘institutional and social reform.’26 Wuthering Heights, indeed, suggests thepossibility of healing and reconciliation for an entire class-divided community. Atthe end, Ellen has risen to a position of relative power as the surrogate-mother ofCathy and Hareton and trustee of their estate, while Lockwood adopts the identityof a peeping and eavesdropping servant. At Wuthering Heights, he peeps into thesitting-room and overhears Cathy and Hareton’s conversation, but enters thekitchen, where sit Ellen and Joseph. Ellen’s story about the reconciliation of theproud Cathy and the slighted Hareton, who too is of genteel birth, albeit, for years,reduced to a servant by Heathliff, again, attests to the possibility of an equilibriumbetween the classes. On the other hand, Lockwood’s encounter with an old servantand child servant, in front of the Grange, as emblematic of the continuing exiliccondition of servants, suggests that reconciliation and social reform are rather autopia, than an actuality. Jacques Derrida warns that ‘Forgiveness is not, it shouldnot be, normal, normative, normalizing.’ When forgiveness aims to re-establishnormality, there is the danger of repressing an unresolved political andinterpersonal trauma.27 Modern restorative justice, Menkel-Meadow states,similarly, advocates ‘forgiveness of the individual, without forgetfulness of theact.’28 And it is haunting ghosts that ensure awareness of a cultural crime and theneed to right it.

Esra Melikoğlu

__________________________________________________________________

1 E Brontë, Wuthering Heights, 2nd edn, Wordsworth Classics, Ware,Hertfordshire, 2000, p.33.2 A Kettle, ‘Emily Brontë: Wuthering Heights’, Twentieth Century InterpretationsOf Wuthering Heights: A Collection Of Critical Essays, Prentice-Hall, EnglewoodCliffs, New Jersey, 1968, p. 38.3 C Menkel-Meadow, ‘Restorative Justice: What Is It and Does It Work?’, AnnualReview of Law and Social Science, Vol. 3, July 2007, p. 10.3, Published online byAnnual Reviews, 2007, Viewed on 19 June 2010, http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/documents/MMRestorativeJustice.AnnuRev.LawSocSci.pdf.4 ibid.5 R Posner, Law and Literature- a Misunderstood Relation, Harvard UniversityPress, Cambridge, Mass., 1988, p. 34.6 B Robbins, The Servant’s Hand: English Fiction From Below, ColumbiaUniversity Press, New York, 1986, p.141.7 M Atwood, ‘Introduction: Into the Labyrinth’, Negotiating With The Dead: AWriter on Writing, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002.8 A Phillips, The Beast in the Nursery, Faber and Faber, London, 1998, p. 98.9 J Searle-White, The Psychology of Nationalism, Palgrave, New York, 2001, p.95.10 R Graves, The Greek Myths: 1, 6th edn, Penguin, Harmondsworth, Middlesex,1964, vol.1, p. 125.11 Brontë, op. cit., p. 46.12 JM Pollock, Ethical Dilemmas and Decisions in Criminal Justice, 5th edn,Thomson Wadsworth, Australia et al., 2007, p. 109.13 Brontë, op. cit., p. 3.14 ibid, p. 22.15 Robbins, op. cit., p. 6.16 GJ Worth, ‘Emily Brontë’s Mr. Lockwood’, A Wuthering Heights Handbook,Odyssey Press, New York, 1961, p. 174.17 Robbins, op. cit. , p. 144.18 Brontë, op. cit., p. 5.19 Menkel-Meadow, op. cit., p. 10.3.20 J Hillis-Miller, ‘Wuthering Heights: Repetition and the Uncanny’, Bloom’sModern Critical Views, the Brontës, Chelsea House Publishers, New York andPhiladelphia, 1987, p. 170.21 Menkel-Meadow, op. cit., p.10.1.22 M Homans, ‘Repression and Sublimation of Nature in Wuthering Heights’,Bloom’s Modern Critical Views, the Brontës, Chelsea House Publishers, New Yorkand Philadelphia, 1987, p. 93.23 Brontë, op. cit., p. 112.

__________________________________________________________________

24 ibid., p. 245.25 Menkel-Meadow, op. cit., p. 10.1.26 ibid., p. 10.2.27 J Derrida, ‘On Forgiveness’, On Cosmopolitanism and Forgiveness, Routledge,New York, 2001, p. 32.28 Menkel-Meadow, op. cit., p. 10.3.

Bibliography

Atwood, M., ‘Introduction: Into the Labyrinth’. Negotiating With The Dead: AWriter on Writing. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002.

Brontë, E., Wuthering Heights, 2nd edn. Wordsworth Classics, Ware, Hertfordshire,2000.

Derrida, J., ‘On Forgiveness’. On Cosmopolitanism and Forgiveness. Routledge,New York, 2001, pp. 25-60.

Graves, R., The Greek Myths: 1, 6th edn. Vol. 1. Penguin, Harmondsworth,Middlesex, 1964

Homans, M., ‘Repression and Sublimation of Nature in Wuthering Heights’.Bloom’s Modern Critical Views, the Brontës. Chelsea House Publishers, New Yorkand Philadelphia, 1987.

Kettle, A, ‘Emily Brontë: Wuthering Heights’. Twentieth Century InterpretationsOf Wuthering Heights: A Collection Of Critical Essays. Prentice-Hall, EnglewoodCliffs, New Jersey, 1968.

Menkel-Meadow, C, ‘Restorative Justice: What Is It and Does It Work?’. AnnualReview of Law and Social Science. Vol. 3, July 2007, pp. 10.1-10.27, Publishedonline by Annual Reviews, 2007, Viewed on 19 June 2010, http://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/documents/MMRestorativeJustice.AnnuRev.LawSocSci.pdf.

Miller, J., ‘Wuthering Heights: Repetition and the Uncanny’. Bloom’s ModernCritical Views, the Brontës. Chelsea House Publishers, New York andPhiladelphia, 1987.

Phillips, A., The Beast in the Nursery. Faber and Faber, London, 1998.

Esra Melikoğlu

__________________________________________________________________

Pollock, J.M., Ethical Dilemmas and Decisions in Criminal Justice, 5th edn.Thomson Wadsworth, Australia et al., 2007.

Posner, R., Law and Literature: A Misunderstood Relation. Harvard UniversityPress, Cambridge, Mass., 1988.

Robbins, B., The Servant’s Hand: English Fiction From Below. ColumbiaUniversity Press, New York, 1986.

Searle-White, J., The Psychology of Nationalism. Palgrave, New York, 2001.

Worth, G.J., ‘Emily Brontë’s Mr. Lockwood’. A Wuthering Heights Handbook.Odyssey Press, New York, 1961.

Esra Melikoğlu is Professor of English at Istanbul University. She has publishedon the servant character in English fiction. Currently her research and writing isdevoted to the (neo)gothic and ghost story with a feminist agenda.

A Self-Destructive Path to Dead End: An Exploration onRevenge in Wuthering Heights

Kuo-Ping Claudia Tai

AbstractIt is not revenge but forgiveness and mercy that can help us release our repressedrage and reach tranquillity when we are tested by fate and victimised by misfortune.But revenge nevertheless stands as an indispensable self-reflective point that weare unable to neglect; it is a significant divide that leads us either to joy andliberation when we surpass it or to misery and despair when it conquers us. In herWuthering Heights, Emily Brontë obviously had chosen the hardest path for hertragic character Heathcliff. Portrayed as a detestable and vengeful brute, Heathclifftakes revenge on the people around him as to fight for an unfulfilled but lostGarden of Eden that he longs for since childhood. His revenge is not irrational; incontrast, he is conscious of it very well as he knows he is good at using this stormypower to destroy everything extremely. He is conscious of it first when he isbetrayed by the grown-up Catherine, a close affinity for him, who marries Edgarand lives in a cultured world which is opposed to his ideal world of wildness. He isconscious of it again when he loses his comrade Catherine and his world but staysin a cultured world where he never belongs. But Heathcliff is not conscious ofbecoming a lifeless being constrained by his revenge until he sees closeness ofyoung Catherine and Hareton. At last, Heathcliff is awakened to see the absurdityof his existence; he lives not for living as an ordinary person but for meaninglessrevenge. The power of revenge can be unexpectedly but instantly transforms anddissolves. Death is the only way to set Heathcliff free from his own cage.

Key Words: Heathcliff, revenge, betrayal, self-awakening, self-destruction.

1. Introduction: the Paradox of RevengeWhy people revenge? In Wuthering Heights, Heathcliff is portrayed as a

detestable avenger, but he is a hapless victim who fails to pass the test of fate andis restricted in the poisonous trap of revenge. From the outset, he is conscious ofbeing abused by Edgar and betrayed by Catherine. He is also conscious of losinghis ideal world of wildness where he is accompanied by Catherine. He starts takingrevenge on the Earnshaws and the Lintons when he returns to Wuthering Heights.He is unaware of walking into a blocked cage of darkness without exit as soon ashe begins his self-destructive journey of revenge.

It is natural that we choose to defend ourselves when we feel threatened andharmed by others. As Govier argues,

A Self-Destructive Path to Dead End

__________________________________________________________________

Seeking revenge is one way to reassert ourselves, to attempt toget relief from the hurt and humiliation of being wronged. If oneperson or group has wronged another, it is common for thevictim, the injured party, to feel rage and resentment, leading to adesire to ‘get one’s own back’ or ‘get even.’1

People are accustomed to believing revenge is necessary to a certain degree.We choose to revenge not only because we feel hurt and victimised withunbearable treatment but also because we want to retaliate those who harm usbadly and get even. Revenge is mostly considered as a method that brings thevictims to reassert themselves and overcome their suffering. What if the victimsare unable to reassert themselves and overcome their sorrow after having takenrevenge? What if their revenge will bring them not to a peaceful but a distressingsituation? If we are not alert to the common myth covered by the paradox ofrevenge, we will become another miserable Heathcliff who awakens too late torelease himself from the trap of revenge but is confined in it until his death. AsGovier indicates,

We think they wronged us, but they are unlikely to think ofthemselves as wrongdoers who deserve to be made to suffer atour hands. Thus, if we bring harm to them in revenge, they willthink we wronged them and feel in response a desire for revengethemselves. A cycle of wrong and retaliation, revenge andcounter-revenge, begins.2

The paradox of revenge is that whether the victims are capable of perceivingthat they will not be entangled in an endless cycle of revenge and counter-revengeand get what they expect. People assume that they can get even after they fightback. But the cycle of revenge and counter-revenge will turn to be an irresistiblebut unhealthy force that constantly disturbs the avengers and stimulates them tostop or keep going. If they are aware that revenge is harmful, they will get rid ofthe trap of revenge by means of forgiveness. If not, they allow hatred to stick intheir mind and remain in the cycle, as Heathcliff does. I will explore howHeathcliff deliberately starts his schemes for revenge with his two motives,belatedly awakens to see the absurdity of his hellish and meaningless existence,and starkly dies as the only consolation he gains from revenge.

2. Two Motives for RevengeHeathcliff’s first motive for revenge is arisen when he assumes that he is

betrayed by Catherine who declares that marrying him is her degradation. Hisrevenge is not an act of self-defence but a desire to relieve his hopeless sufferingfrom losing an ideal world. His repressed rage of losing her and their ideal world is

__________________________________________________________________

his second motive for revenge. He and Catherine comfort each other by inventing aperfect wild world in the moors. It looks like their Garden of Eden where they arefree to stay, play and promise to ‘grow up as rude as savages.’3 Yet she breaks upthe promise and forsakes the ideal world after she meets the Lintons and chooses tostand on their side. She believes that marrying Edgar is the way that fulfils her twowishes: to let her enter the cultured world and to alter the inferior position ofHeathcliff. Her marriage, for Heathcliff, symbolises the utter obliteration of theirideal world. As Cecil comments,

The shock of her infidelity and Hindley’s ill-treatment of himnow, in its turn, disturbs the natural harmony of Heathcliff’snature, and turns him from an alien element in the establishedorder, into a force for its destruction.4

Catherine attempts to use her marriage as a means to let her remain in both thecultured world of Edgar and the rebellious world of Heathcliff, but this attempt cannever be successful because Heathcliff decides to destroy everything when hereturns and begins his self-destructive journey.

3. Revenge on BetrayalCatherine starts betraying Heathcliff when she decides not to behave like him

as the ‘vulgar young ruffian’ and ‘worse than a brut,’ but intends to ‘practisepoliteness.’5 So a clear breach emerges as she marks her difference from him.Heathcliff has no way to stop this ongoing breach and her forthcoming marriage;he is conscious of his nothingness as a wide brute, which is the reason that makeshim believe he is degraded and chooses to leave. After a few years, he returns thereas a rich and civilised man, who looks ‘intelligent’ and retains ‘no marks of formerdegradation.’6 Heathcliff realises that being with Catherine can never be fulfilled,so he uses his wealth as a powerful weapon to destroy the cultured world where theEarnshaws and the Lintons stay and believes his shameful degradation can beerased by way of taking revenge on them in front of Catherine and letting her feelregretful for what she has done to him.

Heathcliff’s scheme for revenge works out when he seduces Isabella to fall inlove and elope with him, forcing her to live in Wuthering Heights with hatred, andalso engages in battle against his abhorrent enemy Hindley. However, he is notconscious of the death of Catherine, the unexpected and unwanted result that hewill never be ready to accept. Catherine does not want to lose neither Heathcliffnor Edgar, but she is incapable of ending the uncompromising clash between themand dies in sorrow and misery. Her unexpected death for Heathcliff is anirresistible force, as her rebellious nature, that cannot terminate his vengeance. AsCecil argues, Heathcliff is not ‘a wicked man voluntarily yielding to his wickedimpulses’ but ‘a manifestation of natural forces acting involuntarily under the

__________________________________________________________________

pressure of his own nature.’7 The death of Catherine reminds Heathcliff of hisunbearable pain of losing her forever, as he says, ‘Two words would comprehendmy future – death and hell; existence, after losing her, would be hell.’8

The death of Catherine stirs up Heathcliff so intensely that he cannot helpbecoming ‘destructive’ at last as ‘a natural force which has been frustrated of itsnatural outlet.’ 9 For obsessively lamenting his permanent loss of Catherine,Heathcliff does not decrease his hatred but intensifies it so much that it severelydamages not only Hindley and Edgar but also the next generation.

4. Revenge on LossMidgley points out, ‘obsession is a possibility for all of us, and a danger to

many, because the balance of motives which we normally maintain is incompleteand insecure.’10 Heathcliff’s obsession is more disastrous. His intolerable fear ofloss distorts his mind, leading him to be a violent bigot who falsely believes thatwhat he loses can be regained by what he possesses. His hopeless despair turns tobe an uncontrollable energy from the wildness that regards the next generation ashis despicable possessions, and takes revenge on them by confining andmaltreating them in the isolated world where he has been left alone.

After the death of his father, Hareton is ‘reduced to a state of completedependence on his father’s inveterate enemy,’ and lives as an inferior servant ‘whois deprived of the advantage of wages, and quite unable to right himself.’11 In orderto take revenge on Hindley, Heathcliff teaches Hareton to ‘scorn everything extra-animal as silly and weak’ and trains him as a coarse and uneducated person whohas already lost his ‘first-rate qualities’ from the Earnshaws.12

Linton, the son whom Heathcliff despises, is the next one that he shuts inWuthering Heights. As Heathcliff declares, ‘he’s mine, and I want the triumph ofseeing my descendent fairly lord of their estates, my child hiring their children totill their fathers’ lands for wages,’ Linton is used by his father as a means to attackEdgar and get the property which belongs to Linton when he dies soon.13 YoungCatherine is the last victim; Heathcliff is determined to let Edgar suffer bycompelling her to be Linton’s wife, as he expresses, ‘I desire their union, and amresolved to bring it about.’14

Yet Heathcliff is not conscious of the difference between human nature andpossessions. He can cultivate evil in his nature remaining in hatred as he wishes,but he is unable to foster evil in others if they reject, including his son. Everythingstarts to change when Linton decides not to obey his father as a worthless and bad-tempered boy. Linton cannot stop behaving wretched with his distorted naturewhen he lives in Wuthering Heights, but he gives young Catherine a slight favourby fetching her the key and letting her leave there and see her father before hisdeath. Linton’s favour strengthens her belief in love as well as weakensHeathcliff’s power of revenge. Later on, by perceiving the spirit of Catherine andviewing her image vividly reflected on Hareton and young Catherine, Heathcliff

__________________________________________________________________

belatedly awakens to realise peace that he longs for can be attained not by living inan earthly hell with his futile revenge but by uniting with Catherine in their lostworld.

5. A Recurring Choice: Fate and Free WillHeathcliff makes a mistake when he decides to revenge. The core of the

problem is that he is too obstinate to understand people have their free will to dowhat they want. It is fate that brings him to Wuthering Heights and let him be closeto Catherine, but she has free will to decide her friendship with him. AlthoughHeathcliff reveals his intention to revenge, it is useless for him to get even andbring her back if she does not think her conduct is wrong, as she replies to him,‘I’ve treated you infernally – and you’ll take revenge! How will you take it,ungrateful brute? How have I treated you infernally?’15 Heathcliff’s decision torevenge only drives her away from him. Worst of all, her death symbolises ahindrance of fate that gives him no chance to reconcile with her.

Heathcliff has free will to encounter the betrayal of Catherine. However, hecreates his evil nature when he cannot feel equal and valued, and erroneouslybelieves that revenge is the best way to prove his unthreatened authority overothers. Heathcliff spends his entire life cultivating evil and condemning others whotreat him unequally; however, he is never satisfied but restricted in the trap ofrevenge. As Baumeister points out, ‘The choice of evil as a means to an endsignifies a victory of the narrow over the broad time perspective.’16 As Nietzschealso indicates, ‘the eternal hourglass of existence is turned over again and again,and you with it, speck of dust.’17 Heathcliff’s attempt to revenge is the heaviestburden that he plants in his mind. ‘Those who condemn this world just reflect theirown impotence.’18 Heathcliff’s revenge is not a solution but an addicted but self-destructive impulse that locks him firmly in the cage of recurring emptiness.

As Baumeister argues, ‘The parallel between evil and self-destruction is notjust a coincidence.’19 Heathcliff’s revenge is weakened when he sees the spirit ofCatherine, as he says, ‘It was a strange way of killing, not by inches, but byfractions of hairbreadths, to beguile me with the spectre of a hope, througheighteen years.’20 It is the spirit of Catherine and her resemblance mirrored throughthe eyes of Hareton and young Catherine, as an overwhelming force of fate, whichstimulates Heathcliff to awaken and realise his hellish emptiness can never befulfilled by meaningless revenge. So he retreats himself from Hareton, and lessenshis threat on young Catherine. When Heathcliff is aware of his inability to maltreatthem who remind him of Catherine, he cannot help but quit his long-term violentefforts as he has to reconcile with her by fate and accept ‘an absurd termination.’21

After having experienced a great amount of time in Wuthering Heights,Heathcliff belatedly awakens to see his ridiculous living in a world as a poorly evilcreature which has to ceaselessly endure the pain of losing Catherine. As Meadargues, ‘We have to recall the experience to become aware that we have been

__________________________________________________________________

involved as selves, to produce the self-consciousness which is a constituent part ofa large part of our experience.’22 Heathcliff’s finally knows who he is and what helongs for. As Neiman argues, Nietzsche’s doctrine of eternal return is to show useverything we experience, whether we call it heaven or hell, is meant to save oursoul through our experiment.23 For Heathcliff, his acceptance of the forthcomingdeath, his only destination, is what he gains in the experience of revenge, as Millerconcludes, ‘Only in death, the realm of absolute communion, can Heathcliff‘dissolve with’ Cathy and ‘be happy’ at last.’24 Death is the place where Heathclifffulfils the desire to join with the spirit of Catherine.

6. ConclusionEmerson says, ‘A man’s fortunes are the fruit of his character.’25 Heathcliff is

sadly damaged by his character. He is not only a merciless avenger who destroysthe people around him, but also a poor human being who is deceived by hismisconception of revenge. As Neiman argues, ‘The problem of evil wasmeaningless suffering.’26 Heathcliff is too late to understand that revenge is uselessbecause the only significant thing in his life is to unite with Catherine and staytogether in their ideal world of wildness. First, Catherine does not forsake theLintons but reproaches Heathcliff’s attempt to revenge, and she dies suddenlybeyond his expectation. Second, Heathcliff’s continuous cruelty to others issenseless because it never brings dead Catherine back but let him live inabhorrence ‘worse than the devil.’27 Heathcliff’s revenge is futile because he nevergets even and fulfils his wish. As Neiman argues that ‘we invented sin andredemption. Sin gave pain an origin, and redemption gave it a telos.’28 Heathcliff isunusual; he does not invent redemption but only sin in his entire life, which is themeans for him to express his unbearable pain of losing Catherine. Heathcliffcannot regain the lost Garden of Eden, which symbolises purity and innocence,when he becomes an avenger.

Heathcliff finally realises that Wuthering Heights and the world of wildness arehis heaven where he can fulfil his wish and stay with the spirit of Catherine, asNelly describes, ‘They [Heathcliff and Catherine] are afraid of nothing. Together,they would brave satan and all his legions.’29 As his absurd existence in the earthlyworld, the end of his life is the point that Heathcliff starts enjoying the uniqueheaven which belongs to him. Goodridge argues that Wuthering Heights ‘leaves uswith a host of unanswered questions and embodies no consistent philosophy oflife.’30 Emily Brontë creates an extraordinary and wild figure Heathcliff, which isdoomed to reach his dead end by his self-destructive nature.

1 T Govier, Forgiveness and Revenge, Routledge, London, 2002, p. 2.2 Govier, Forgiveness and Revenge, p. 9.

__________________________________________________________________

3 E Brontë, Wuthering Heights, Signet Classic, New York, 2004, p. 44.4 D Cecil, ‘Emily Brontë and Wuthering Heights’, Twentieth CenturyInterpretation of Wuthering Heights, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1968, p.103.5 Brontë, Wuthering Heights, p. 65.6 ibid., p. 93.7 Cecil, ‘Emily Brontë and Wuthering Heights’, p. 103.8 Brontë, Wuthering Heights, p. 144.9 Cecil, ‘Emily Brontë and Wuthering Heights’, p. 103.10 M Midgley, Wickedness, Routledge, London, 1984, p. 151.11 Brontë, Wuthering Heights, p. 181.12 ibid., p. 210.13 ibid., p. 200.14 ibid., p. 206.15 ibid., p. 109.16 RF Baumeister, Evil: Inside Human Violence and Cruelty, W. H. Freeman, NewYork, 1997, p. 123.17 F Nietzsche, The Gay Science, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003, p.194.18 S Neiman, Evil in Modern Thought, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2002,p. 212.19 Baumeister, Evil: Inside Human Violence and Cruelty, p. 124.20 Brontë, Wuthering Heights, p. 277.21 ibid., p. 308.22 G J Mead, ‘The Social Self’, Pragmatism: Critical Concepts in Philosophy, Vol1, Routledge, Abingdon, 2005, p. 273.23 Neiman, Evil in Modern Thought, p. 220.24 JH Miller, ‘Emily Brontë’, Twentieth Century Interpretation of WutheringHeights, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1968, p. 115.25 RW Emerson, ‘Fate’, Nature and Selected Essays, Penguin, New York, 2003, p.385.26 Neiman, Evil in Modern Thought, p.216.27 Brontë, Wuthering Heights, p. 319.28 Neiman, Evil in Modern Thought, p.216.29 Brontë, Wuthering Heights, p. 322.30 JF Goodridge, ‘The Circumambient Universe’, Twentieth Century Interpretationof Wuthering Heights, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1968, p. 77.

__________________________________________________________________

Bibliography

Baumeister, R.F., Evil: Inside Human Violence and Cruelty. W. H. Freeman, NewYork, 1997.

Brontë, E., Wuthering Heights. Signet Classic, New York, 2004.

Cecil, D., ‘Emily Brontë and Wuthering Heights’. Twentieth CenturyInterpretation of Wuthering Heights. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1968, pp.102-105.

Emerson, R.W., ‘Fate’. Nature and Selected Essays. Penguin, New York, 2003, pp.361-391.

Goodridge, J.F., ‘The Circumambient Universe’. Twentieth Century Interpretationof Wuthering Heights. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1968.

Govier, T., Forgiveness and Revenge. Routledge, London, 2002.

Mead, G.H., ‘The Social Self’. Pragmatism: Critical Concepts in Philosophy. Vol1, Routledge, Abingdon, 2005, pp. 271-276.

Midgley, M., Wickedness. Routledge, London, 1984.

Miller, J.H., ‘Emily Brontë’. Twentieth Century Interpretation of WutheringHeights. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1968.

Neiman, S., Evil in Modern Thought. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2002.

Nietzsche, F., The Gay Science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003.

Kuo-Ping Claudia Tai is Assistant Professor in Department of Applied ForeignLanguages at Hsuan Chuang University in Taiwan. In addition to constantlyreading fictions and writing stories, she is also focusing on her current research andwriting in Literature and Nietzsche.

Montresor and Hop-Frog Strike Back: Poe’s Never-EndingPoetics of Revenge

Marta Miquel-Baldellou

AbstractEdgar Allan Poe’s two later narratives ‘The Cask of Amontillado’ (1846) and‘Hop-Frog’ (1849) can be interpreted as parallel texts which illustrate thecircularity of Poe’s poetics of revenge. In both tales, Montresor and Hop-Frog asavenging figures adopt a Socratic approach whereby they conceal their realintentions. Both characters display an analytical methodology to detect theirnemesis’ special vulnerability. Likewise, their strategy for revenge requires a trapinto which the victim must fall willingly so as to discover eventually he hastrapped himself. Nonetheless, this apparent sense of retribution is equivocal.Despite his flawless execution, Montresor’s anxiety and guilt are ultimatelybetrayed by his confessional recollections half a century later, just like the happily-ever-after ending in ‘Hop-Frog’ seems to underline Poe’s acknowledgement thatonly in a purely imaginary world can one silence his own enemy. A parallelism isalso established between victim and avenger as the victim of revenge invariablyreflects the self the avenger seeks to destroy. It is the aim of this paper to interpretboth tales as a unique narrative which displays Poe’s circular poetics of never-ending revenge.

Key Words: Edgar Allan Poe, ‘The Cask of Amontillado’, ‘Hop-Frog’, poetics ofrevenge, intertextuality, memory, circularity, confession, guilt, the double.

1. IntroductionHaving published several tales underscoring the nature of retribution and

ongoing enmity, Poe consolidated the poetics of revenge in his later tale ‘The Caskof Amontillado’ (1846), amalgamating and perfecting many of the characteristicshe had already disseminated in previous tales of revenge such as ‘Metzengerstein’,‘William Wilson’ or ‘The Imp of the Perverse’. Likewise, ‘Hop-Frog’ (1849), aless explored piece, was Poe’s last tale of revenge, published only some monthsbefore his death and including many features of the poetics of revenge he hadalready presented in ‘The Cask of Amontillado’. Both tales, including manyintertextual links that are repeated and reversed, can be interpreted as parallel textsillustrating Poe’s poetics of revenge and the never-ending quality of retribution.Taking these two tales as a point of departure, this paper aims at decoding Poe’spoetics of revenge, identifying intertextual links between these two narratives, andunderlining the circularity of vengeance as illustrated in these texts.

Montresor and Hop-Frog Strike Back

__________________________________________________________________

2. Poe’s Poetics of Revenge‘The Cask of Amontillado’ has openly been classified as a tale of revenge, but

it is also a tale of confession. Montresor, being unable to forget his crime afterfifty years, unfolds the testimony of his wicked deed, mentally enacting andvoicing each scene once more. His confession underlines both his vanity for whathe presumes to be a perfect crime, as well as foreshadows his necessity to recalland retell his deed half a century later. As Fisher contends, once Montresor hasrepressed ‘the ‘fortunate’ part of his being, he becomes fated never to forget thatevent.’1 Montresor thus exemplifies two recurring themes in Poe’s fiction: analysisand obsession. Even if he personifies one of Poe’s neurotic narrators, histestimony of a carefully-projected crime endows him with the qualities of ananalyst. As Magistrale asserts, Montresor is coolly rational on the surface, buttruly raging inside.2 His painstaking confession responds to his analytical quality,while his obsessive nature results in accomplishing his projected reprisal.Vengeance and confession, obsession and analysis thus come hand in hand, just asthe public acknowledgement of retribution seems necessarily entangled in the actof revenge.

Montresor’s analytical qualities are shown when he theorises about the natureof ideal revenge despite his frenzied condition:

I must not only punish but punish with impunity. A wrong isunredressed when retribution overtakes its redresser. It is equallyunredressed when the avenger fails to make himself felt as suchto him who has done the wrong.3

According to Gerald Kennedy, revenge must accomplish a triple satisfaction: first,punish the wrongdoer; second, insure the avenger against any subsequent injury;and third, demonstrate his superior intellect to the adversary.4 Through the act ofrevenge, the avenger must preclude any possibility of response, while the victimmust recognise the deed as an act of retribution.

Having theorised about the nature of revenge, the avenger’s strategy lies inanalysing the rival to discover his special vulnerability. As a result of a deliberateidentification with his counterpart, Montresor discovers Fortunato’s vanity lies inhis expertise in wine, which Montresor also seems to share as he admits ‘I wasskilful in the Italian vintages myself.’5 After all, both characters present manypoints in common: their names, Montresor and Fortunato, make explicit referenceto treasure and fortune; both are fond of wine, and both are in disguise due to thecarnival festivities. Consequently, a special and significant kind of parallelism isestablished between victim and avenger so that the latter projects and externaliseshis hatred, which is ultimately personified by the victim, the doppelganger, hisown double.

__________________________________________________________________

Following De Quincey, Poe also contemplated an aesthetics of murder inwhich the perfect crime becomes the ideal realisation of a mental construct. Tocommit the perfect crime is to effect a total disassociation of the self from itsdouble and destroy that part of the self that suffers mortal anxiety. Nonetheless,the act of violence usually follows its way back to the perpetrator and cannoteliminate the connection between the murderer and his victim, which alwaysremains inscribed in the memory of the avenger because of the bond of mortality itrecalls.6

3. Ironic DoublenessMontresor also relies on ironic doubleness, a Socratic approach, adopting a

manner which is precisely the opposite of his real intentions, thus confessing: ‘Itmust be understood that neither by word nor deed had I given Fortunato cause todoubt my good will.’7 Montresor cunningly weaves a trap to ensnare Fortunato,urging him to taste his Amontillado, but constantly repeating he should have askedLuchresi instead. Montresor’s strategy of revenge requires a trap, in which thevictim must fall by choice, believing he is proving his own talent and genius evenif ultimately paving the ground for his own destruction. Following Poe’s poetics ofrevenge, the snare should involve an element of play, since the victim must have achoice. Fortunato must not be overtly coerced, as he should eventually know hehas trapped himself. The victim’s awareness of his inability to extricate himselffrom the trap brings about the ascendancy of the avenger. Finally, the avengersilences the enemy denying any sort of retaliation, as the victim is well awarethere is no one else to blame but himself for his misfortune.

After all, Fortunato is punished for his inability to read the signs Montresor hascarefully presented. It is due to his ineptitude to detect Montresor’s clues thatFortunato meets his ‘unfortunate’ end. All through their descent into his family’svaults, Montresor wears a black mask, resembling an executioner, Fortunato isconducted to a crypt, and so as to convince Fortunato he is a mason, Montresorshows his trowel, which anticipates Fortunato’s end. Likewise, Montresor’sdisplay of his family’s coat of arms and its motto, nemo me impune lacessit (noone offends me with impunity), can be interpreted as an explicit affront toFortunato. In any case, dressed as a jester, Fortunato remains mystified all the waythrough, despite Montresor’s recurrent insinuations during their descent into thevaults. The downward path to the crypt reflects both Montresor’s ancestry and thedecline of his noble origins, as well as his sinful fall into the caverns of his ownunconsciousness. Montresor methodically weaves his trap through the use oflanguage, in a sort of verbal duel, which reaches its climax when Fortunatochallenges him to prove he is mason. This particular episode will reverberate at theend of the tale when Fortunato hopelessly asks for mercy and the love of God.

__________________________________________________________________

4. The Victim, MyselfIn order to prepare for revenge, Montresor observes Fortunato to emulate him

and anticipate his movements, so that Montresor’s strategy inevitably entails somesort of identification with his rival. The antagonism between both opponents lies intheir mutual resemblance as well as their reciprocal fear. Thus, the desire forrevenge is articulated along with ontological fear, just like violence is projected asa reification of displaced anxiety.

René Girard pointed at a mimetic desire, a rivalry, a mutuality of desire whichenforces a perverse bonding. All desire is a desire to be, that is to say, the dream ofa fullness attributed to the mediator, who separates the subject from the object, thusthe desire for a certain object always brings about the desire of another person forthis same object. Consequently, each character develops an obsessive awareness ofthe ‘other’, an intimate identification. They anticipate each other’s strategies andassume their nature, so that the distinction between self and other becomes blurred.The rival becomes linked to the attributes of the self we seek to deny, so in aimingto destroy our rival we attempt to destroy our most vexing qualities. The attackupon one’s double thus becomes a suicidal gesture; a mechanism of self-destruction. Every wound is the reciprocation of a previous injury through a historyof enmity as the desire for ascendancy ensures the repetition of the exchange.Aware that his own actions will prompt retaliation, the rival seeks his ownsuffering, and this is how the economy of revenge ensures the recirculation of evil.

Revenge unleashes to strike the balance between rivals once their antagonisticequilibrium has been disrupted and needs to be re-established. In this respect, Poe’s‘The Cask of Amontillado’ can also be interpreted as a roman-à-clef. Critics suchas Reynolds have referred to ‘The Cask of Amontillado’ as Poe’s vindictivenarrative against two prominent New York literati, the author Thomas DunnEnglish and the newspaper editor Hiram Fuller. Taking this background intoconsideration, the narrator Montresor (Poe) seeks revenge on his enemy Fortunato(English) for a recent insult, using their mutual friend Luchresi (Fuller) as a foil inhis scheme.8

5. Mirroring TextsThis assumed duality as well as the constant need to hide one’s intentions is

especially characteristic of the season. It is significant to notice that Montresorintends to accomplish his revenge during the carnival festivities, either to mask hisactivity or to insinuate his intentions. He puts on a mask of black silk, thussignalling the role of an executioner, while Fortunato looks like a jester.Nonetheless, both are disguised and they both present several points in common asfitting rivals. Montresor seems to have released himself from his double, from thatpart of the self he loathes. Thus, his final exclamation in pace requiescat, whichcan be referring to both himself and Fortunato, seems to point at a wish rather thana reality. Retelling the same tale after fifty years paves the ground for shaping an

__________________________________________________________________

unforgettable memory which never seems to reach its proper end. Consequently,‘The Cask of Amontillado’, due to its ambiguous conclusion - as Montresor feelssick at heart and can still hear Fortunato’s jingling of bells - can be interpreted asan open-ended tale.

These two roles, executioner and jester, are also repeated in Poe’s last tale‘Hop-Frog’, even though roles are eventually reversed through both stories. IfFortunato, disguised as a jester, ultimately becomes Montresor’s victim in ‘TheCask of Amontillado’, in ‘Hop-Frog’, it is the jester who eventually takes revenge.The similar characterisation between Fortunato and the jester is particularlystriking and foreshadows a close parallelism that can be established between Poe’stwo later tales.

The man wore motley. He had on a tight-fitting parti-strippeddress, and his head was surmounted by the conical cap and bells.9

Several of the great continental ‘powers’ still retained their‘fools’, who wore motley, with caps and bells.10

The mirroring effect established between Montresor and Fortunato, avenger andvictim, already pointed out by Gerald Kennedy, can be expanded and furtherdeveloped in relation to the King and the jester in ‘Hop-Frog’, as both talespresent many intertextual points in common. In tales of revenge, there is often theneed to give voice to the deed committed, which can be interpreted as an act ofnarcissism, as an act of confession or as a sign of weakness on the part of theavenger. The perpetrator’s sense of superiority vanishes when the victim ceases toexist, consequently the avenger needs to enact the crime endlessly retelling thesame tale and echoing the same feeling in different tales. As Girard asserts,characters in great fiction evolve in a system of relationships which reverberatethrough different texts.

Having been immured in the vaults of Montresor’s family, Fortunato’sappearance bears a close resemblance with the jester in Poe’s ‘Hop-Frog’, wearingmotley, caps and bells, seeking to effect revenge. In contrast, Montresor’saristocratic origins and ancestral vaults render him closer to the King in ‘Hop-Frog’. Thus, a reversal of roles has been articulated so as to underline thecircularity of revenge. However, as all characters are often in disguise, Montresoralso shares his wit with the jester, while the King’s mesmerized condition bears aclose resemblance with Fortunato’s inability to unravel Montresor’s riddles. In anycase, ‘Hop-Frog’ as a tale bears many parallelisms with ‘The Cask ofAmontillado’ to the extent both tales can be read as parallel texts mirroring eachother.

If Montresor and Fortunato accentuate the mutual resemblance betweenperpetrator and victim, Hop-Frog and the King, despite being rivals, are also

__________________________________________________________________

counterparts and often complement each other. Gradually, the apparent differenceestablished between the King and his fool is reversed so as to show the jester’sreal wit and the King’s true foolishness. If Fortunato’s vanity was his expertise inwine, the King’s vanity lies in his fondness of joking. Likewise, as rivals,Montresor also shares Fortunato’s knowledge of wine, while the King and thejester are both especially proficient in cracking good jokes. Despite theseparallelisms, the antagonism between rivals in both couples remains fairlyobvious.

6. Is There a Reason for Revenge?In ‘The Cask of Amontillado’, the perpetual hostility between Montresor and

Fortunato may be rooted in religious conflict. Nonetheless, the reason whyMontresor seeks revenge is never explicitly acknowledged except for Fortunato’sthousand injuries and his venture upon insult. And yet, Montresor’s echoingphrase ‘for the love of God’ seems to point at a Protestant-Catholic conflict lyingat the heart of revenge, bearing in mind the Brotherhood of the Masons, Protestantin orientation and strongly opposed to the Catholic Church. As Reynolds pointsout, historical associations rooted in Masonry aversion had swept America duringPoe’s apprentice period, especially referring to an actual fact involving WilliamMorgan, a bricklayer and a mason who, after thirty years of membership, wasdetermined to expose the order but was silenced by vindictive members of theorder.11

In contrast, ‘Hop-Frog’ has been interpreted as a tale of revenge with antiracistundertones, a narrative of retaliation against slavery and racism. Hop-frog crafts acounterplot to reveal and revenge himself upon the King, epitome of the ‘master’race, who has abused both him and his female friend Tripetta. The King and hisseven ministers come to occupy the position of servants or slaves, especiallytaking into consideration that they are ultimately chained and exhibited, disguisedas simians before the jester sets them on fire.12 Likewise, Fisher has also referredto postcolonial readings of the tale interpreting Poe’s ‘Hop-Frog’ as a narrative ofretaliation against slavery and racism. Despite this discourse underlining each ofthe tales, religion and slavery, Montresor admits his act of revenge responds toFortunato’s insult, whereas Hop-Frog’s action is aimed at punishing the King forstriking his friend Tripetta. Consequently, the act of revenge, regardless of anymajor undertones, is ultimately an act of personal will.

7. Conclusion: The Circularity of RevengeAll things considered, many parallelisms can be established between both

tales, which underline Poe’s never-ending poetics of revenge. First, bothMontresor and the jester share their ironic doubleness, their Socratic approach, inorder to entrap their victims. If Fortunato is unable to gain insight into Montresor’switty insinuations, the King cannot possibly guess the jester’s real intentions.

__________________________________________________________________

Likewise, both Montresor and the jester take the necessary precautions to ensureFortunato and the King entrap themselves, preventing them from any possibility toretaliate, thus condemning them to silence after arduous verbal fights.

In both tales, the avengers and their victims indulge in masquerades to concealor insinuate their real intentions, and similarly, the wine plays a pivotal role inboth stories. Fortunato’s conceit about his knowledge of wine eventually leads tohis demise. Nonetheless, despite his assumed expertise, Fortunato exhibitsintolerance to wine as he is hopelessly inebriated when he reaches the vaults. In‘Hop-Frog’, the King urges the jester to drink even if knowing the wine exerts apowerful effect on his brain. Thus, if the wine serves the purpose of mesmerisingFortunato, it enrages Hop-Frog and leads him to commit murder. Likewise,Montresor’s descent into his vaults is counteracted by the jester’s ascent to lowerthe chandelier and set fire to the King and the ministers, disguised as apes.

The verbal battle anticipating both acts of revenge, which may echo Poe’spersonal one with other literary critics, takes place in both tales throughMontresor’s insinuations and the jester’s accurate depiction of the masquerade.Fortunato is finally immured, literally turning into another cask of amontillado,preserved in both Montresor’s vaults and memories. Similarly, the King istransformed into a living joke, a capital diversion for his own jester. Furthermore,if Montresor’s confessional tone implies a lingering sense of anxiety out of guiltthat urges him to repeat the same narrative after fifty years, ‘Hop-Frog’ portraysPoe’s ultimate fantasy of revenge with impunity.

Both tales encode Poe’s poetics of revenge including several structuralindicators that reverberate all the way through such as immemorial antagonismbetween rivals, identification with the victim, detection of the victim’s weakness,elaborate strategies of mystification, instigation of the victim to fall into his owntrap as a result of his free choice and a final attempt to impose eternal silence. Astales of vengeance and illustrative examples of the literary catharsis of retribution,they generate a circular poetics of revenge that is enacted and re-enacted throughverbal battles whereby avengers attempt to impose silence on both their nemesisand their own most vexing qualities.

1 BF Fisher, The Cambridge Introduction of Edgar Allan Poe, CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge, 2008, p.69.2 T Magistrale, Student Companion to Edgar Allan Poe, Greenwood Press, London,2001, p.92.3 EA Poe, ‘The Cask of Amontillado’, The Selected Writings of Edgar Allan Poe,Norton, London and New York, 2004, p.415.4 JG Kennedy, Poe, Death and the Life of Writing, Yale University Press, NewHaven and London, 1987, p.139.

__________________________________________________________________

5 EA Poe, ‘The Cask of Amontillado’, p.415.6 JG Kennedy, op. cit., p.137-8.7 EA Poe, ‘The Cask of Amontillado’, p.415.8 DS Reynolds, ‘Poe’s Art of Transformation: ‘The Cask of Amontillado’ in ItsCultural Context’, New Essays on Poe’s Major Tales, Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, 1995, p.93.9 EA Poe, ‘The Cask of Amontillado’, p.416.10 EA Poe, ‘Hop-Frog; or, The Eight Chained Ourang-Outangs’, The SelectedWritings of Edgar Allan Poe, Norton, London and New York, 2004, p.422.11 DS Reynolds, op. cit., p.99.12 LS Person, ‘Poe’s Philosophy of Amalgamation’, Romancing the Shadow: Poeand Race, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001, p.218.

Bibliography

De Quincey, T., On Murder. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2009.

Girard, R., Deceit, Desire and the Novel: Self and Other in Literary Structure. JohnHopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1966.

Fisher, B.F., The Cambridge Introduction of Edgar Allan Poe. CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge, 2008.

Kennedy, J.G., Poe, Death and the Life of Writing. Yale University Press, NewHaven and London, 1987.

Magistrale, T., Student Companion to Edgar Allan Poe. Greenwood Press, London,2001.

Person, L.S., ‘Poe’s Philosophy of Amalgamation’. Romancing the Shadow: Poeand Race, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001.

Poe, E.A., ‘The Cask of Amontillado’. The Selected Writings of Edgar Allan Poe.Norton, London and New York, 2004, pp.415-421.

–––, ‘Hop-Frog: or, The Eight Chained Ourang-Outangs’. The Selected Writings ofEdgar Allan Poe. Norton, London and New York, 2004, pp.421-428.

Reynolds, D.S., ‘Poe’s Art of Transformation: ‘The Cask of Amontillado’ in ItsCultural Context’. New Essays on Poe’s Major Tales. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, 1995.

__________________________________________________________________

Marta Miquel-Baldellou is member of the research groups Dedal-Lit and IRIS(Institute of Research in Identity and Society) at the University of Lleida,Catalonia, Spain. She is mainly interested in Victorian literature, nineteenth-century American literature, gothic literature, gender studies and theconceptualisations of aging in the literatures of the English-speaking countries.

PART III

Revenge in the Arts and around the Globe

The Involuntary Casualties of Revenge in Alan Ayckbourn’s TheRevengers’ Comedies

Iwona Bojarska

AbstractRevenge is something that many attempted and so many more have lusted after.Being such a powerful feeling, it corrupted the minds of those seeking revenge andbecame a disdain for their targets. Regardless of the way revenge is acted out,whether it is an instinctive act or a well orchestrated plot, it becomes a fatalmachinery aimed at the ones who did us wrong, and consumes many more thatbecome affected among it’s way. While conducting their mischievous plan,avengers would let others get hurt in order to achieve the blissful satisfaction ofgetting even. In my paper I investigate revenge in terms of how it is bound toterminally effect not just the avengers and their targets but many more as, veryoften, it also involves foreign agents who somehow get trapped in the process ofrevenge and get sacrificed in order for it to take place. In my exploration of thetopic I relate to Modern English Drama in the writing of Alan Ayckbourn. In hisplay, The Revengers’ Comedies, Ayckbourn portrays a magnificent example ofrevenge where the two main characters, Karen and Henry, use each other to delivertheir punishment. Karen has lost her lover, Henry has lost his job and as a resultthey both intend to commit suicide by jumping into the Thames. Luckily, Henry isinterrupted by Karen’s failed attempt and by helping Karen, he pulls himself out ofhis dreadful feelings. Ironically, that suicidal interference of two people, thatinitially saves them from hurting themselves, triggers a revengeful scheme thatresults in a number of lives being cruelly destroyed.

Key Words: Revenge, drama, Ayckbourn.

Revenge is often discussed in terms of whether the avenger has a moral right oreven a moral duty to avenge for the wrong that was done to them. Since the lawdoes not take sides on matters of affection, revenge may become the last resortwhen the judicial system fails. Very often it is mainly the perspective of theavenger that is being examined as well rather than the one of the victim, let aloneof those who are neither the avengers nor the victims therefore their impact is oftenbelittled. Regardless of the perspective, once put into motion revenge initiallyaffects everyone involved. The main focus of this paper is to examine why somany have to be affected and must fall victim in the process of revenge eventhough they may not necessarily be the ones at which the revenge is being targetedat. Very often they find themselves involuntarily engaged in other people’sconflicts. I would like to show that the number of victims and the extent to which

The Involuntary Casualties of Revenge

__________________________________________________________________

they are affected by the avenger is very much dependent on the very nature ofrevenge itself and the way it progresses. In order to do so I will look at severalcharacteristics of revenge and demonstrate that regardless of the avengers’ reasonsor intentions revenge is bound to adversely affect more than just the avenger andtheir targets. In my exploration of the topic, I relate to modern English Drama inthe writing of Alan Ayckbourn. In his play The Revengers’ Comedies, Alanpresents the corrupted results of vengeance and what effect it may have on thoseinvolved; often unaware of the role they play in the process. Before I begin a basicoutline of the play is in order.

Two strangers, Henry and Karen, meet at one of the London’s bridges. Karenhas lost her lover, Anthony, who decides to go back to his wife, Imogen; Henry iselbowed out from his job by Bruce Tick, but is also betrayed by his co-workerswith whom he worked for years and whom he considered to be his family. As aresult of their loss, they both intend to commit suicide by jumping into the Thames.Luckily, Henry is interrupted by Karen’s failed attempt and by helping herentangle the coat from the ironwork of the bridge, he pulls himself out of thesedreadful feelings. That crucial meeting results in a pact being made. Karen andHenry swear to exact revenge for each other and even though Henry only seems tosign up for the ride to enjoy the perks of Karen’s hospitality, Karen takes it moreseriously. Ironically, that suicidal interference of two people that, at least initially,saves them from hurting themselves, in the end triggers a revengeful mechanismthat results in a number of lives being cunningly and at times cruelly destroyed.

Revenge is a powerful force but most importantly a very destructive one andshould not be justified in a society of high values and morals. In an ideal world thevictimiser would be punished for whatever harm they did, but once they escapethat justice, or the victim decides that too much leniency was given to theiroffender, the victims may become the victimisers themselves. Even though they actin the name of what they perceive as justice, the actions they take are not a result ofself defence but simply well calculated steps aimed to cause suffering. Socialpsychologist, psychoanalyst and humanistic philosopher, Erich Fromm, suggested:‘Revenge can be differentiated from normal defensive aggression in two ways: itoccurs after the damage has been done, and hence is not a defence against threat, isof much greater intensity, and is often cruel, lustful and insatiable.’1 Frommseparates these two: revenge and defensive aggression, and brings our attention tothe fact that revenge is a calculated mean of causing hurt rather than an instantreaction to what someone has done to us. This is skilfully portrayed in the play.Karen and Henry plan their revenge well in advance. Karen admits that herself andHenry are ‘unquiet spirits, if you like, with unfinished business. The wrongs thathave been done to [them] have got to be put right. [They]’re never going to rest,either of [them], until [they]’ve done that.’2 Exacting revenge for each other seemslike an excellent idea as this way they can easily escape justice. Karen admits: ‘It’sbrilliant. No motive. No trace. Cold, calculated revenge.’3 What follows is indeed a

Iwona Bojarska

__________________________________________________________________

calculated plan aimed to seek their victims’ weaknesses and teach their offenders abitter lesson by giving them ‘as much as they gave.’4

Karen does not waste time proceeding with her plan. She skilfully arranges forthe secretarial job description to include qualifications that make the position seemless achievable. That reduces the number of applicants thus making herintroduction to Henry’s company much easier. At the interview Karen convincesthe only other applicant, Tracey, that the job is for ‘someone with glamour andbuckets of sex appeal.’5 Misinformed, Tracey tries to sustain the sort of imagematching Karen’s description, makes a horrible impression, and subsequently, isturned down for the position. After being made a secretary to Bruce, Henry’sdetested ex work colleague who led to Henry’s wrongful dismissal, Karen quicklymanages to find his weak points. She leads Hilary (Bruce’s wife) to believe that heis having an affair. Initially Bruce is unaware of what is going on especially thatKaren presents herself as a very unattractive woman therefore is of no interest toBruce. Hilary finally leaves Henry after finding a piece of lady’s underwear inBruce’s pocket, which ironically he empties out to give Hilary a present, but findsKaren’s panties instead. As if that was not enough, Karen suggests that they allmeet and this way Hilary may find out for herself that Karen is of no threat to theirmarriage. Bruce embraces the idea: they all meet but Karen turns up lookingattractive, even provocative, which only ascertains Hilary of her husband’sadultery. Bruce finally realises he was being played all along. Not being able tostand the pressure and as a result of his health issues, he collapses on the floorgasping for air. At this point Karen reveals to Bruce who his true avenger is andseconds later he dies. Bruce becomes Karen’s first deadly victim yet the immensityof hurt she causes at this point is nothing compared to what she is capable of lateron, proving that revenge is never accidental, involves careful planning and alwaysinvolves innocent victims like Tracey or Hilary. Bruce’s death is Karen’sachievement in the deal she made with Henry. Yet, it turns out that getting evenwith Bruce is not satisfactory enough which leads me on to the next part of myresearch.

Fromm describes revenge being of much greater intensity, which indicates thatvictims are purely driven by emotion such as anger, hate, disappointment,unreciprocal love etc. This is a key element when it comes to calculating thenumber and a kind of victims involved in the revenge process. Once victimsbecome avengers their actions are purely based on these negative emotions, whichmakes it very difficult, if possible at all, to reason with them. Revenge is thereforemore of a result of someone’s inability to process these emotions. Although theway revenge is orchestrated may be a masterpiece in its form, it still comes from anunstable mind. Such is the mind of Karen Knightly, a chief avenger and a tricksterin disguise, cunningly engineering for whom she sees as her enemy to bedestroyed. As Ayckbourn commented:

__________________________________________________________________

I just think [revenge] is a terribly strong emotion, it’s adangerous emotion, it’s as strong as love. It’s based on lovewhich turns to hate. It’s obsessive, it refuses to see reason. Therevenge of normal people lasts about 20 minutes. You have aninstinctive fury about what someone’s done to you, but with mostof us, thank God, the emotion passes. Otherwise there would bevery few people left alive.6

In case of Karen that emotion never passes. In fact, it gets stronger every timeher need for getting revenge is not sustained through Henry’s actions. Both Henryand Karen hope that through their revenge they can regain their peace of mind, butas they experience themselves, hurt and revenge cannot cancel each other out. Thiscan never happen as hurt, like any other emotion, has a sort of timeless quality.Even though it may be weakened for a while by the act of revenge, it will comeback whenever the feelings of hurt are renewed. The process of delivering revengeis therefore a way of rebalancing – the more guilt one feels, the stronger the needfor revenge; analogically the closer one is in getting even, his/her feelings of hurtwill lessen. This manifests itself in Karen’s behaviour and has a direct impact onpeople around her.

Once revenge is delivered and Karen brings the news to Henry, instead ofseeing Henry celebrating, she sees him trying to back out. Karen’s need forrevenge is renewed and so she continues pursuing Henry’s ex co-workers. Within ashort time Karen manages to make another director die; Mr Seeds, a very nervousman who comes back to work after a heart attack, rushes on the roof of thebuilding and jumps off as a result Karen communicating that they need to evacuateas the whole building is on fire. Soon she takes another secretarial job within thesame company. It is Veronica Webb this time, a very shy and hard working girl,that falls under Karen’s mischievous game. She is led to believe that her bossJeremy has fallen for her. As a result Veronica builds up strong feelings towardsJeremy but when seeing Karen and Jeremy flirting she realises she was of nointerest to Jeremy, which basically breaks her heart. As much as we could try andjustify the way Karen deals with Bruce, it is hard to do so when it comes to the restof the company workers that become the involuntary victims of her actions. At thisstage it becomes very clear that Karen’s fury has no end and it is very doubtful shewill ever stop. The enormity of hurt that she causes in no way equals the hurt shecould have possibly received which becomes my next point of interest in thispaper.

People consider their own pain and suffering to have more meaning than otherpeople’s hence the need for the realisation of that pain, which can manifest itself inthe form of revenge. Applying the punishment makes the offence seem moresignificant to us. It also makes others acknowledge the harm that was done to us.Very often though, revenge carries more harm than the harm one experienced in

Iwona Bojarska

__________________________________________________________________

the first place, as is the case with Karen. Her reason for revenge is to make awomen pay for taking her lover, Anthony. It is not the men himself she blames, buthis wife, Imogen to whom he supposedly decides to come back after having a flingwith Karen. By protecting Anthony and blaming Imogen, Karen can both cling tothe idea that Anthony loves her and at the same time focus her negative emotion onthe easy target of revenge, which is Imogen. Knowing her reasons for getting evenand her inability to understand that she could be the one that is at fault, we can seethat there is no comparison between what she suffered and what she does to others.Few scientists working at the Institute of Psychiatry and Neurology at UniversityCollege London have shown that we underestimate the amount of pain we inflicton other people. They conducted an experiment during which patients were askedto take part in ‘tit-for-tat’ situations. A fixed force was applied to one finger ofonly one member of each group after which these were asked to apply the sameamount of force they received on their partners. The second group wassubsequently asked to apply that power back to the initial partners and that cyclewas carried out eight times. Scientists observed that by the end of the experimentthe force applied was 14 times greater than the original one. It turned out that insome cases this amount doubled by 50% but still in most of them it went up by atleast a third. They observed that all participants consistently applied a greater forcewhen using their right index finger to directly match the externally applied targetforce; they consistently underestimated the force they were applying because theirperception of the force was likely to be attenuated.7 This would partially explainwhy so many fall victim of Karen’s hurt. She is not capable of keeping the level ofpain she endured same to the level of hurt she is inflicting on everyone else. OnceHenry announces his intentions towards Imogen have changed and that he nowplans on marrying Karen’s prime enemy, she feels defeated and betrayed. In herrage, fury and disappointment, she sets fire to her house thus making herself, herbrother and her loyal servants homeless. In the end, she throws herself into theThames shouting ‘revenge’, which is the last word being said in the play. We couldonly assume that by doing so Karen would hope to put some sort of curse on Henryand Imogen’s new relationship. This only proves how strong and destructiverevenge can be and how far people will go with it, no matter who or what stands intheir way, even if it is themselves they eventually destroy. That finally brings me toconclude on the subject of my paper.

Karen explains in the beginning of the play: ‘I’d kill myself when I had a verygood reason for doing so. A stronger reason than the reason I had for living. Thereis a difference, I promise there is.’8 Regardless of the reasons one might have toavenge and regardless of the way it is acted out, whether it is an instinctive act or awell orchestrated plot, revenge becomes a fatal machinery aimed at the ones whodid us wrong, consuming many more along it’s way. Most importantly it comesand is dependent on a human being who is very often corrupted, whose moralemay be questioned and whose actions are mostly based on anger and feelings of

__________________________________________________________________

hurt. While conducting their mischievous plan, the avengers would let others gethurt in order to achieve the blissful satisfaction of getting even. Moreoverdelivering revenge can never be enough in itself as even when served, the painremains. Revenge is therefore a short-sighted solution in dealing’s with one’s angerand disappointment destroying the lives of anyone standing in its way, includingthe avenger’s.

1 E Fromm, The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness, Penguin, London, 1990, p.386.2 A Ayckbourn, The Revengers’ Comedies, Faber and Faber, London, 1991, p. 20.3 ibid., p. 21.4 ibid., p. 22.5 ibid., p. 52.6 A Ayckbourn, ‘The Revengers’ Comedies Quotes By Alan Ayckbourn’, DailyMail. 07 October 1991, Viewed on 17 May 2010, http://therevengerscomedies.alanayckbourn.net/TRC_AAQuotes.htm.7 SS Shergill, G Samons, PM Bays, CD Frith & DM Wolpert. ‘Evidence forSensory Prediction Deficits in Schizophrenia’, AM J Psychiatry, December 2005,viewed on 27 April 2010, http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/162/12/2384.8 Ayckbourn, op. cit., p. 11.

Bibliography

Ayckbourn, A., The Revengers’ Comedies. Faber and Faber, London, 1991.

—, ‘The Revengers’ Comedies Quotes By Alan Ayckbourn’. Daily Mail, 07October 2001, Viewed on 17 May 2010, http://therevengerscomedies.alanayckbourn.net/TRC_AAQuotes.htm.

Fromm, E., The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness. Penguin, London, 1990.

Shergill, S.S. et. Al., ‘Evidence for Sensory Prediction Deficits in Schizophrenia’.AM J Psychiatry, December 2005, viewed on 27 April 2010, http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/162/12/2384.

Iwona Bojarska, University of Lodz, Poland. Interested in Modern British Dramadealing with a wide range of psychological and social issues.

Revenge, American Cinema and Framing theDecade of the 1970s

William Gombash, III

AbstractThis paper seeks to examine a number of factors that led to the popularity ofrevenge in American films during the 1970s.The specific focus will be two films:Don Siegel’s Dirty Harry (1972) and Michael Winner’s Death Wish (1974) due totheir similar approaches to political framing, the nature of the protagonists and theurban locales. The analysis will draw from a variety cultural and politicalreferences. As part of this examination I will focus on the following: How theadministration of President Nixon helped frame the political discourse in the 1970sin relation to victimhood. How popular mass media adapted their messages tocoincide with the political and cultural zeitgeist of America in the 1970s. How bothDirty Harry and Death Wish drew liberally from the Western film genre tosymbolically frame their heroes, locales, and enemies within the parameters oftraditional American values of both law and order and vengeance against themilieu of the 1970s.

Key Words: Revenge, film, 1970s, victim, Nixon, framing, American Dream,urban, crime.

It is often said that revenge is sweet, but in the United States in the 1970s it wasbetter than sweet, it was a goldmine. Producers quickly discovered that they couldmake revenge themed like Dirty Harry and Death Wish film with a small budgetand reap huge profits. Why were these films so popular? What was the responsivechord that this subgenre of struck that made them resonate so powerfully within theconsciousness of the American people? Film theorist James Monaco best sums upthe relationship between the movies and vengeance in his 1979 book AmericanFilm Now:

The mythic materials of paranoia and revenge, which certainlydominate American movies in the 1970s, are the clearest signswe have that all is not well in the Land of the Free and the Homeof the Brave, and that all of us - cops and addicts, private eyesand beautiful widows, crazy taxi drivers and middle-levelexecutives, housewives, hookers, and journalists - are thoroughlyalienated from a political, social, and cultural system that iseither corrupt, moribund, ineffectual, or all of the above.1

Revenge, American Cinema and Framing the Decade of the 1970s

__________________________________________________________________

This paper seeks to examine a number of factors that led to the popularity ofrevenge in American films during the 1970s. The specific focus will be two films:Don Siegel’s Dirty Harry (1972) and Michael Winner’s Death Wish (1974) due tosimilar their approaches to political framing, the nature of the protagonists and theurban locales.

Many Americans in the 1960s and 1970s, felt out of control and a victim of anAmerica that had changed since the giddy days after the victories of World War IIwhen the country seemed all powerful where its citizen could walk the streets andleave their doors unlocked. In the 1970s, many Americans believed they were atwar with their own country against other Americans they neither recognized nortrusted. Thanks to the medium of television the race riots, the crime and therampant drug addiction afflicting mostly minorities and the poor in America’sdecaying urban centers seemed threateningly right on the doorstep of a group ofAmericans that President Nixon referred to as ‘The Silent Majority.’2

‘The Silent Majority’ was a term coined by the presidential administration ofRichard Nixon. Very early in his administration Nixon sought to appeal to groupsof Americans whom he described as alienated from the political process. Thesymbolism of ‘The Silent Majority’ was a deliberate attempt by the Nixonadministration to unite his traditional Republican political base with southernDemocrats who were feeling disaffected from their party because of formerPresident Lyndon Johnson’s ‘liberal policies’ of the Great Society. Strategically,the goal was to portray the radical elements of the country who were protestingagainst the war in Viet Nam, radical African-American organizations such as TheBlack Panthers and anyone who advocated the illegal use of drugs as a dangerousthreat to the Nixon’s new political base. Americans labeled as ‘The SilentMajority’ were portrayed as victims of a variety of nefarious criminal elements.This was a means to mobilize public opinion for many of Nixon’s policies bothforeign and domestic.3

Nixon’s sounding call to ‘The Silent Majority’ was not just an attack on thedrugs or protesters or the inner city poor it was an attack on the liberals andintellectuals who were at the core of the problem. Using Vice President SpiroAgnew as a mouthpiece, the administration attacked intellectual dissent because itwas motivated by those who hated the country and wanted it to fail. In twoseparate speeches in October 1969 Agnew inflammatory rhetoric attacked ‘liberalintellectuals’ who he contended had a ‘masochistic compulsion to destroy theircountry’s strength.’ Ten days later the Vice President aimed his strident words atprotesters whom he labeled ‘hard-core dissidents and professional anarchists’ and‘ideological eunuchs’ who ‘overwhelm themselves with drugs and artificialstimulants.’4

It was this mass media legerdemain that was used to create an imagined crisis,centered primarily in America’s urban centers that could have led to the overthrowof the America, the good and moral America from a bygone era. The threat were

__________________________________________________________________

radical blacks, drug induced teens, and antiwar protesters.5 Nixon and hisadministration were seizing their vision of the moral and intellectual high ground.They would marginalize anyone or any group that opposed their vision of morality.This would be payback for the years of Roosevelt’s New Deal or even more recentJohnson’s Great Society.

Politicians like Nixon have endeavored to define and frame the Americannarrative in terms of fear and uncertainty. Popular entertainment often emulateswhat it perceives to be that narrative and to form their popular narratives within theframework of the popular narrative. How entertainment portrays political events,through television shows or movies for example, is often directly related to publicperception of that event. ‘As thought processes on justice change in relation tohistorical events such as 9/11; different culture representations arise.’6

After 9/11 American video store owners reported that the public wanted actionfilms where terrorist were disposed of by the most violent means ‘that in the faceof uncertainty they’ll flock to movies that offer them the illusion of control.’7 OnAmerican television the controversial drama ‘24,’ with protagonist Jack Bauer asan American hero and avenger took on terrorists with a no holds barred attitude.The program became a lightning rod for political debate and ‘has arguably thedefining entertainment of the political moment, earning accolades from observersas diverse as Frank Rich and Pat Buchanan. Rolling Stone just declared it ‘thecentral moral-political drama of our time’.’8

Like 24 after 9/11, both Dirty Harry and Death Wish reflected the politicalzeitgeist of the 1970s. Film critic Pauline Kael declared that ‘In the Heat of theNight belongs to the Lyndon Johnson age as clearly as Dirty Harry belongs to theheyday of the Nixon era.’9 In his review of Death Wish, New York Times film criticVincent Canby declared the film ‘exploits very real fears and social problems andsuggests simple-minded remedies by waving the American flag much in the samefashion former Vice President Agnew used to.’10

During the sixties and seventies, with war in Viet Nam, politicalassassinations, and the rise of urban crime, violence became partof our everyday life. Inevitably, the movie screen becamebloodier, and while movies about bad guys and antiheroes werestill popular, vigilante films became equally successful.11

The symbol of the decay of the social and legal system in 1970s America wasits cities. Cities were perceived as centers of civil unrest fermented by AfricanAmerican radicals. Public spaces such as parks once seen as a slice of sylvan peacefor families were being occupied by radical elements of society where the rule oflaw no longer applied. To that end both Dirty Harry and Death Wish portray theirurban settings as an insane asylum or war zone. During one night patrol Callahan

__________________________________________________________________

views describes the people on the streets as ‘loonies,’ and ‘they ought to throw anet over the whole bunch of them.’

Death Wish was even more blatant with its framing of the city as a place whereinnocent citizens were in constant danger of being murdered. When Kersey returnsto New York City from his Hawaiian vacation he learns from a co-worker the grimstatistics regarding the number of homicides that have occurred in the city duringhis absence. The co-worker then proceeds to compare New York City to a warzone and all of the criminals should be confined to concentration camps.

Be it insane asylum or war zone it was up to Callahan and Kersey to take theircities back not just from the lunatics and enemy combatants who ruled the streets,but also from the liberal legal and social policies of the 1960s that had empoweredthem in the first place. Callahan and Kersey must, through any means, impose theirmoral vengeance for sake of the innocent victims, ‘The Silent Majority’ who havebeen made powerless by, to use the rhetoric of Vice President Agnew, ‘liberalintellectuals’ who he had a ‘masochistic compulsion to destroy their country’sstrength,’ needed an avenger to clean up the streets of the cities because the liberallegal system would not.

Traditionally, in revenge tragedies ‘Revenge is perceived as the only to addresswrongs at multiple levels.’12 These multiple levels are exemplified in The SpanishTragedy that ‘represents Hieronimo’s revenge which is partly that of a grievingfather and partly that of a political scourge, a terrible cleansing of a corrupt state.’13

Both Death Wish and Dirty Harry work at both levels in relation to the revenge ofthe grieving father and the revenge of a citizen against a corrupt state.

Paul Kersey in Death Wish is the literal grieving father seeking revenge againstthe criminals who broke into upper middle class apartment murdered his wife, andbrutally raped his daughter who survives the attack but in left in a catatonic state.Her assault is filmed in exacting and sadistic detail. Although Kersey does notwitness the rape the audience must observe this innocent wide eyed white youngwoman apparently forced to commit unspeakable acts. Although none of theassailants are black, one of them, who looks somewhat Hispanic, carries a can ofspray paint that he uses to not only vandalize Kersey’s home with graffiti but alsospray his daughter’s buttocks with red paint. This symbolic act of sodomy goesbeyond the assault on one young woman. Kersey’s daughter is not just a youngwhite woman she is all young white women. In the large cities of the 1970s the canof spray paint was often represented not just as a symbol of vandalism but of allurban crime often committed by violent Hispanic or black criminals. Death Wishengages the audience to identify with the victim on a personal and social level.Kersey’s daughter is being sodomized by a not just by a young thug identified as‘Spraycan’ in the closing credit but also permissive social system that created him.

Steven Spielberg in his film Munich (2005) deliberately manipulates ‘the modelof victimhood so as to expose the underlying trauma that supports it.’14 Thenarrative of films that focus on victimhood ‘encourage identification with

__________________________________________________________________

victimhood, and thus indirectly, extreme acts of retaliation and aggression.’15

Thusly, the rape of Kersey’s daughter not only forces the audience to identify withKersey, the grieving father, but also Kersey the American citizen betrayed by alegal and social system that will not offer him justice. When Kersey asks a policedetective about the probability that the men who murdered his wife and raped hisdaughter the response is a rather impotent, ‘Just a chance. In this city that is theway that it is.’ Kersey vindictive fury against the criminals of New York City isboth the acts of a vengeful father seeking personal retribution and a vengefulcitizen seeking political retribution.

Harry Callahan is not the literal father of fourteen year old Mary Ann Deaconwho was tortured, raped, and murdered by an evil serial killer. The audience neversees her actual father. Callahan is the symbolic father who berates the districtattorney and a judge who rule that Mary Ann’s killer must be set free becauseCallahan broke the law that was created to protect criminal suspects like the manwho killed her. Callahan angrily snaps back ‘Who speaks for her?’ and ‘The Lawis crazy.’ Like Kersey in Death Wish, Callahan commits vengeance for bothpersonal and political reasons. The audience identifies with both Callahan andMary Ann Deacon as victims of a corrupt legal system. Therefore the audiencebegins to see themselves as victims and conclude that men like Kersey andCallahan are to be cheered and venerated for their willingness to stand aloneagainst a corrupt system that forces them to be vigilantes in the 20th Century.

The vengeance themes in both Death Wish and Dirty Harry are deeply rootedin the social and political philosophy of The American Dream. Both films alsodraw liberally from the mythic conventions of that most uniquely American filmgenre, the Western.

After the attack on his family, Kersey’s goes to Tucson, Arizona for a businesstrip. It is there where he receives the gift of the gun that he will use to eventuallyexact his vengeance in New York City. Kersey also receives a lesson from one ofTucson’s citizens of the efficacy and value of the American Dream. In Death WishTucson is portrayed as symbolic of the Old West style of frontier justice, whereevery law abiding citizens helps keep the peace with their guns the way theirforefathers did in the 19th Century. Unlike New York City, Kersey is told you canwalk safely in the parks at night ‘muggers in this here parts get their asses blownoff.’

In Westerns, communities were often an isolated ‘arena where civilized meetsavage in an interminable mythic contest.’16 The savages in Death Wish arenarrowly drawn from a progressively dominant African-American amalgam of‘muggers, vandals and kids who carry spray-paint cans (they should be eliminatedtoo) prefer knives most of the time and thus wouldn’t be able to shoot first orback.’17

While Kersey fights many unnamed savages, Callahan has but one powerfulSavage. His savage is a wanton sociopathic serial killer who is unnamed and only

__________________________________________________________________

referred to as Scorpio. Scorpio is a hippie-like creature with shaggy hair, colorfulclothing, and even a peace symbol for a belt buckle. He is Scorpio in terms of theAge of Aquarius. This nameless sociopath is a hippie, love child symbolic oflawlessness and permissive of the counterculture, the spawn of pagan gods whohas been allowed to mutate and wreak havoc on the innocent because of a lack oflaw and order. Scorpio is a straw man, grounded not in the realm of logic but inan emotional dystopia of a right winger’s nightmare. Pauline Kael attacked thesimplistic portrayal of Scorpio as ‘pure evil’ who ‘stands for everything theaudience fears and loathes. And Harry cannot destroy this walking rot because ofthe legal protections, such as the court rulings on Miranda and Escobedo that aweak, liberal society gives its criminals.’18

The cultural significance of Dirty Harry Callahan may have begun with the oftquoted ‘Do you feel lucky?’ from Dirty Harry would morph into ‘Go ahead, makemy day’ from the fourth installment on the series Clint Eastwood’s Sudden Impact(1983). This phrase of tough-guy avenging bravado would become so iconic that in1985 President Ronald Reagan would use it when he threatened to veto a bill, hethought too liberal, passed by Congress. Most of America cheered Reagandoggedly avenging another symbol of the 1960s.

1 J Monaco, American Film Now: The People, the Power, the Money, the Movies,Plume, New York, 1978, p. 287.2 K Yuill, ‘Another Take on the Nixon Presidency: The First TherapeuticPresident?’, Journal of Policy History 21, No. 2, April 2009, pp. 139-141.3 D Conley & M Ryvicker, ‘Race, Class, and Eyes Upon the Street: Public Space,Social Control, and the Economies of Three Urban Communities’, SociologicalForum 16, No. 4, December 2001, pp. 718-759.4 B D’Arcus, ‘Protest, Scale, and Publicity: The FBI and the H Rap Brown Act’,Antipode 35, No. 4, September 2003, pp. 718-741.5 K Yuill, ‘Another Take on the Nixon Presidency: The First TherapeuticPresident?’, Journal of Policy History 21, No. 2, April 2009, pp. 138-162.6 R Dean-Ruzicka, ‘Vengeance, Healing and Justice: Post 9/11 Culture Throughthe Lens of CSI’, Quarterly Review of Film & Video 26, No. 2, March 2009, pp.118-130.7 J McEntee, ‘I’ll give you acts of God’: God, the Father, and Revenge Tragedy inThree Billy Connolly Movies’, 49-71, Salisbury University, 2009, p. 528 C Orr, ‘Kiefer Madness’, New Republic 234, No. 19, May 22, 2006, p. 17.9 P Kael, ‘Forward’, Reeling, Warner Books, Boston, 1976, p. 16.10 V Canby, ‘Screen: ‘Death Wish’ Hunts Muggers: The Cast Story of GunmanTakes Dim View of City’, New York Times, July 25, 1974, p. 27.

__________________________________________________________________

11 L Bourzereau, Ultra Violent Movies: From Sam Peckinpah to QuentinTarantino, Citadel Press, Secaucus. 1996, p. 127.12 J McEntee, ‘I’ll give you acts of God’: God, the Father, and Revenge Tragedy inThree Billy Connolly Movies’, Salisbury University, 2009, p. 53.13 Ibid., p. 55.14 R Brand, ‘Identification with Victimhood in Recent Cinema’, Culture, Theory &Critique, No. 2, October 2008, p. 167.15 Ibid., p. 16516 T Schatz, Hollywood Genres: Formula, Filmmaking, and the Studio System,McGraw-Hill, New York, 1981, p. 48.17 V Canby, ‘Screen: ‘Death Wish’ Hunts Muggers: The Cast Story of GunmanTakes Dim View of City’, New York Times, July 25, 1974, p. 27.18 P Kael, ‘Saint Cop’, Deeper Into Movies, Warner Books, Boston, 1973, p. 486.

Bibliography

Bourzereau, L., Ultra Violent Movies: From Sam Peckinpah to Quentin Tarantino.Citadel Press, Secaucus. 1996.

Brand, R., ‘Identification with Victimhood in Recent Cinema’. Culture, Theory &Critique. No. 2, October 2008, pp. 165-181.

Canby, V., ‘Screen: ‘Death Wish’ Hunts Muggers: The Cast Story of GunmanTakes Dim View of City’. New York Times. July 25, 1974.

Conley, D. & Ryvicker, M., ‘Race, Class, and Eyes Upon the Street: Public Space,Social Control, and the Economies of Three Urban Communities’. SociologicalForum. No. 4, December 2001, p. 759., pD’Arcus, B., ‘Protest, Scale, and Publicity: The FBI and the H Rap Brown Act’.Antipode. No. 4, September 2003, pp. 718-741.

Dean-Ruzicka, R., ‘Vengeance, Healing and Justice: Post 9/11 Culture Through theLens of CSI’. Quarterly Review of Film & Video. No. 2, March 2009, pp. 118-130.

Fernandez-Armesto, F., Ideas that Changed the World. Fall River Press, NewYork, 2009.

Kael, P., ‘Forward’. Reeling. Warner Books, Boston, 1976.

—, ‘Saint Cop’. Deeper Into Movies. Warner Books, Boston, 1973.

__________________________________________________________________

Lenihan, J.H., Showdown: Confronting Modern America in the Western Film.University of Chicago Press, Urbana. 1980.

McEntee, J., ‘I’ll give you acts of God’: God, the Father, and Revenge Tragedy inThree Billy Connolly Movies’. Salisbury University, 2009.

McGilligan, P., Robert Altman: Jumping Off the Cliff. St. Martins, New York,1989.

Monaco, J., American Film Now: The People, the Power, the Money, the Movies.Plume, New York, 1978.

Orr, C., ‘Kiefer Madness’. New Republic. No. 19, May 22, 2006.

Schatz, T., Hollywood Genres: Formula, Filmmaking, and the Studio System.McGraw-Hill, New York, 1981.

Yuill, K., ‘Another Take on the Nixon Presidency: The First TherapeuticPresident?’. Journal of Policy History. No. 2, April 2009, pp. 138-162.

William Gombash, III is Professor of Communication at Valencia CommunityCollege in Orlando, Florida, USA. His great love is studying film then passing thatknowledge on to his students.

Maternal Revenge and Redemption in PostfeministRape-Revenge Cinema

Claire Henry

AbstractRecent rape-revenge films such as Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2 (Quentin Tarantino, 2003/2004) and Sympathy for Lady Vengeance (Park Chan-Wook, 2005) display a post-feminist emphasis on maternity, which impacts the nature of their revengenarratives. In these contemporary variations on the 1970s exploitation genre,revenge is never just revenge for rape – the heroine’s construction as ‘mother’ addsan additional layer to raise the stakes and justify her acts of vengeance. At the sametime, her return to motherhood requires a transformative journey of redemption,which results in an ambivalence towards revenge.

Key Words: Revenge, rape, postfeminism, maternal, Kill Bill, Lady Vengeance.

Recent rape-revenge films such as Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2 (Quentin Tarantino,2003/ 2004) and Sympathy for Lady Vengeance (Park Chan-Wook, 2005) display apost-feminist emphasis on maternity, which impacts the nature of their revengenarratives. In these contemporary variations on the 1970s exploitation genre,revenge is never just revenge for rape – the heroine’s construction as ‘mother’ addsan additional layer to raise the stakes and justify her acts of vengeance. At the sametime, her return to motherhood requires a transformative journey of redemption,which results in an ambivalence towards revenge.

While the classic rape-revenge narrative transformed the heroine from victim toavenger, these contemporary variations focus on the heroine ‘becoming mother’.This reverse transformation from avenger to mother is presented as a redemptivejourney in which the former femme fatale (sexual, violent and a neglectful mother)gives up on her vengeance mission when her maternal instincts kick in. Thesatisfying closure that an eye for an eye once brought for rape avengers is nowdisavowed.

1. Kill BillThe premise of Tarantino’s two-volume epic is the revenge by heroine Beatrix

(Uma Thurman) on her five former fellow assassins. Beatrix is raped multipletimes, shot in the head by Bill (David Carradine), betrayed by her fellow assassins,buried alive, and worst of all, separated from her child (whom she believes to bedead). This plethora of injustices is an example of how ‘maternal revengecontinues to be subject to… additional legitimating devices and/or punishment’.1

This gender double standard may partly explain the pressure Tarantino felt from

Maternal Revenge and Redemption

__________________________________________________________________

his audience after Vol. 1 to elaborate on the story in Vol. 2 (giving Beatrix a deepmaternal motivation in addition to the rapes and murder attempts). Kill Bill,particularly Vol. 2, is more than an action, samurai, or Western flick with a basicrevenge plot; it becomes an interesting variation on the rape-revenge flick bylayering a maternal transformation narrative into Tarantino’s genre bricolage.Through the course of this Oedipal epic, our heroine Beatrix does not only takevengeance upon her former colleagues, she metamorphoses from warrior tomother.

Beatrix’s maternal transformation can be summarized by looking at thecontrasting first and last scenes of the epic. Chapter 1 establishes Beatrix as pre-maternal warrior, trashing a domestic space in her fight with redeemed warrior andmother to Nikki, Vernita Green (Vivica A. Fox). With postmodern irony, a primalscene plays out. Vernita is the Mother, penetrated by Beatrix’s knife; Beatrix is theFather, in obvious phallic imagery she withdraws her knife from Vernita’s chestand returns it to the sheath at her hip (emphasized in a close-up); and Nikki(Ambrosia Kelley) and the spectator represent the child who witnesses thisintercourse or act of aggression by the father. For the child/spectator, the openingprimal scene has induced sexual arousal, castration anxiety, and laid the foundationfor an Oedipal drama to play out as the film continues. This scene establishesBeatrix as masculine hero. In the role of the Father, she separates mother and child.

In the Last Chapter of Kill Bill, Beatrix meets her own four year-old, BB (PerlaHaney-Jardine), when she goes to confront Bill. It is only this - meeting her child,whom she believed dead - that can finally disarm Beatrix. She has a second chanceat ‘becoming mother’. She had been castrated; now her child stands before heralive. The motif of castration is iconic in the rape-revenge genre but usuallyappears as the rapists’ punishment. Here it plays out on the body of the mother.The castration anxiety which arguably underpins the genre now takes the form ofthe mother’s loss of her child. Beatrix does not castrate as revenge, she takesrevenge for castration (the removal of her child from her body). The reunion ofmother and child resolves this castration anxiety and takes away her need forrevenge.

The importance to Beatrix of ‘becoming mother’ is reinforced in flashback asshe recounts to Bill the moment when she got a positive result to a pregnancy test.She tells Bill that she is now motivated completely by wanting to protect her child.This resorting to an essentialist assumption about all women having a maternalinstinct rings false within the world of the film. After journeying with Beatrixthrough multiple deaths and resurrections, sharing in her trauma and her toughtraining with Pai Mei (Gordon Liu), and celebrating her triumphant acts ofrevenge, her sudden and extreme sacrifice in changing her life so completelybecause ‘the strip turned blue’ is narratively (and to me, politically) disappointing.A pre-feminist vision of the gendered separation of public/private spheres isnostalgically reinforced.

Claire Henry

__________________________________________________________________

The issue is perhaps that Kill Bill is not just a revenge story, or even a narrativeof resurrection and transformation - Tarantino also seeks to make it a narrative ofredemption. By enforcing redemption, Tarantino affects a sort of reversetransformation, similar to that identified by Jacinda Read in the maternal (proxy)rape-revenge film.2 In maternal avenger films such as In My Daughter’s Name (JudTaylor, 1992) and Eye for an Eye (John Schlesinger, 1996), the mother of the rapevictim undergoes a transformation from mother to aggressor (a variation on theclassic transformation from victim to aggressor). The protagonists in Kill Bill andLady Vengeance undergo the reverse transformation - from aggressor to mother -which is presented as a redemptive journey.

The problem with Beatrix’ redemption from a feminist film theory perspectiveis that it is similar to that of the femme fatale’s limited choices in film noir. Noir is‘often concerned with investigating and establishing the guilt of a woman’3 and shemust be either punished or redeemed for her transgressions as a sexual and violentwoman and a neglectful mother. It is worth keeping in mind here Mary AnnDoane’s arguments that the femme fatale is ‘the antithesis of the maternal’ and nota feminist figure so much as a figure of male fears about feminism.4 However, in apostfeminist context she may be both. The redemption narrative can be read ascharting a contemporary feminist reclamation of maternity, a metaphor for thefeminist movement’s changing position on motherhood. At the same time, theredemption narrative can be read as part of a trend of ‘representations returning…to the idealization of woman in the home, which embodies patriarchal need tocontrol and restrict woman’.5 Post-9/11 American cultural, political, and religiousfactors have likely also helped to determine the femme fatale’s fate here. Thefemme fatale protagonist of Lady Vengeance similarly faces patriarchal andreligious forces pushing her to redemption, but negotiates her designations asmother and sinner (within the narrative and Korean society) differently to Beatrix.

2. Lady VengeanceWhere Lady Vengeance differs from, or extends on, Kill Bill (as well as Park’s

previous revenge films, Old Boy (2003) and Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance (2002))is the heroine’s search for atonement. This was Park’s intention, as he commentedin an interview while working on Lady Vengeance: ‘The third film in the trilogywill be about a character who longs for salvation and atonement rather than anger,vengeance and violence’.6

Lady Vengeance opens with Geum-ja (Yeong-ae Lee) being released fromprison after thirteen years served for the murder of six year-old schoolboy Won-mo(Ji-tae Yu), a crime she was framed for by Mr Baek (Min-sik Choi), whothreatened to kill her newborn daughter if she did not confess. Where Beatrix’srevenge came to an end with her maternal redemption, Geum-ja rejects theredemption offered to her by a Christian minister and seeks redemption her ownway - via vengeance on evil child killer Mr Baek.

__________________________________________________________________

Before the introduction of her daughter Jenny (Yea-young Kwon), there areseveral ways Geum-ja is constructed as mother. She takes on a maternal role inprison, donating a kidney to one fellow inmate, and poisoning a rapist in acalculated act of proxy vengeance for another. The only actual act of rape-revengeby Geum-ja is against this female rapist in prison, reflecting a postfeministperspective on rape, which asserts that men are not the enemy and that women canrape too. Geum-ja’s gradual poisoning of the rapist is a maternal, benevolent act,saving her fellow inmate from further abuse; her actions are not impulsive,emotional, or a selfishly motivated personal vendetta.

A key turning point occurs in the vengeance narrative when Geum-ja realisesthat Mr Baek continued to kill children while she was in prison. She gatherstogether the parents of all the victims, screens videos of their children being killed,and conducts a community meeting to decide how to deal with Mr Baek. Typicalof vengeance cinema, the aggrieved decide they cannot place their faith in the lawand choose violent retribution. Pragmatically dressed in raincoats, the parents sit ina row and wait their turn, each careful not to go too far and kill Mr Baek untileveryone has had a piece of him. Our heroine mobilizes the community to takerevenge on Mr Baek, but communal revenge is linked with premeditation andchallenged as a valid response through the ethical and spiritual questions raised.The tone of the following scene, in which the parents hold a birthday celebrationfor their dead children, hardly feels like a celebration. This reflects director Park’sperspective on vengeance, for while he understands it is a strong human desire anddifficult to resist, he states that vengeance can never be justified.7 Taking thepleasure or satisfaction out of the act of revenge underscores this moral point,questioning the righteousness of their act.

For Park, the victim to aggressor transformation (the transformation whichunderpins rape-revenge) produces a sense of guilt, as opposed to a sense of justice,triumph, empowerment, righteousness, or balance restored through an eye for aneye. Park describes all of his protagonists in the revenge trilogy as suffering from asense of guilt, but it is in this third film with a female protagonist that the theme ismore fully explored, and guilt is linked to the heroine’s maternity and femininity.

The guilt attributed to Park’s avengers is exacerbated in Geum-ja’s case by herconstruction as mother, reflecting Jacinda Read’s analysis of earlier Hollywoodmaternal avengers: ‘these narratives constantly work to construct the mother not asmorally justified but as guilty’.8 Read attributes this construction to the deploymentof the codes and conventions of classic melodrama and its narrative drive thatpushes women back into the domestic sphere of home and family, legitimating abacklash politics.9 Park appears to be drawing on (or playing on) the tradition ofSouth Korean melodramas in which ‘motifs of Christian redemption are mobilizedin ambivalent narrations of imperilled and sometimes fallen femininity’.10 It isdifficult to pin down an origin for the construction of Geum-ja as guilty becausethe cultural archetypes of the madonna versus the slut, the self-sacrificing mother

Claire Henry

__________________________________________________________________

versus the neglectful working mother, and the femme fatale in need of redemption,are so prevalent and film buff Park has clearly drawn on a range of these well-wornimages in creating Geum-ja.

The film can considered as part of what Kim Kyung Hyun calls ‘TheRemasculinization of Korean Cinema’ in his 2004 book of the same name. Kimfinds that in contemporary Korean films by directors such as Kim Ki-duk, womenare still objects ‘predicated on the patented image of mother and whore’.11 Theauthor asks: ‘Could a story ever be conceived in Korean cinema that focuses on aself-centering woman who is freed from her duties as a mother or a wife, withoutframing her in the convention of a vamp?’12 Park does not conceive of such a storywith Lady Vengeance, in fact the persistent archetypes are supported by Park’sconcept of gendered vengeance. He describes the male vengeance in Sympathy forMr. Vengeance and Old Boy (the other two films in the trilogy) as impulsive,messy, and based on emotion, whereas Geum-ja’s vengeance is cold andcalculated, based on intellect more than emotion.13 Park condemns acts ofvengeance as ‘idiotic’ but sees value in Geum-ja’s motivation of redemption (incontrast to the motivations of the male protagonists in the first two films). Hewanted to go against stereotypes of women as emotional or acting on emotion, butconsequently invokes stereotypes of the cruel mother or beautiful ice queen bitch,which Damon Smith sees evoked ‘in terms of the color palette and the themes ofice - the iciness of the revenge impulse paired with white, snow, and the idea ofpurity. All of these revolve around the ways women have always beencharacterized as particularly catty and vengeful’.14

The spectator is positioned to judge Geum-ja’s success (redemption) or failure(guilt) by alignment with the victims - Geum-ja’s daughter, Jenny, and to a lesserextent, the ghost of Won-mo. Geum-ja feels guilt for her role in Won-mo’s deathbut the focus within the narrative is the sin of abandoning her daughter. Via theabandoned daughter (the victim) Geum-ja is made to answer for this sin. Jenny tagsalong as Geum-ja prepares her revenge, playing witness to her choices and actions,as do we the spectators. She confronts her mother in a letter, insisting that sheapologize, and Geum-ja’s reply (read to Jenny in Korean and translated intoEnglish by Mr Baek) illustrates the dynamic between mother, daughter, andspectator.

Far from the reunion with her daughter ending her revenge mission (as in KillBill), this face-to-face encounter demonstrates that Geum-ja will pursue herrevenge mission (and continue to try to justify it) even at the cost of alienating thechild and spectator. However the face-to-face encounter between Geum-ja and MrBaek in the following scene, which also heavily uses looks to camera, depictsGeum-ja unable to bring herself to take her long-awaited vengeance and shoothim.15 While she is battling out her internal conflict, Mr Baek’s phone rings,leading Geum-ja to find the children’s charms he has collected. This is the turningpoint in which her personal vendetta ends and she hands over the job of revenge to

__________________________________________________________________

the aggrieved collective. This pushing away of Jenny/the spectator in Geum-ja’sletter precipitates the need to see her maternal redemption, her self-sacrifice inhelping other mourning parents take revenge. While at this point the spectator maystill desire to see Mr Baek punished, we are not invested in seeing Geum-japersonally take the pleasure in it.

The spectator’s (ethical) relationship to the protagonist is fostered through theseface-to-face encounters. In analysing the films of Kim Ki-duk, Steve Choe drawson Emmanuel Levinas, for whom ‘the question of ethics is emblemized by theface-to-face encounter, a moment that discloses to the I the infinite separationbetween itself and other’.16 This separation is played out visually and narratively inthe scene when Geum-ja reads her letter. It is a potentially traumatic separation forthe daughter/spectator as it entails an acknowledgement of independence betweenself and other, mother and child, protagonist and spectator. Jenny/the spectator isinvited to make ethical judgement when she comes face-to-face with Geum-ja, andagain when Geum-ja is face-to-face with Mr Baek and finds that she cannot killhim. No matter if vengeance is desired so strongly that one dreams about it (asGeum-ja does), its justification is ethically questioned - perhaps ethicallyimpossible - in a face-to-face encounter.

Direct to camera looks are frequent in Lady Vengeance and the other two filmsin Park Chan-wook’s revenge trilogy, particularly by the protagonists. As in thescene discussed above, this technique invites the spectator into an ethicalintersubjective relationship with the protagonist and to engage with themes ofrevenge and redemption. Where Kill Bill uses Hollywood film language to directthe spectator to identify with the protagonist, Lady Vengeance uses direct addressto align you with the child who is brought face-to-face with Geum-ja in theirreunion, and like Jenny, the spectator seeks justification and atonement fromGeum-ja. The way that the face is exposed and vulnerable and challenging in theseface-to-face looks unsettles the spectatorial desire for vengeance, making therevenge mission more ethically complex.

The ethical complexity of revenge in Lady Vengeance, like the emphasis on thecyclical nature of revenge in Kill Bill, contributes to the image of the maternalavenger as being in need of redemption. In the 1980s and 1990s proxy maternalavenger films, the maternal layer added a new right ideology of family values intothe genre and diverted the subversive feminist politics seen in other rape-revenge.17

As my discussion of Kill Bill and Lady Vengeance has sought to demonstrate, thisideological project has been perpetuated in twenty-first century articulations of thegenre.

Claire Henry

__________________________________________________________________

1 J Read, The New Avengers: Feminism, Femininity, and the Rape-Revenge Cycle,Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2000, p. 236.2 Ibid., 2000, pp. 205-40.3 Ibid., 2000, 221.4 MA Doane, Femmes Fatales: Feminism, Film Theory, Psychoanalysis,Routledge, London, 1991, p. 2.5 EA Kaplan, Motherhood and Representation: The Mother in Popular Culture andMelodrama, Routledge, London, 1992, p. 215.6 R Cline, ‘Humour in Revenge: A Chat with Korean Filmmaker Park Chan-wook’,Shadows on the Wall, 2004. Accessed 15/01/2010, http://www.shadows.wall.net/features/sw-park1.htm, p. 1.7 P Chan-wook, Sympathy for Lady Vengeance, DVD interview.8 Read, op. cit., 2000, p. 226.9 Read, op. cit., 2000, p. 18.10 N Abelmann & K McHugh, ‘Introduction: Gender, Genre, and Nation’, SouthKorean Golden Age Melodrama: Gender, Genre, and National Cinema, WayneState University Press, Detroit, Michigan, 2005, p. 9.11 KH Kim, The Remasculinization of Korean Cinema, Duke University Press,Durham and London, 2004, p. 9.12 Ibid., 2004, p. 9.13 P Chan-wook, Sympathy for Lady Vengeance (Park Chan-Wook, 2005), DVDinterview.14 D Smith, ‘Acts of Revenge: Director Park Chan-wook Discusses LadyVengeance and More’, Bright Lights Film Journal, Iss. 53, August 2006. Accessed19/3/2010. http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/53/parkiv.php15 Note that Mr Baek does not undergo any such confrontation with his conscience.Despite that Geum-ja played a lesser role in the death of Won-mo, the filmcontinues the common trope in patriarchy, postfeminism, psychoanalysis, film noirand melodrama, of directing anger and blame toward the mother figure and seekingher redemption.16 S Choe, ‘Kim Ki-duk’s Cinema of Cruelty: Ethics and Spectatorship in theGlobal Economy,’ Positions, Vol. 15 iss. 1, 2007, p. 66.17 Read, op. cit., 2000, p. 216.

Bibliography

Abelmann, N. & Choi, J., ‘‘Just Because’: Comedy, Melodrama and YouthViolence in Attack The Gas Station’. New Korean Cinema. Edinburgh UniversityPress, Edinburgh, 2005.

__________________________________________________________________

Abelmann, N. & McHugh, K., ‘Introduction: Gender, Genre, and Nation’. SouthKorean Golden Age Melodrama: Gender, Genre, and National Cinema. WayneState University Press, Detroit, Michigan, 2005.

An, J., ‘Screening the Redemption; Christianity in Korean Melodrama’. SouthKorean Golden Age Melodrama: Gender, Genre, and National Cinema. WayneState University Press, Detroit, Michigan, 2005.

Choe, S., ‘Kim Ki-duk’s Cinema of Cruelty: Ethics and Spectatorship in the GlobalEconomy’. Positions. Vol. 15, Iss. 1, 2007, pp. 65-90.

Cline, R., ‘Humour in Revenge: A Chat with Korean Filmmaker Park Chan-wook’.Shadows on the Wall. 2004. Accessed 15/01/2010, http://www.shadows.wall.net/features/sw-park1.htm.

Coulthard, L., ‘Killing Bill: Rethinking Feminism and Film Violence’.Interrogating Post-Feminism: Gender and the Politics of Popular Culture. DukeUniversity Press, New York, 2007.

Doane, M.A., Femmes Fatales: Feminism, Film Theory, Psychoanalysis.Routledge, London, 1991.

Forna, A., Mother of All Myths: How Society Moulds and Constrains Mothers.HarperCollins, London, 1998.

Gombeaud, A., ‘Joint Security Area’. The Cinema of Japan and Korea. WallflowerPress, London, 2004.

Kaplan, E.A., Motherhood and Representation: The Mother in Popular Cultureand Melodrama. Routledge, London, 1992.

Kim, K.H., The Remasculinization of Korean Cinema. Duke University Press,Durham and London, 2004.

Le Cain, M., ‘Tarantino and the Vengeful Ghosts of Cinema.’ Senses of Cinema,vol. 32, July-Sept 2004. Accessed 19/3/2010. http://archive.sensesofcinema.com/contents/04/32/tarantino.html.

Lee, H., Contemporary Korean Cinema: Identity, Culture and Politics.Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2000.

Claire Henry

__________________________________________________________________

Read, J., The New Avengers: Feminism, Femininity, and the Rape-Revenge Cycle.Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2000.

Schwarzbaum, L., ‘Sweet Revenge (Lady Vengeance)’. Entertainment Weekly. Iss.877, May 19 2006, p. 58.

Smith, D., ‘Acts of Revenge: Director Park Chan-wook Discusses Lady Vengeanceand More’. Bright Lights Film Journal. Iss. 53, August 2006. Accessed 19/3/2010.http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/53/parkiv.php

Filmography

Eye for an Eye (John Schlesinger, 1996).

In My Daughter’s Name (Jud Taylor, 1992).

Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2 (Quentin Tarantino, 2003/2004).

Sympathy for Lady Vengeance (Park Chan-Wook, 2005).

Claire Henry is a PhD candidate in Film Studies at Anglia Ruskin University,Cambridge, UK, writing her doctoral thesis on contemporary rape-revenge cinema.

Revenge as Cultural Catharsis inMoya Henderson’s Opera Lindy

Timothy McKenry

AbstractThe death, during a camping trip in central Australia, of the nine-week-old baby,Azaria Chamberlain, and the subsequent trial, imprisonment and eventualexoneration of her mother, Lindy, for the murder of the child was a seminal eventin recent Australian social history. The issues raised by this event, includingsexism, racism, sectarianism and the abuse of power, left deep scars on theAustralian psyche as the reaction of the Australian public throughout the incidentdiverged from the prevailing view of Australian identity as one characterised by‘mate-ship’, egalitarianism, and a ‘fair-go’. This paper examines how MoyaHenderson’s opera Lindy, functions not only to tell and reinterpret the storythrough a fragmented postmodern narrative, but also as an act of ‘cultural revenge’.In celebrating this retelling of the story through opera, one segment of Australiansociety is given the opportunity to punish, marginalise and re-educate another.Through an examination of the circumstances surrounding the commissioning anddevelopment of the opera, structural aspects of the narrative style employed in theopera, and the critical reception of the opera, the paper posits that Lindy representsa cultural tool that enables a catharsis through vengeance.

Key Words: Opera, culture, identity, Australia.

1. The Chamberlain Case and Australian IdentityThe death, during a 1980 camping trip in central Australia of the nine-week-old

baby, Azaria Chamberlain, and the subsequent trial, imprisonment and eventualexoneration of her mother, Lindy, for the murder of the child was a seminal eventin recent Australian social history. The issues raised by this event, includingsexism, racism, sectarianism and the abuse of power, left deep scars on theAustralian psyche as the reaction of the Australian public throughout the incidentdiverged from the prevailing view of Australian identity as one characterised by‘mate-ship’, egalitarianism, and a ‘fair-go’. Moya Henderson’s opera, Lindy, is oneof several portrayals of the incident that, along with the books (both subsequentlymade into films1) Evil Angels and Through My Eyes, serves a purpose beyondmerely documenting an event in recent Australian history. The book Evil Angels byJohn Bryson, first published in 1985 while Lindy Chamberlain was still in prison,presented a summary of the events surrounding the case and helped sway publicopinion in her favour. This, along with the discovery of new evidence thatsupported Lindy’s version of events2, led to her release from prison. The film

Revenge as Cultural Catharsis in Moya Henderson’s Opera Lindy

__________________________________________________________________

adaptation of this book followed in 1988 and, with Lindy’s account of the event inher autobiography, Through My Eyes, functioned to humanise her in the eyes of theAustralian public. Both represent an attempt to construct a more positive corporatememory of the event. In spite of these attempts, significant public figures includingjournalist Derryn Hinch3 and the Attorney General who eventually enabled herrelease from prison, Marshall Perron,4 continue to express doubts about herinnocence.5

The Chamberlain case has generated much scholarship devoted to the legal andsocial implications of the episode, and academics from a range of disciplines havehighlighted the significance of the case to issues of Australian identity. Literarycritic Kerryn Goldsworthy interprets the initial public reaction to LindyChamberlain as an example of a Madonna-Whore complex writ large in theAustralian community. In vocally proclaiming her innocence, rather than deferringto her husband or male defence council to speak for her; in failing to embodysocietal expectations of a grieving mother in her dress and demeanour; and bybecoming pregnant prior to her trial in 1982, Goldsworthy suggests that Lindy‘represented for Australian society a disturbing and unresolvable contradiction andtherefore a threat to complacently held beliefs.’6 Goldsworthy goes on to assertthat, regardless of the content of the prosecution’s case against her, had Lindyconformed to an accepted norm of Australian womanhood, she would haveavoided imprisonment.7

Culture theorist Jennifer Craik suggests the case draws attention to fault lines inthe Australian community related to race. In Blind Spot or Black Hole inAustralian Cultural Memory?, Craik suggests the case ‘exacerbated the nascentdebate about indigenous rights and integrity of indigenous culture that wascirculating at the time.’8 Evidence given by Indigenous trackers that confirmedLindy’s story that a dingo was responsible for Azaria’s death, but contradictedwhite canine ‘experts’ who claimed that dingoes were incapable (in terms ofbehaviour and physiology) of harming humans was at first ridiculed and laterignored. The treatment of these witnesses revealed that while the referendum of19679 may have been seen as endowing Indigenous Australians with the legalitiesof ‘personhood’, this did not extend to a social agency that enabled them tochallenge the authority of a white man.

In Innocence Regained, scholar and theologian Norman Young concludes thatthe combination of a bigoted public and malaise bordering on corruption inAustralia’s law enforcement and legal institutions were responsible for the abusesthat Lindy Chamberlain suffered:

The failures in the legal system, the multitudinous forensicerrors, the public’s hostility, and the media’s irresponsiblereporting all resulted from a prejudicial disbelief in the dingostory and a ready acceptance of the Chamberlain’s guilt.10

Timothy McKenry

__________________________________________________________________

Young also suggests that in being members of a non-mainstream religion (Seventh-day Adventist), Lindy and her husband Michael were gleefully cast as members ofa cult by the Australian community.11 Claims that the name Azaria meant ‘sacrificein the wilderness,’12 and that Lindy had murdered her daughter by slashing herthroat with a pair of nail scissors as a religious atonement were readily reported inthe media and believed by a significant portion of the public. The case revealed anAustralian community characterised by a suspicion of outsiders and an intoleranceof difference, standing in stark contrast to prevailing positive views of Australianidentity: the literature points to a disjunction between what Australian society isand what it claims to be.

2. Composing Lindy: 1991 to 2002It was into this context that, in 1991, composer Moya Henderson and librettist

Judith Rodriguez commenced a commission from Opera Australia to compose anopera based on the event. The score of the opera was not completed until 1997 and,with the exception of two scenes that were staged in a ‘workshop’ performance in1994, the opera was not performed until 2002. The five-year gap between thecompletion of the opera and its first performance is accounted for in differentways: Janet Healey, the author of the notes that accompany the recording of the2002 production of the opera, cites neglect, suggesting the opera needed to be‘rescued’ from a filing cabinet by the then new music director of Opera Australia,Simone Young;13 journalist Joyce Morgan points to a more tumultuous journey tothe stage revealing in a 2002 article for The Age newspaper that first the director,Ros Haring, and then the conductor Richard Gill resigned from the production. Gillultimately agreed to return, but cited overwhelming ‘argy-bargy and to-ing and fro-ing’ as the reason for his initial departure, and the ‘significance’ of the piece as thereason for his return.14

Example 1: The Structure of Lindy – 1997 Score vs. the 2002 Production1997 Score 2002 ProductionAct I Act 1Prologue: The Mother i. Dingoi. The Rock ii. Motherii. The Dingo iii. Killiii. The Kill iv. Blood

Act II v. Trialiv. The Blood Act IIv. The Trial i. Jacket

Act III ii. Inquiryvi. The Jacketvii. The Inquiry

__________________________________________________________________

Example 1 shows the removal of the scene The Rock and the re-ordering andmerging of Acts I and II. In addition there are excisions, some significant, fromevery scene apart from Mother. Neither the opening nor the ending intended by the1997 score remains intact: in the 2002 production, an aria15 from the end of scenevi replaces the original ending of the opera. The difficulties revealed by Morgan,along with the changes shown in example 1, suggest that the ultimate realisation ofthe opera represents a corporate creative vision rather than one that resulted from acomposer and librettist working in isolation. Furthermore, many of the alterationsfrom 1997 to 2002 are revealing in understanding the cultural instrument that Lindyultimately functions as.

3. The Construction of Lindy: An Instrument of RevengeWhile opera has a long tradition of using revenge as a plot device, often in a

manner that renders it a pivotal aspect of the drama, it is not the plot of Lindy thatconstitutes the vengeful act, but rather the mode of storytelling; it is the choicesmade by the creators and the motivations behind the opera itself that reveal it as aninstrument of revenge. Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan of 1651 provides a succinctdefinition of revenge: ‘desire, by doing hurt to another, to make him condemnsome fact of his own,’.16 Acts of vengeance therefore, are motivated not merely bya desire to punish or inflict harm, but also by a desire to re-educate the offendingparty: Lindy seeks both to punish those responsible for victimising theChamberlains via straightforward negative characterisation and parody, and toengender a re-imagining of Australian society firstly by presenting aninterpretation of events that removes any doubt as to the veracity of the guilt of thedingo, and secondly by requiring its audience to condemn those failings of theAustralian psyche that led to this miscarriage of justice.

Act I of Lindy interprets the Chamberlain case through a fragmented narrativethat presents the timing of events in a non-linear manner: the first scene of the2002 production, Dingo, shows Lindy and her family in 1980 admiring Indigenousrock paintings at Uluru hours prior to Azaria’s death; the second scene, Mother,jumps forward to 1986 to show Lindy, now in prison, being told of the discoveryof Azaria’s matinee jacket: the new evidence that secures her release; the thirdscene, Kill, returns to 1980 to depict Azaria’s death; and the fourth and fifthscenes, Blood and Trial, show events leading up to and including the 1982 murdertrial. Act II employs a linear narrative, charting Lindy’s release from prison to theinquest where she is exonerated.

Non-linear time aside, the storytelling seeks to be verismatic with a librettoreplete with Australian accent and idiom, and courtroom scenes feature text takendirectly from trial and inquest transcripts. This attempt at dramatic realism is offsetby the use of seven singers dressed as dingoes who function as a kind of Greekchorus, commenting on events and acting alternately as a ‘hungry’ media pack anda condemning public. The dingo chorus works to regularly remind the audience of

Timothy McKenry

__________________________________________________________________

the vilification suffered by Lindy. In scene ii, Mother, the chorus provide a seriesof contemporary readings of the case, quite independent of the action of the scene.For example, the chorus asks the audience to ‘remember it was ‘sacrifice in thewilderness’’ when Lindy is questioned as to why she was at Uluru. The dingo packaccentuates, through straightforward reprise, the motivation of the prosecutingcouncil, the antagonist of the opera, who is a composite character based on severallawyers. This works to reinforce the judiciary’s bias against Lindy and highlightsthe state’s pragmatism in seeking to secure a conviction regardless of the weaknessof the case.

The opera also lambasts the police, depicting them as buffoons whoseincompetence contaminates evidence. This is achieved through a pseudo-pantomime where a forensics police sergeant makes an exaggerated play of puttingon plastic gloves to handle Azaria’s matinee jacket, only to drop everything on theground a moment later. The Australian public’s treatment of Lindy is highlightedin a brief vignette that interrupts the static music setting of the trial transcript, justprior to the judgement against Lindy in scene v. The courtroom is brieflytransformed into a fancy-dress ball where every dancing couple is disguised asMichael and Lindy Chamberlain; each Lindy is dressed to depict a grotesqueexaggeration of her pregnancy and the vignette ends with a drunk proclaiming in athick Australian accent: life’ll be fuckin’ awful if Lindy gets off the hook! Indrawing attention to Australia’s beer-drinking culture and in using an accenttypically associated with rural and working-class Australians, the opera is seekingto condemn the ‘ocker’17 stereotype.

As a contrast to these negative depictions, the opera heaps praise on thecharacter of Lindy, depicting her as a courageous and forthright woman and givingher the opportunity, through dialogue with her husband, to explain the behavioursthat allowed the media and public to so easily paint her as a cold-hearted murderer(such as filing her nails during her murder trial and wearing clothes seen asinappropriate for a grieving mother). The opera also presents the defence council ina positive light and the composer openly states that in giving the role to a woman(Lindy’s lawyers were all men) she is translating ‘expectations for future genderequality into the present.’18

4. Honing the InstrumentThe revenge enacted through negative characterisations of the ‘ocker’

Australian public, the media, the police and the judiciary ultimately creates aninterpretation of the story that, like the books and film before it, marginalises and‘punishes’ anyone who would continue disagree with Lindy’s innocence. Notsurprisingly, the Australian reception of the opera was shaped as much by thesensitivities surrounding the Chamberlain case as by an assessment of theaesthetics of the piece. Critic Peter McCallum writing for the Sydney MorningHerald typifies the Australian response. Apart from expressing some discomfort

__________________________________________________________________

about the structure of the opera, McCallum’s review presents a positive assessmentof the piece and suggests it is an ‘uncomfortable triumph...in the mirror it holds upto us.’19 Australian David Gyger, reviewing Lindy in Opera Canada, notes thepiece’s pro-Lindy stance, but also raises concerns about the dramatic effectivenessof the opera, claiming that aspects of the story are unstageable and that the scenesin the jail and courtroom are lacking physicality, requiring audience interest to ‘bemaintained through an eloquence not achieved in the libretto.’20 Non-Australianreviewer, Harvey Steiman, perhaps unencumbered by a cultural connection to theevents of the opera, is somewhat more critical: he suggests the opera is one-dimensional; that the ‘composer didn’t trust her music to carry a scene for long;’and that the supporting characters are weakly drawn: ‘there is little emotionaldrama because the mob is only a caricature.’21

Considering each critic cites the structure of Lindy as a weakness, anexamination of the rationale behind the structural changes from the 1997 score to2002 production is warranted. This examination reveals that the 2002 production isthe result of cutting, altering and re-ordering aspects of the 1997 score: very littlenew material is added. It can be posited that the choice of what was cut and altereddemonstrates not simply a desire to shorten the opera, but also a desire to shape aspecific reading of the material. For example, the 1997 score features twoIndigenous characters, Nuwe Ninyintirri and Barbara Tjikadu, based on thetrackers who gave evidence supporting Lindy’s version of events that was laterignored. These characters are missing from the 2002 production, but havesignificant roles in the 1997 score. In The Rock, the voices of Nuwe and Barbarafunction as the ‘spirit’ of Uluru: Nuwe sings a passage that uses Indigenouslanguage and features a descending melodic contour commonly associated withsome Indigenous Australian repertoires.22

Example 2: The Rock, Nuwe – vocal line23, bars 152-159, 1997 score.

In The Inquiry, Barbara and Nuwe present evidence in person (in the 2002production, the defence council quotes an abridged version of this evidence) and alively confrontation between Barbara and the prosecuting council ensues (anexchanged based on an actual transcript). Finally, Barbara and Nuwe feature in the

Timothy McKenry

__________________________________________________________________

original ending of the opera, immediately prior to a final duet between Lindy andMichael Chamberlain. Here, the two Indigenous trackers sing of the shortcomingsof the white-man’s law versus what they claim is the ‘grounded reality’ ofIndigenous law: White people’s law of paper/not much good to us/not much goodto Lindy: paper thin!24

Particularly in the final scene, the inclusion of these characters would havebroken up a static passage of exposition by the defence council and perhapsmitigated some of the flaws identified by those critiquing the opera. While thecreators25 of the opera have not made public references to the rationale behindthese changes, sensitivities related to the depiction of Indigenous people and theappropriation of Indigenous language and musical rhetoric most likely influencedthe decision. There is a tradition in Australian art music of appropriatingIndigenous music in an attempt to forge an ‘Australian’ musical identity. Thediscourse that surrounds this repertoire has, particularly over the last twenty years,been scathing of white composers who appropriate actual Indigenous music orattempt to write pseudo-Indigenous music. In addition, the depiction of Indigenouscharacters would have been problematic for the opera company. The roles writtenfor Nuwe and Barbara require trained opera singers: in the absence of classicallytrained Indigenous singers, Opera Australia would have needed to resort to non-Indigenous singers made up to appear Aboriginal. Such a gross example of culturalinsensitivity would have undercut the moral authority of the piece and the excisionof these sections, while perhaps weakening the dramatic effectiveness of the piece,hones the opera as an instrument of revenge.

5. ConclusionIn seeking to operate as an instrument of vengeance, the opera Lindy serves a

cultural purpose that transcends simple storytelling or entertainment. Thelambasting of those responsible for Lindy’s ordeal is representative of‘punishment’ being meted out to the ‘deserving’; the persistently noblecharacterisation of Lindy and the defence council represents an attempt to createnew ‘correct’ cultural memories of the event. The transformation of the opera from1997 to 2002 also highlights a deliberate self-censoring with regard to culturallysensitive Indigenous issues: an instrument of vengeance cannot be ‘tarred with thesame brush’ as that which it seeks to punish. In spite of what some reviewers sawas the dramatic flaws in the work, the piece ultimately provides Australian culturewith a catharsis: a means of incorporating the event into a corporate culturalmemory with ‘justice’ not only for Lindy, but also for those aggrieved by what theevent revealed about Australian society in the 1980s.

__________________________________________________________________

1 The 1983 film, Who Killed Baby Azaria? predates the portrayals listed here. Thisfilm is a reflection of contemporary public opinion during Lindy Chamberlain’smurder trial and aligns itself with the later debunked prosecution case.2 Namely Azaria Chamberlain’s matinee jacket, discovered at the base of Uluru in1986.3 Email correspondence with Derryn Hinch, 25 May 2010.4 Perron later became Chief Minister of the Northern Territory5‘Premiers Past – Michael Perron’, Verbatim, radio program, Radio National,broadcast 16 July 2005.6 K Goldsworthy, ‘Martyr to Her Sex’, The Chamberlain Case: Nation, Law,Memory, Australian Scholarly Publishing, North Melbourne, 2009, p. 38.7 Goldsworthy, p. 38.8 J Craik, ‘The Azaria Chamberlain Case: Blind Spot or Black Hole in AustralianCultural Memory?’, in The Chamberlain Case: Nation, Law, Memory, AustralianScholarly Publishing, North Melbourne, 2009, p. 273.9 The 1967 referendum enabled changes to the Australian Constitution that broughtIndigenous people under the auspices of Federal law and enabled them to becounted in the national census. Over 90% of Australians voted in favour of thechanges.10 N Young, Innocence Regained: The Fight to Free Lindy Chamberlain, TheFederation Press, Sydney, 1989, p. 286.11 Young, p. 283.12 J Bryson, ‘Against the Tactician’, The Chamberlain Case: Nation, Law,Memory, Australian Scholarly Publishing, North Melbourne, 2009, p. 278.13 J Healey, [CD Liner Notes], Moya Henderson’s Lindy, ABC Classics, 2005, p.14.14 J Morgan, ‘Rock Opera’, The Age, http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/10/26/1035504923144.html, 26 October 2002. Accessed 10 May 2010.15 The final aria of the 2002 production is sung by Lindy and is titled My FamilyStands Steadfast to Receive Me.16 T Hobbes, Leviathan, Dent, London, 1914, p. 26.17 ‘Ocker’ is an Australian colloquial term that refers to an individual whose speechand behaviour is uncultured. Depending on the user, the term is employed in both apejorative and a positive manner: for some it is an insult, for others a ‘badge ofhonour’.18 M Henderson, ‘The Composer ‘on the Spot’ about Lindy’, [CD Liner Notes],Moya Henderson’s Lindy, ABC Classics, 2005, p. 8.19 P McCallum, ‘Lindy, Opera Australia’, Sydney Morning Herald, http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/10/27/1035683304577.html, 28 October 2002, Accessed10 May 2010.

Timothy McKenry

__________________________________________________________________

20 D Gyger, ‘International: Australia – Sydney [Opera Review]’, Opera Canada,vol. 44:1:174, 2003, p. 40-41.21 H Steiman, ‘International Opera Review: Lindy’, Seen and Heard International,http://www.musicweb-international.com/SandH/2002/Aug02/lindy.html, 08/2002,(accessed 10 May 2010).22 N Drury, Making Australian Society: Music and Musicians, Thomas NelsonAustralia, West Melbourne, 1980, p. 50.23 Anangu: an Indigenous people of Central Australia; Irititja: an AnanguDreamtime reference related to the stories and lore of the Dreaming; Tjukurpa: anAnangu Dreamtime reference relating to traditions of etiquette and law.24 M Henderson & J Rodriquez, Lindy, [Unpublished Music Score] 1997, scene vii,bar 883.25 Remembering that the ultimate structure of the opera was the result of acollaborative effort extending beyond composer and librettist.

Bibliography

Bryson, J., ‘Against the Tactician’. The Chamberlain Case: Nation, Law, Memory.Australian Scholarly Publishing, North Melbourne, 2009.

Craik, J., ‘The Azaria Chamberlain Case: Blind Spot or Black Hole in AustralianCultural Memory?’. The Chamberlain Case: Nation, Law, Memory. AustralianScholarly Publishing, North Melbourne, 2009.

Drury, N., Making Australian Society: Music and Musicians. Thomas NelsonAustralia, West Melbourne, 1980.

Goldsworthy, K., ‘Martyr to Her Sex’. The Chamberlain Case: Nation, Law,Memory. Australian Scholarly Publishing, North Melbourne, 2009, pp. 34-38.

Gyger, D., ‘International: Australia – Sydney [Opera Review]’. Opera Canada,Vol. 44:1:174, 2003, pp. 40-41.

Healey, J., [CD Liner Notes], Moya Henderson’s Lindy. ABC Classics, 2005.

Henderson M. & Rodriquez, J., Lindy. [Unpublished Music Score], 1997.

Henderson, M., ‘The Composer ‘on the Spot’ about Lindy’. [CD Liner Notes].Moya Henderson’s Lindy. ABC Classics, 2005, pp. 7-9.

Hobbes, T., Leviathan. Dent, London, 1914.

__________________________________________________________________

McCallum, P., ‘Lindy, Opera Australia’, Sydney Morning Herald,http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/10/27/1035683304577.html, 28 October2002, Accessed 10 May 2010.

Morgan, J., ‘Rock Opera’, The Age, http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/10/26/1035504923144.html, 26 October 2002, Accessed 10 May 2010.

Steiman, H. ‘International Opera Review: Lindy’. Seen and Heard International,http://www.musicweb-international.com/SandH/2002/Aug02/ lindy.htm, 2002,Accessed 10 May 2010.

Young, N., Innocence Regained: The Fight to Free Lindy Chamberlain. TheFederation Press, Sydney, 1989.

Timothy McKenry is lecturer in music at the Australian Catholic University. Hisresearch interests include an examination of the narratives used to account for stylechange in contemporary art music, Australian art music and post common-practicetonal functions.

PART IV

Various Perspectives on Revenge

The Writer Seeking Vengeance: Blognovelism and ItsRelationship with Literary Critics

Daniel Escandell Montiel

AbstractDigital literature creates new ways of dialogue between the writer and the readers,both ‘common’ readers and those who see themselves as ‘the chosen ones’: theliterary critics. A case in point is that of the Argentinean writer Hernán Casciari,who wrote the blognovel Más respeto que soy tu madre. This new way of creatinga story within the field of digital literature soon made an impact among Spanishliterary critics, especially on one nicknamed Borjamari, in his very own blog. Fromhis weblog Borjamari published an article about the abovementioned blognoveland its then unknown author. He harshly criticised the author’s work, and tried touncover the masquerade. Casciari took revenge of his not-so-correct asseverationsand accusations about the not yet revealed real writer of the blognovel: the criticbecame a character in his story, being portrayed as a homosexual embalmer or,more specifically, as a beautician in a funeral parlour who displays signs of mentalillness, thereby spoofing the literary critic, specialized in weblogs. In this paper, wetake this example as the starting point to study the approach of the writer in hispersonal revenge against this critic in the context of the digital world and revenge,therefore analysing this new relationship among writers, readers and critics in athree-way charade between blogs into the cyberspace.

Key Words: Hernán Casciari, blognovel, blogfiction, literary critics, Más respetoque soy tu madre.

The relationships established between writers and literary critics have beencharacterized, as in any other artistic expression, by the disagreements which havearisen between the creative front (without forgetting the difference of opinionamong writers themselves) and those who are professional critics, especially asliterary criticism gained importance in the industrialization of the literary market.

As a consequence of the negative criticism, or of those critiques perceived asnegative, authors have employed those resources available to get their own backfor what they did not like, usually focusing on the critic himself, more than on hisdiscourse. Of course, the writer’s main tool has been his pen, canalized by meansof new literary works or the written press, given the high number of authors whoare also journalists or the journalists who pretend to be men of letters. Although thetranscendence of the confrontation between author and critic is made more obviousin other cultural industries, literature is not oblivious to these circumstances and,even if they may be more popular in the theatre world, poets and novelists have

The Writer Seeking Vengeance

__________________________________________________________________

also had much to say against their critics, whether they belonged to their ownprofession, or they were professional critics, with confrontations and oppositionsthat were either ignored or magnified by the studies of the history of literature.

The exchange of rude words or demonstrations of wit derived from thesecircumstances proves of no interest in most cases, despite illustrious examples suchas the dialectic scuffle between Quevedo and Góngora in the Spanish Golden Age.It is not common that the disagreements trespass in such a palpable way theborders of narrative fiction and permeate the author’s creative work, as thetraditional publishing systems are slow and there is not the chance for a realdialogue. However, the shift towards digital literary publishing on the Internet andthe quick dissemination of the work by means of this kind of edition is providingnew relevance to the response (or, what is the same thing, the revenge) of theauthor who uses his pen -the keyboard- to oppose what literary critics have said.

In this paper we will subsequently study those measures taken by theArgentinean (though living in Spain) blognovelist Hernán Casciari so as to respondto negative -and moreover unfounded and wrong- criticism written about his workDiary of a Fat Woman [Diario de una mujer gorda],1 which won the Best of Blogs2005 award granted by Deutsche Welle, and which was edited as a book under thetitle Show me more respect, I am your mother [Más respeto que soy tu madre]. Inorder to do so, we will first establish the conceptual limits of the blognovel whichare essential to understand the criticism that this work received and how Casciariachieved his revenge.

According to the existing tendency in Spanish literature and to the conceptionof the very same authors in their own works,2 a blognovel is understood to be anovelized narration structuralized as a weblog, written in the first person, andwhose plot unfolds in real time, that is, in sequential time, determined by the realworld in which there is no turning back. The protagonist of the novel is the ownerand author of the blog, behind whom is the writer, who embodies at all times therole of the abovementioned protagonist, assuming his existence and granting thecharacter a life outside the novel, which implies that he has to interact with thereaders through the comments on the site.

The writer is then the protagonist, personifying the role as would an actor in aprocess of assimilation which transforms the main character in an avatar.3 There is,hence, a strong hoax component in the narration and creation of the protagonist soas to deceive the reading public, always masking the writer: to hide his identity,and to convince the public that what they are reading is actually being written byan anonymous blogger, just as any else, are some of the main artistic objectives ofthe blognovel, which we cannot and must not confuse with the serial novelspublished in blogs.

The character’s I or self is, therefore, absolutely domineering in this kind ofnarrative in detriment of the author’s I or self; the latter is only revealed -and onlyif the author wishes to do so- when the narration is over. There have been cases in

__________________________________________________________________

which clever readers have managed to uncover the writer’s identity: this has as aconsequence blognovels being aborted or continuing with the open complicity ofits readers, who, once they have unveiled the mystery, have decided to continueplaying the narrative game in open and public collaboration with the author.However, this creates a new narrative game in which the public/reader assumes anactive role in which he ‘fights’ against the author/avatar to take off his mask,something considered legitimate by many blognovelists. Nevertheless, this causesmany mistakes, failed attempts to uncover its real authorship, and, of course, criticshave not remained indifferent to this tendency.

Although digital literary criticism continues to focus, above all, on works editedin a traditional fashion, despising the digital medium of which they themselvestook pride as they chose to write online, they are paying an increasing attention tothe digital narrative in its different forms and genres. In the same way, if thepopularity of blogs has opened the way for the creation of specific literary formsand for a greater dissemination of amateur authors (or at least anonymous ones)due to the open digital field, it is also true that it has increased the diffusion ofamateur or anonymous critics without the support, nor the pressure, of bigcorporations, as happens in the media.

We still do not know who was hiding under the pseudonym of Borjamari, butbetween the year 2003 and 2007 he was actively devoted to literary criticismthrough his blog Borjamari: Only personal opinions [Borjamari: Sólo opinionespersonales].4 Casciari defined his work as a critic in the following terms: ‘Hischaracteristics were long headings, texts with literary pretensions, and blue stars(from one to five) which graded the works’.5 However, his opposition to this criticdid not end there for, as Cascari himself admitted, the homonymous character inhis blognovel was a parody of that same critic to whom he attributes, at least, ‘agreat audience’.6

In any case, Borjamari published several reviews related to Casciari’s work,even when it was still not known -though it was clearly sensed- that it was a workof fiction by a writer and not by an anonymous middle-aged Argentinean blogger,called Mirta Bertotti, who was in charge of a dysfunctional family with ahomophobic and rude husband, a homosexual older child, a teenage daughter whoearns money using her webcam to perform peep-shows online, a younger childwhose greatest success in life is to create what he considers sculptures with hisfaeces, and a father-in-law who is a recurrent drug-user.

Borjamari’s main article -after several references in his blog to Cascari’s work-makes reference to the fact that the visit statistics have been erased of the site (thestatistics were represented as a home-delivery pizza business in the context of thenarration) and tries to unveil the story’s real authorship. He believes that thedisappearance of the statistics responds to the fact that these ‘have started todecrease to less than one thousand a day (the true reason behind the existence of

__________________________________________________________________

this soap-opera)’,7 which ‘has started to worry some of the members of its ever-diminishing fan club’.8

Of course, there exists a space for pure literary criticism:9

They are not happy with just boring us with endless repetitions offoreseeable stories that have lost their original freshness, he alsohas to bare-facedly plagiarise others so as to try to be funny andbecause of the lack of his own ideas.10

However, we can sense that what bothers Casciari the most about Borjamari’scriticism is that he asserts that:

It’s a bad business for the advertising agency that is behind thewhole thing and that prepared everything looking forward to theappearance of a novel based on the characters of the blog. Noteven the recurrent advertising forced to fit in ‘yonkis’ or ‘elrellano’11 seems to be working this time.12

As the literary author detaches himself from the blognovel so the avatarcharacter assumes the role of both narrator and protagonist, there was not an openexchange between Casciari and Borjamari, but, as we have mentioned before, theformer achieved his revenge by introducing the latter in his novel, to the greataffront of the portrayed critic.

In chapter 89, entitled ‘A dinner that went on for too long’ [‘Una cenademasiado larga’], dated November 27th 200313, the protagonist’s homosexual soninvites his new love, Borjamari, who works as a makeup artist in a funeral parlour,to have dinner and eat some pizzas, as the family business is a pizza restaurant. It isat that moment when his own criticism is ridiculed in the strange conversation thatunfolds over dinner; the conversation arriving, through the humour that permeatesthe story, to an ontological discussion on pizza itself:

-So you didn’t like the pizza, honey? –say I, slightlydisillusioned.-Taking into account that all of you pretend to own a pizzarestaurant in Argentina when you are in fact an advertisingagency which is trying to impose a novel on the Spanishpublishing market, I must admit that, at least, you have preparedthe food yourselves.-Oh, my little Borja, what the devil are you saying? –said Nacho,who I have the impression is little by little falling out of love.-Fatty, come with me to the pantry for a sec’- Zacarias toldBorja- cos’ I’ve got a little present for you. Let’s go, come on…

__________________________________________________________________

-Zacarias, stay where you are –I order my husband, because youcan tell when he wants to bite the people that annoy him-Come on, lady, -said Borja, giving me a funny look-, tell thetruth: you are not Mirta Bertotti, you are a group of Catalonianauthors and these walls are false, everything is a set, everythingis false! Why did you remove the statistics the week you soldless than a thousand pizzas a day? You are all obsessed with me,everything is false, it is a Catalonian advertising agency!14

At this point, Borjamari experiences a psychotic outburst and starts to mess upthe whole house, turning everything upside down. This episode ends with thewhole family (which is dysfunctional but nevertheless organised when it comes totackling the undertaker) detaining the poor man. Borjamari is then placed, as wewill discover the following day, in the hands of a hypnotist who, by means of abribe from grandfather Bertotti, convinces him that he is a hen.

However, Casciari’s revenge is not limited to a ridiculous and incoherentdiscourse, or to the extreme situations that Borjamari’s character experiences, butmoves beyond to the very portrait that is made of him. Besides his homosexuality,special emphasis is placed on his work as a funerary makeup artist and on hisobvious mental instability. To all this we must add the fact that every character inthe blognovel is assigned a profile which appears as a pop-up window every timewe pass the mouse over its name on the body of the text. Borjamari is presentedwith a picture of a fat, pale man with sunglasses and a receding hairline, togetherwith a description written by the protagonist/avatar, which states:

He is a [sic] very sensitive boy who owns the funeral parlourFrom Post Mortem to Post Mortem. In general he speaks butlittle and goes out frequently at night, like the vampires. Rumourhas it that he spends his life foretelling illnesses because theyneed people to die in order to keep up the business. I alwaysgreet him because he has a very self-sacrificing job, poor thing.15

__________________________________________________________________

Figure 1. Borjamari’s profile in the blognovel

Casciari’s revenge is successfully accomplished and is supported by the usualreaders’ comments. These readers know who hides behind Borjamari’s portraitand, at the same time, accept that the work is purely fictional but they neverthelessdesire to maintain the fictional pact established with the author and to continuereading the adventures of the Bertotti family. It is for this reason that the revengetakes place within the work in a chapter clearly conceived as metablognovelistic,so as to satirise the accusations and critiques that appeared, transforming them inthe discourse of a mad, sinister and ridiculous man who ends up believing to be ahen.

We can neither forget that the critic’s assessment of the authorship is wrong:Casciari, though living in Barcelona, is actually Argentinean, and this blognovelwas conceived as a way to express his nostalgia for his country and is orientedtowards making some of his intimate friends laugh. Casciari said: ‘It’s a funnylittle book, very dear to. It’s about shared feelings, about nostalgia and loss’.16

However, its fame grew little by little, in some measure because of the gooddiffusion of it that was made in virtual communities, and also because of thecreation of other parallel -though less popular- blognovels to advertise Casciari’s.An example of these blognovels would be Letizia Ortiz’s Diary [El diario deLetizia Ortiz],17 which took advantage of the appeal in Google of the then fiancéeof the Spanish Prince. At that time, Casciari did not have the support of anypublishing house nor of any advertising companies.

The revenge is accomplished in the literary field, but with the immediacycharacteristic of the digital era by means of the three-directional dialogue betweenthe critic, public/audience (both of the critic and the criticised author) and the

__________________________________________________________________

author/avatar, which reaches its peak in the integration of Borjamari in the novel.In Casciari’s own narrative domains his discourse is deformed, highly ridiculous,and reverts to insults or ignominies of a more childish kind, such as thoseconcerning his sexual preferences. Ridiculing and humiliating the critic’sreflection, Casciari finds his satisfaction and catharsis through this purely literary,but also online, revenge. It is the definite answer in a dialogue between author andcritic in which the strain between them has sprung both on a professional and apersonal level, and it is the man of letters who has employed the tools offered byblognovelism to give the last stroke in this battle, as the ultimate response to whathad been said on his work -and himself.

1 http://mujergorda.bitacoras.com.2 Casciari studies the main characteristics of blognovels in some of his papers, suchas ‘El blog en la literatura. Un acercamiento estructural a la novela’ and ‘La ficciónon line. Un espectáculo en directo’, both of them in opposition to Arranz Lago’spaper ‘Los tortuosos caminos de la blognovela’; all of them are key works tounderstand what a blognovel is. For further reading in this topic, see Choi’s paper‘La literatura en el mundo virtual: los escritores y el ‘blog’ en América Latina’ orSánchez-Mesa’s works, such as ‘Las nuevas fronteras de la literatura: La narrativaelectrónica’.3 D Escandell, ‘El escritor convertido en actor: El blogonovelista en su teatrillo’.Despalabros, Vol. 4, 2010, pp. S39-S44.4 http://borjamari.blogspot.com.5 H Casciari, ‘Una cena demasiado larga’ in Más respeto que soy tu madre, 27November 2003, Viewed on 5 May 2010, http://mujergorda.bitacoras.com/cap/000098.php.6 ibid., <http://mujergorda.bitacoras.com/cap/000098.php>.7 Borjamari, ‘Nos cuentan que...’, Borjamari. Sólo opinones personales, November2003, Viewed on 5 May 2010, http://borjamari.blogspot.com/2003/11/nos-cuentan-que_20.html.8 ibid., http://borjamari.blogspot.com/2003/11/nos-cuentan-que_20.html.9 There is an obvious doubt about the authorship, as Borjamari uses indistinctly‘they’ and ‘he’.10 Ibid., http://borjamari.blogspot.com/2003/11/nos-cuentan-que_20.html.11 Both of them are popular Spanish websites among youngster, with humour,kinky content and weird stories: See both sites http://www.yonkis.com,http://elrellano.com.12 Ibid., http://borjamari.blogspot.com/2003/11/nos-cuentan-que_20.html.13 Casciari, op. cit., http://mujergorda.bitacoras.com/cap/000098.php.14 Ibid., http://mujergorda.bitacoras.com/cap/000098.php. Original Spanish text:

__________________________________________________________________

- ¿Entonces no te gustó la pizza, nene? -digo yo, un poco desencantada.- Teniendo en cuenta que todos vosotros fingís tener una pizzería en Argentina,cuando realidad sois una agencia de publicidad que está intentando imponer unanovela en el mercado editorial español, debo reconocer que por lo menos habéispreparado la comida vosotros mismos.- Ay, Borjita, ¿qué carajo estás diciendo? -dice el Nacho, que de a poco me parecea mí que se iba desenamorando.-Gordo, vení un cacho al galponcito del fondo conmigo -le dice Zacarías al Borja-que tengo un regalo para vos. Vení, dale...-Zacarías, quedáte quieto ahí -le digo yo a mi marido, que se le nota cuando quieremorder a la gente que le cae mal.-Venga ya, mujer -dice el Borja mirándome muy raro-, diga la verdad: usted no esMirta Bertotti, es un conjunto de autores catalanes, y estas paredes son falsas, todoes un decorado ¡todo es falso! ¿Por qué quitó las estadísticas la semana que vendiómenos de mil pizzas al día? Todos vosotros estáis obsesionados conmigo, ¡todoesto es falso, es una agencia de publicidad catalana!15 Ibid., http://mujergorda.bitacoras.com/cap/000098.php. Original Spanish text:Es un un [sic] chico muy sensible, que tiene la funeraria De Post Morten en PostMortem. Por lo general habla poco y sale mucho de noche, como los vampiros.Según las malas lenguas se pasa la vida prediciendo enfermedades, porquenecesitan que la gente se muera y así mantener el negocio. Yo siempre lo saludoporque tiene un oficio sacrificado, pobre.16 ‘El exilio en clave de humor’ in Clarin.com, 13 November 2007, Viewed on 3April 2010, http://clarin.com/diario/2007/11/13/conexions/t-01539095.htm.17 http://letizia-ortiz.blogspot.com.

Bibliography

Arranz-Lago, D. F., ‘Los tortuosos caminos de la blognovela’. Literaturas del textoal hipermedia. Romero López, D. & Sanz-Cabrerizo, A. (eds), Anthropos, Madrid,2008.

Borjamari, ‘Nos cuentan que...’. Borjamari: Sólo opiniones personales. November2003, Viewed on 5 May 2010, http://borjamari.blogspot.com/2003/11/nos-cuentan-que_20.html.

Casciari, H., Diario de una mujer gorda. 2003-2004, Viewed on 5 May 2010,http://mujergorda.bitacoras.com.

–––, ‘El blog en la literatura. Un acercamiento estructural a la blogonovela’. Telos.Cuadernos de comunicación, tecnología y sociedad, Vol. 65, 2005, pp. 95-97.

__________________________________________________________________

–––, El diario de Letizia Ortiz. 2004, Viewed on 5 May 2010, <http.//letizia-ortiz.blogspot.com>.

–––, ‘La ficción online. Un espectáculo en directo’. La blogosfera hispana:pioneros de la comunicación digital. Cerezo, M. (dir), France Telecom, Madrid,2006, pp. 171-179.

–––, Más respeto, que soy tu madre. Plaza & Janés DeBOLS!LLO, Barcelona,2005.

Choi, Y., ‘La literatura en el mundo virtual: los escritores y el blog en AméricaLatina’. Espéculo: Revista de Estudios Literarios. Vol. 33, 2006, Viewed on 20June 2009, http://www.ucm.es/info/especulo/numero33/blogam.html.

‘El exilio en clave de humor’. Clarin.com. 13 November 2007, Viewed on 3 April2010 http://clarin.com/diario/2007/11/13/conexiones/t-01539095.htm.

Escandell Montiel, D., ‘El escritor convertido en actor: El blogonovelista en suteatrillo’. Despalabros. Vol. 4, 2010, pp. S39-S44.

Sánchez-Mesa Martínez, D., ‘Las nuevas fronteras de la literatura: La narrativaelectrónica’. Escrituras digitales. Tecnologías de la creación de la era virtual.Tortosa, V. (ed), Servicio de Publicaciones Universidad de Alicante, Alicante,2008, pp. 215-242.

Daniel Escandell Montiel is a Spanish teacher and Ph.D. Candidate at theUniversity of Salamanca. He is currently conducting research on digital narrativeand blognovelism in the Spanish literature. He is also a published playwright.

Treatment of Vengeance in Ferdowsi’sThe Shahnameh: Book of Kings

Leyli Jamali

AbstractThe Shahnameh or Book of Kings is the grand national epic of Persia written by thegreat Iranian poet Ferdowsi in the 10th century. Containing 60,000 rhymingcouplets this magnificent masterpiece recounts the history of Iran, beginning withthe creation of the world by Kayumars progressing through Iranian legend tohistoric times, tracing the reigns of the Sasanian Emperors and ending with theArab conquest in 641. Though ostensibly historical, mostly revolving around thekings of Persia and the heroes who served them, the Shahnameh’s stories are fullof myth and legend, fairies and demons, packed with love stories, tragedies, andmoral obligations faced by the warrior-heroes who must in time also display acapacity for vengeance, among other virtues, in their battle for truthfulness.Vengeance for Ferdowsi’s warrior-heroes is not an act of passion but rather an actof justice baring moral values. The emphasis on ethical aspects of vengeance andportraying conditions that could make acts of vengeance virtuous are, however,mainly confined to the beholders of codes of honour and moral authority. Therationality of vengeance looses its persuasive grip when it turns into a hostileresponse in favour of the evil forces illustrating a barbaric sentiment. Moreover,vengeance seems to be a crucial narrative tool for Ferdowsi who through itsconscious application justifies the causal logic behind the event running in hisgrand scale epic. The present paper aims to examine the concept of vengeance inthe Shahnameh, exposing different kinds of vengeance and revenge which connectits events tracing the logic and motivation behind them.

Key Words: Vengeance, honour, virtue, justice, The Shahnameh, Ferdowsi.

1. IntroductionLiterature on revenge has discussed vengeance and revenge terms as synonyms.

Indeed many authors used both concepts interchangeably and there is no consistentusage of these terms in the literature.1 Seemingly any definition of the word islinked to religious background and codes of honour and to the undeniable role ofculture in shaping the notion. In its broadest sense vengeance is defined as aninfliction of punishment or injury in return for perceived wrong.2 Many scholars,however, have outlined distinctions between vengeance and other similar conceptsof negative reciprocity such as retaliation, hostility and retribution. As Zourringmaintains:

Treatment of Vengeance in Ferdowsi’s The Shahnameh: Book of Kings__________________________________________________________________138

Revenge is different from retaliation in terms of rationality,affect and behavior goal. ... Furthermore, revenge differs fromhostility in that the justification and motivation for vengefulaggressive acts rest on the perception of having being wrongedrather than undifferentiated feelings of hostility toward others. ...Moreover, revenge differs from retribution because of its greateremotional and behavioral intensities.3

Based on such differentiations and in spite of the fact that most moral philosophersreject vengeance as a barbaric sentiment, from the very early times nations havewielded vengeance as a legal tool for obtaining justice. As Ho asserts, ‘clearly, formany, vengeance is justice and the pursuit of justice, is exacting vengeance on theoffender.’4

Peter French, in The Virtues of the Vengeance takes a similar stand whileexamining concepts relevant to vengeance. For French, revenge ‘is the technologyof moral empowerment’5 and vengeance can stand as an alternative source formoral order.6 Making convincing case for the central moral importance ofvengeance, honor and retribution, French exposes important distinctions betweentypes of moral theories (karmic and non-karmic). Concentrating on the conditionsthat could make acts of vengeance virtuous, he investigates the use of vengeancethemes in literature and popular culture by scrutinizing literary examples fromIliad to Hamlet. As touched by French justice as revenge and getting even hasoccupied the storytellers and philosophers for so long. Indeed, ‘the articulation ofthese concepts lends itself to narrative more than dry legal formulations. Thus,literature from Homer’s heroic epics to modern popular fiction has been a site forhuman inquiry into the morality of retribution.’7

As one of the world’s greatest literary masterpieces the Shahnameh alsopresents magnificent tales of vengeance. As Talebian illustrates the theme ofvengeance is at the heart of almost %7 of the stories in the Shahnameh.8 Saramialso argues that ‘if the central idea of romances [in the Shahnameh] is love, the trueessence of war tales is vengeance.’9 According to Fazlollah ‘vengeance, revenge,and warfare are the major themes in the Shahnameh yet they are totally differentfrom what one encounters in Buddhism, Christianity or Sufi literature.’10 Finally,Ghafoori maintains that ‘vengeance is one of the three main reasons for theoutbreak of wars in the Shahnameh, the other two being defending the motherlandand obtaining justice.’11

2. DiscussionFerdowsi Tousi, (935 -1020) was a well-educated member of a social class

called dehghans (the noble landowners) who completed his Shahnameh in 30years. With 62 stories, 990 chapters, and some 60,000 rhyming couplets, theShahnameh is more than seven times the length of Homer’s Iliad consisting ofhistory of Iran complied and cast into verse based on sources such as Khodynameh,

Leyli Jamali

__________________________________________________________________

Pahlavi texts, Persian myths, religious texts and the oral stories related by learneddehghans.

The whole epic can be divided into three parts; The Mythical Age, as theshortest section, gives an account of the creation of the world and the story of thefirst man/king Kayumars. As the largest section, almost occupying two-thirds ofthe grand epic is The Heroic Age, which retells the events from the reign ofManuchehr to the conquest of Alexander the Great. This section is packed withincidents about gallant hero-worriers of the Persian Empire especially Rostam. TheHistorical Age, as the final section, changes from mythology and legend toromanticized history and relates the epoch making events from the time ofAlexander the Great to the Arab invasion and the death of the last Iranian kingYazdgerd III in 641.

The theme of vengeance is apparent in all the three sections of the Shahnameh,starting in The Mythical Age with the revenge of Syamak, running through, as wellas, composing the main portion of The Heroic Age, culminating in the revenge ofSeyavash, and ending in The Historic Age when Bijan the Turk avenges MahoviSori the killer of Yazdgerd III.

Ferdowsi’s treatment of revenge throughout the entire work centers on theancient Persian ideology, which sees vengeance as an instrument of divine justice.For the ancient Iranians vengeance was not an individual business, but rather adivine duty to restore impersonal justice. Considered as a virtuous act and a holycommitment, vengeance of the oppressed was an inevitable responsibility laidupon all members of society by the providence. Consequences of disobediencewere horrible and the sinner would, in the dooms day, be questioned and punishedby eternal damnation.

Actually, the very first order for vengeance in the Shahnameh is given directlyby Ahurmazd, the god of light, when at the opening of the first section, Syamak,the son of Kayumars is killed by a monster send by Ahriman, the god of evil whocould not bear Kayumars’s eminence on earth. Ahurdmazd orders Hooshank toavenge the monster promising to reveal the secret of fire to the earthlings inreward. Thus the first act of vengeance as a divine duty is ordered to the mortalsand a celestial reward is bestowed to the avenger as a heavenly precedent set for allthe righteous kings if they wished to have the glory or the Farr of Ahurmazd.

The model of glorified or exalted vengeance is followed by all the heroesthrough conscious choice of pursuing the course of revenge as an especialinspiration and a way to fulfil the providential justice. Venting revenge against theenemies of the selected kings was thus thought to be a divine calling from heaven.

In the Shahnameh, ‘god chooses to exercise his controlling authority throughthe institution of monarchy’12 and ‘therefore to challenge the Shah is to challengegod himself.’13 Moreover, Iran is the holy land, which is chosen to be protected bythe god, and the Iranians are the chosen nation. Iran is, actually, the holy landwhich is engaged in a long-lasting mythical battle with Turan, which is known as

the embodiment of evil. The fight between Iran and Turan is ‘in fact amanifestation of primordial fight between good and evil; Ahurmazd andAhriman.’14

Acting not as private persons but as instruments of divine retribution theIranian heroes followed certain principals in their battles. Never once in theShahnameh the Iranians are shown to attack or occupy other lands beyond theirborders or to commence war to expand their territories. ‘Wars are never launchedto rob a country of it wealth or for converting other nations to Iranian religion.’15

The only reason for the initiation of war is the protection of national sovereigntyand avenging the unjust killings.

Throughout his grand epic Ferdowsi condemns war, killing and excessive greedwhich leads to bloodshed. In all his stirring narratives he expresses his distaste andresentment of those who follow the path of evil and pursue their own passions anddesires to kill and destroy. However, when war and killing take the form ofvengeance for the bloods that are unjustly shed he grants his full support regardlessof devastating consequences which might even lead to mass killings.

Although the old sage of Tous has a tender heart, which gives him away inlines where he strongly condemns bloodshed and denounces the values of war, ‘hedescribes the revenge scenes with extraordinary passion and the fullest details.’16 Itis indeed within these descriptive lines and a close reading of the tales ofvengeance that one can see how the concept of inevitability of fate is artfullywoven into the texture of these verses.

The theme of inevitability of fate and the futility of man’s resistance to it ispresent in every step made by the kings and heroes especially at the heart of theiracts of vengeance. Although Fredowsi was a Muslim and believed in a singlealmighty God, the prevalent idea ruling over his grand epic is seeminglyZoroastrian. Thus, instead of a single God two powers of good and evil- Ahurmazand Ahriman- are present through their perpetual conflict. Another controllingelement, which manifests itself as the eternal and unchangeable power, is fate,which has its roots in Zarvanism. This philosophy, which existed beforeZoroastrianism, sees the will of endless time or Zervan as the controlling powerover peoples’ destinies and a power that hovers beyond good and evil.

Ferdowsi evokes a powerful sense of fatalism in versification of his talesmaking the Shahnameh an amalgam of Zervanist duality and the presence of asingle God. Ferdowsi mixes these two features together so that the God’s choicebecomes the unchallengeable fate, which is not for any man to question. Thisphilosophy is also at heart of the tales where the Iranian kings, as the divinesymbols of national sovereignty and justice, have to pursue their holy duty byexecuting revenge. These kings, however, ‘never attend the wars for vengeance inperson.’17 Although the honour of every victory belongs to the king, it is the hero-worriers who have to accomplish the revenge missions.

These heroes are motivated by the love of protecting the mother land andavenging all its enemies embracing what fate offers in full obedience. As

Leyli Jamali

__________________________________________________________________

summarized in Bahman Shah’s speech the history of Iran is constructed by thehands of hero’s that have carried out seven grand acts of revenge in the name oftheir kings. These acts of vengeance were of course bound to strict rules andrituals. Firstly, the act of vengeance worked on the bases of cause and affectgrounded on fate. Secondly, venting vengeance was a duty, which did not wear outor fade away by time and the spilled blood, forever hot and fresh, waited to becleaned by the avenger. Thirdly, executing vengeance was a father son contract andany son or father who failed to avenge was socially disgraced and stigmatized witheverlasting shame. Moreover, the responsibility to avenge passed from onegeneration to the other and all the male kin inherited the duty. In addition, wieldingvengeance had to be carried out man to man, far from the war scene without anyperson’s assistance.

Apart from the aforementioned facts, wielding vengeance in times acquiresespecial characteristics in the Shahnameh. For instance, whenever justice isviolated and an innocent blood is shed, a plant grows out of the spot standing as asign to remind people of their duty. This happens in the story of Syavash, fromwhose blood the plant of Syavooshan rises. In other cases, vengeance is carried outin some symbolic manners. Like when the avenger weilds the vengeance at thesame spot that the killing has been occurred (Kaykhosro pleads to avenge Afrasyabwhere Syavash has been murdered), or when the avenger washes his hands in theblood of the avenged, or even drinks the blood of the man he has killed (Goodarzcups his hand to drink Prian’s blood). Other brutal methods are also visible likehanging the body of the avenged from the victor’s horse, mutilation as in the caseof Mahovi, lynching as with Faramarz, and of course burning alive as withShaghad or even crucifixion as with Zahak. Swards, spears, arrows, daggers, andclubs are the deadly weapons that the avengers use very freely to fulfil their divineduties in restoring justice.

Mass killings in the name of vengeance are also seen in some tales, or theselective killings of those who had had a hand in the death of an innocent. Rostam,for example, slays Sodabeh, Syavash’s stepmother, whose prohibited love was thereason for his being behead. In contrast, in some cases a single person is avengedfor the sake of a group, which has been unjustly killed, like when Ghoodarzavenges Piran clearing the blood of 70 young heroes from his family. Rostam is theonly person in the Shahnameh who gets the chance to vent his own vengeanceagainst his brother Shaghad by a deadly arrow before meeting his end in hisbrother’s trap. Rostam is also the hero who decides to avenge himself when afterunknowingly killing his son Shorab aims to starve himself to death. Heroes ofvengeance tales sometime use disguise to gain their aims. Rostam and Gorgin dressthemselves like merchants to pass the borders of Turan. Deception andcunningness is also fair in executing vengeance. For example, when Rostam seeshimself trapped in the hands of Sohrab he tricks the inexperienced worrier by

telling him that the true heroes never take the lives of their rival in the first roundand sets himself free only to kill the young worrier.

3. ConclusionFrom what has been discussed above it could be concluded that Ferdowsi’s

treatment of vengeance centres around two contrasting types of revenge; the justand the unjust. Indeed, the foundation of the Shahnameh, as the grand Persian epic,is based on the battle between the good and evil, and the light and darkness. Thedark forces of deception, destruction, greed, envy, and ambition are nourished byAhriman, the god of evil, and are represented by ‘natural disasters, demons andTuranians.’18 The noble and moral values, such as love, loyalty, justice, on theother hand, are represented by the noble kings and heroes of Iran. Rostam, thegallant hero of the epic, not only symbolizes the Iranian virtue but also embodiesthe resistance and resilience of the Iranian nation against the evil forces. For himand all the other worriers all the enemies who attack the motherland and shed thebloods of the innocent and defenceless countrymen are the soldiers of evil andmust be destroyed and avenged. The resentment felt for the enemy is the same asthe hatred felt for the unjust, and vengeance is the act taken to restore justice. Thusall the ‘wars launched by the Iranians are in the name of justice.’19

Under such circumstances the Shahnameh’s heroes are encouraged to yield towhat has to happen but at the same time to be fair during the wars that are fought inthe name of justice revenge. No harm is to be done to the common, innocentmembers of the enemy’s household and no damage caused to their cities.Forgiveness should be bestowed to those who repent as far as they were notdirectly involved in the bloodsheds. All along Ferdowsi reminds his heroes to bereceptive and enjoy what life has to offer and beware that life is a wheeling cyclewhich stops where it had started.

This worldview which is based on the circular and not linear progression of theevents is actually the holding pin that binds all the stories of the Shahnamehtogether. And attached to these binding pins are Ferdowsi’s tales of vengeance.Indeed every act of revenge causes the plot to progress it self being a cause for thenext incident thus leading to the completion of the circle which forms the plotlineof Ferdowsi’s grand epic and provides him with a skeleton upon which he canmodel his creation.

As Sarami notes ‘the Shahnameh is a progression of man from nothingnesstowards nothingness and perhaps this is the uniting point of the beginning and theend which gives the opening and closing of this grand epic a complete overlap.’20

The Shahnameh opens when Syamak is murdered by Ahriman and closes with themurder of Yadgerd by Mahovi. ‘Yazdgerd is actually Syamak killed by therepresentative of Ahriman. Both killings are followed by vengeance and themethods of the killings and acts of vengeance are identical.’21 This similarity mightbe the best disclosure to explain that killing and vengeance are too close to be thetwo separate sides of a same coin. And this is what Ferdowsi offers to the ones

Leyli Jamali

__________________________________________________________________

who wish to see beyond the unforgettable narratives of his masterpiece theShahnameh.

1 H Zourring, J Chebat & R. Toffoli, ‘Consumer Revenge Behaviour: A Cross-Cultural Perspective’, Journal of Business Research, Vol.62, 2009, p. 995.2 N Stuckless & RGoranson, ‘The Vengeance Scale: Development of a Measure ofAttitude towards Revenge’, J Soc Behav Pers 7, 1992.3 H Zourring, 995.4 R Ho, ‘Justice versus Vengeance: Motive Underlying Punitive Judgments’,Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 33, 2002, p. 365 .5 P French, The Virtues of the Vengeance, University Press of Kansas, 2001, p. xi.6 French, p. 63.7 A Loney, Syllabus Design for CLST 180 Special Topics: The Poetics and Ethicsof Revenge Themes of Retributive Justice in Literature.8 Y Talebian, ‘The War between Good and Evil: The Theme of Ferdowsi’s theShahnameh and the Narrative Archetypes’, Journal of Literature of MashhadUniversity, Vol. 158, 2007, p.106.9 G Sarami, From the Colour of the Flower till the Pain of the Thorn, Science andCulture Publications, 1998, p.468.10 R Fazlollah, A Study on Ferdowsi, Science and Culture Publications, 2005, p. 5.11 M Ghafoori, Narratology of the Shahnameh, Ostad Motahari PublicationsGhom, 2009, p.158.12 I Dibaj, ‘Hunchback Fate in Tragedy of Rostam and Shrab in Shahnameh,http://www.elam.com/articles/fate-in-poetry/, Viewed 5 May 2010.13 Ibid.14 Ibid.15 M Riyahi, Frdowsi, Tarhe No Publiction, 2001, p.198.16 Sarami, p. 465.17 Masse, p. 218.18 Riyahi, p.189.19 Ibid.20 Sarami, p. 102.21 Ghafoori, p.128.

Bioliography

Dibaj, I., ‘Hunchback Fate in Tragedy of Rostam and Shrab in Shahnameh,http://www.elam.com/articles/fate-in-poetry/. Viewed 5 May 2010.

French, P., The Virtues of the Vengeance. University Press of Kansas, 2001.

Ferdowsi, A., The Shahnameh: Moscow Edition. Elm Publication, 2005.

Ghafoori, M., Narratology of the Shahnameh. Ostad Motahari Publications, Ghom,2009.

Ho, R., ‘Justice versus Vengeance: Motive Underlying Punitive Judgments’.Personality and Individual Differences. Vol. 33, 2002, pp. 365 – 377.

Loney, A., CLST 180 Special Topics: The Poetics and Ethics of Revenge Themesof Retributive Justice in Literature. Spring 2009, Viewed on 10 May 2010http://poeticwordpress.com.

Masse, H., Firdouci et L’Epopee Natioale. Tabriz University Press, 1996.

Riyahi, M., Ferdowsi. Tarhe No Publication, 2001.

Sarami, G., From the Colour of the Flower till the Pain of the Thorn. Science andCulture Publications, 1998.

Stuckless, N. & Goranson, R., ‘The Vengeance Scale: Development of a Measureof Attitude towards Revenge’. J Soc Behav Pers 7. 1992, pp. 25 -42.

Talebian, Y., ‘The War between Good and Evil: The Theme of Ferdowsi’s TheShahnameh and the Narrative Archetypes’. Journal of Literature of MashhadUniversity. Vol. 158, 2007 pp. 106 – 116.

Zourring, H., ‘Consumer Revenge Behaviour: A Cross-Cultural Perspective’.Journal of Business Research. Vol.62, 2009, pp. 995 – 1001.

Leyli Jamali is Assistant Professor of English Literature at the Islamic AzadUniversity-Tabriz Branch, Iran. She is the member of the Executive Committee theResearch Centre at the university and her research interests cover a range of topicsfrom feminism to comparative literature on which she has presented and publishedmany papers.

Unlikely Heroines: Self-Destructive Sexuality and NarrativeIdentity-Building in the Fiction of Joyce Carol Oates

Jenaeth Markaj

AbstractThis paper addresses the unique contributions of Joyce Carol Oates tocontemporary women’s fiction. Although her voluminous body of work hasreceived considerable critical acclaim, the explosive sexuality and violencedepicted frequently in her writing, in addition to the apparent passivity of herfemale characters, have drawn harsh criticism. Feminists in particular havecondemned her narratives for condoning female victimization. While at firstglance, such an interpretation might seem justified due to the graphic nature of thesubject matter, it neglects a crucial redemptive pattern that surfaces repeatedly inher writing. Oates posits and demonstrates narration as a cathartic process ofidentity development that initiates the emergence of authentic, autonomous femalevoice. Her writing affirms the importance of considering not only the eventsunfolding in the course of a novel, but the narrative process by which the authorarticulates these events when considering the nature of a work’s significance togendered experience and authorship. This generative process, when considered as ameans of redefining personal identity, emerges as a more fulfilling, in essence,more substantive form of retaliation than the type of revenge traditionally playedout in the narrative setting –catharsis for the title character in the form of atriumphant and violent act may appear the epitome of vengeance in the context ofthe novel. But how much more unapologetic and revolutionary is a woman’srefusal to depict rebellion in service to the reader’s desire for a satisfyingconclusion in favor of a more understated and sincere testament to self-fulfillmentthrough narration?

Key Words: Narration, redemption, voice, identity.

1. IntroductionJoyce Carol Oates is an extraordinarily prolific, contemporary American

author, having published numerous poems, essays, short stories, plays, and novelssince the early 1960’s. Her fiction has received much critical attention for itsexplosive sexuality and violence and has been criticized by feminists for thepassivity of her female characters. Although these elements factor into Oates’presentation of the world, an interpretation of her works as approving of femalevictimization neglects a redemptive pattern that surfaces repeatedly in her novels inwhich constructive narration succeeds characters’ self-destructive experiences withsexuality.

Unlikely Heroines

__________________________________________________________________

In many of Oates’ works, a first-person female narrator relates her storybeginning with childhood; the family structure is profoundly unstable, composedof unreliable or inappropriate, often sexual relationships. The girl matures inisolation, developing a low self-image and unnaturally strong attraction tomembers of the opposite sex. Sexual desire becomes sexual dependency; the youngwoman will endure condescension, humiliation, insult, and pain in herrelationships with men in an attempt to exonerate herself from the boundaries ofmemory and personality, barriers to the stability she seeks.

Sexuality, used as the sole instrument of release for women, represents aviolent effort to destroy the self. However, this tactic necessarily fails becausesexual release is a gendered form of self-obliteration. Oates’ depictions of sexualexperience highlight the differences between male and female physicality,emphasizing the manner in which sexuality creates distinct roles for man andwoman. Thus, the woman fails to destroy her identity because sexual experienceaffirms her essentially female characteristics. The woman reaches a crisis point,generally involving extreme violence, that consists in a recognition of dependenceon sexual involvement. This newfound self-awareness, in turn, initiates hertransition to narrative redemption and self-creation. The woman begins to reflectupon her situation, integrating past memory with present reflection to construct apersonal narrative. And it is through this act of confession that true redemptionoccurs; by writing or telling her story, the woman creates her own identity.

2. Pursuit of Stability through Escape from IdentityTo understand how Oates’ female characters develop through sexuality and

narration, it is first necessary to ask why they seek release through self-destructivebehaviour. According to Robert H. Fossum, this tendency, often associated withthe pursuit of stability, represents ‘a struggle to control their own lives against theforces of ‘accident,’ circumstances, [or] other people.’ 1 In certain instances,stability also becomes attractive as a remedy for internal imbalance. In both cases,the desire of Oates’ female characters for constancy becomes evident through theirmental preoccupations and actions aimed at eradicating conflict, whether this stateof turbulence arises from internal strife or a contentious relationship with anotherindividual. These characters view death as a form of stability as it represents acessation of emotion, conflict, and will.

3. Self-Destructive Sexuality as EscapeOne such character is Enid Stevick of You Must Remember This (1987) who

demonstrates a powerful attraction to the idea of stability through her fascinationwith death. The correlation between death and stability stems from the idea thatobedience to the dictates of individual will gives rise to turmoil, an inherentlyhateful state of consciousness. Enid comes to perceive sexuality as a kind of self-directed violence and a means of approaching, simulating, or actually achieving

Jenaeth Markaj

__________________________________________________________________

death. As a result, she begins to experience sexual involvement as her primarymeans of release. During incestuous encounters initiated by her uncle, Felix, Enid,‘sometimes felt her mind drift free, and break.’ 2 Here Enid articulates a distinctseparation between two aspects of her identity; this divorce of soul from bodyrepresents death. She seeks out this experience of mind-body separation as both anapproximation of death and a tantalizing step closer to the stability she craves.

4. Heightened Awareness of Gender Difference Through SexualityThe connections established between sexuality and death in You Must

Remember This demonstrate the means by which Oates’ female characters engagein sexual relationships in an attempt to escape all facets of identity. These attemptsare successful to a certain extent, allowing the women to experience a measure ofrelease or liberation. However, sexuality fails to eradicate one essential aspect ofidentity: gender. Instead of refuting the uniquely female aspects of a woman’sbody, sexual affairs in Oates’ fiction heighten their importance.

This idea factors significantly into Oates’ presentation of Ingrid Boone’ssexuality in Man Crazy (1997). Ingrid shares Enid’s intense sexual appetite as wellas her commitment to destroying personal identity. Notably, Ingrid’s involvementwith satanic cult leader, Enoch Skaggs, affirms the contention that sexuality relieson and heightens her awareness of gender difference. Ingrid initially relives herfirst sexual contact with Enoch by describing his penis:

Thick as my wrist was Enoch Skaggs’ cock, blood engorged andalive giving off a humid radiant heat. Never kissed any guy likethis before, never once sucked off any guy before, the disgust ofit, the shame. But now no turning back, I started to choke whenEnoch gripped my head tighter and tighter jamming his cock intomy mouth, too weak to fight him off, his steely fingers ready tosnap my neck like he could snap a cat’s neck. . .pumping himselfinto me like he wanted to kill me.3

Here Ingrid draws attention to divergent physical images of men and womenthrough descriptive language. She characterizes the male sexual organ as athreatening physical instrument, and her perception of Enoch becomes explicitly,almost exclusively phallic. While Enoch materializes through his penis as ‘thick,’‘blood-engorged,’ and ‘alive,’ Ingrid presents herself as a fragile dumping groundfor violent attack.

Later in the same scene, Ingrid provides a more comprehensive picture of herappearance, describing herself in the third person as ‘a naked blond girl skinnyassed, bruised breasts no larger than pears, ribs showing through her skin...’ 4 Eachdescriptive phrase in this statement directly conflicts with some aspect of Ingrid’srecollection of Enoch. Ingrid previously claims that he remained clothed duringtheir interaction, hesitating only to unbutton his pants.5 This presents a direct

Unlikely Heroines

__________________________________________________________________

contrast to Ingrid’s nakedness. Ingrid’s hair is blond, while Enoch boasts ‘longstraggly dead-black hair.’ Ingrid is skinny, while Enoch is thick and ‘sinewy-muscled.’ 6 The ‘bruised breasts’ of Ingrid’s self-portrait suggest injury andvulnerability far removed from the impenetrable strength implied by the ‘bronzemask’ of Enoch’s face.7 Finally, where Ingrid’s ribs protrude through her flesh,Enoch is a wall of solid muscle. While the characteristics involving hair colour andbody composition are not gender specific, they do enhance Ingrid’s awareness ofthe differences between herself and Enoch. The knowledge of gender difference,heightened through participation in sexual acts, becomes more dramatic throughIngrid’s recognition of these similarly opposing physical traits.

Gender difference resides not only in structural characteristics but in the type ofbehaviour exhibited during intercourse. With Enoch, Ingrid’s sexual passivityemerges on a dramatic scale: ‘her silly doll head gripped in a man’s big hands andhe’s pumping pumping pumping himself into her mouth, her mouth pried open soher face is near to splitting, she’s choking, gagging…’ 8 Most significant here is theopposition established between the actions of the two individuals. Ingrid’srepetition of ‘pumping’ dramatizes the intrusive role assumed by her sexual malepartners, while she functions as the passive recipient of his violent aggression.

Oates frequently portrays gender difference by presenting male initiatives asinvasive and foreign. Female sexuality, contrarily, is characterized by compliance.Women characters such as Ingrid and Enid subjugate their bodies in hopes ofescaping personal identity. This behaviour, however, sharpens their awareness oftheir gendered selves and ultimately chains them to the very identities they hopedto elude through the strictures of the gendered experience. Thus, the women’ssexual experiences ultimately subvert their desire to achieve an elusive, escapistform of stability, the impulse that lies at the heart of these relationships.

5. Recognition of Dependence -Incentive to TransformThrough an examination of several female narrators, it has become clear that

sexual encounters awaken these women to a heightened cognisance of theirgendered selves. This newfound self-awareness typically culminates in a crisispoint, or a recognition of dependence on damaging sexual interaction that spurstheir desire for autonomous life and voice.

This crisis point plays out dramatically in Oates’ novella, Beasts (2002), inwhich the female narrator, Gillian, is coerced into a toxic sexual relationship withher English professor, Andre Harrow, and his wife, Dorcas. Significantly, the firsttime that Mr. Harrow kisses Gillian, he contextualises the encounter, precludingthe possibility that she could form an independent analysis of or response to theincident. She recalls, ‘He would provide the narration, the interpretation for whathad happened, as, in his lectures and workshops, he controlled such information.’ 9

Mr. Harrow understands that the articulation of his views on their encounter, ineffect, prevents Gillian from asserting her vision of the relationship. In this way, he

Jenaeth Markaj

__________________________________________________________________

assures his own dominance and her lack of control in the sexual realm and in thelarger context of their shared life experience.

The first time that Andre and Gillian have sex, he prefaces the meeting bydenying her the opportunity to express herself through writing. Gillian remembersthis incident, stating, ‘Mr. Harrow…. was wholly in control. ‘May I come inside,Mr. Harrow?’ I asked. He said, ‘Sure. But not to discuss your schoolgirl poetry.’’ 10

Mr. Harrow speaks dismissively of Gillian’s writing because, as he so clearlyunderstands, the narrator possesses the power of autonomy and a method forasserting control over her actions and interactions. An independent Gillian wouldundermine Mr. Harrow’s despotic quest for complete domination. Consequently,Mr. Harrow encourages and exploits Gillian’s self-destructive sexual impulse forhis own personal gain, to the detriment of her fledgling narrative aspirations.

Ultimately, however, Gillian’s relationship with Mr. Harrow culminates in acrisis point that provides the impetus for her transformation. After yet anotherdemeaning encounter with Mr. Harrow and Dorcas, Gillian burns their housedown, as they lie sleeping in bed. Among the many items destroyed in the fire is atotem resembling Gillian that was shaped and defined by Dorcas, who previouslydescribes the totem as a brainless beauty, commenting, ‘ ‘She has no brain –she isbete –but belle, yes?’’ 11 The totem modeled after Gillian is completely lacking inintelligence and will.

Recognizing her complete dependence on her sexual relationship with thecouple and the extent to which they have symbolically renamed and refashionedher as a ‘doll’ for their purposes, Gillian seizes the opportunity for transformationby destroying them in the very bed that has become emblematic of hersubservience and debasement. Significantly, as the couple burns, Gillian returns toher own bed and begins to write of her experiences in a journal. In essence, shedestroys Mr. Harrow and Dorcas to gain the ability to speak her own story.

6. Revenge: Creation of Identity through NarrationOates’ Man Crazy demonstrates the process of the narrator’s successful attempt

to create herself in language. Man Crazy opens with a suggestion of the healingpower of narration in which Ingrid outlines the origins of her memoir: ‘And himsaying in that slow kind pushy voice like something prying a shell open tell me ofyour life, Ingrid. We want to make you well.’ 12 By asking Ingrid to tell her story,he encourages her to construct identity; she must select those events that contributemost significantly to her development, describe people who figure mostprominently in her memory, and articulate ideas that guide her behavior. Thissubjectivity and arbitrary construction comprise a self-evaluation that negatesIngrid’s former escapist tendencies. The doctor makes one error, however, in hisentreaty; he takes responsibility for Ingrid’s well-being. Although he recognizesthe positive potential of the narrative process for his patient, he underestimates hercapacity for self-determination. As a result, Ingrid initially refuse to speak with

Unlikely Heroines

__________________________________________________________________

him, beginning her narrative not in direct response to his questions but as aseparate document.

The doctor’s questions to Ingrid occur in a prologue to the novel entitled, ‘TellMe Of Your Life,’ as he repeatedly attempts to initiate conversation with his newpatient.13 Ingrid remains silent during these sessions, satisfying none of hisrequests during the prologue. The section ends with one of these pleas: ‘Will youspeak to me, then? No?’ 14 Ingrid makes no reply but subsequently begins a newchapter that constitutes the beginning of her narration. This technique cementsIngrid’s autonomy as the author of her own salvation. She never verbally consentsto share her life with the doctor, suggesting that her decision to narrate is not aresponse to outside initiative but an independently formed decision.

Ingrid begins the narrative with an affirmation of her desire to speak and a briefdescription of setting, saying, ‘This story I want to tell began in upstate New York,in the Chautauqua Mountains, in August 1972.’ 15 This verbal acceptance of herrole as narrator supports the hypothesis of the text as a self-definitive effort ratherthan an assumed responsibility initiated by the doctor. Ingrid embraces the task ofstorytelling because she recognizes its constructive potential, not because she feelsobligated to please others. Her understanding of narration’s power is also evidentin her inclusion of specific locales and dates in the introduction. The inclusion ofverifiable information lends a sense of historical permanence and truth to thedocument that simultaneously cements her individuality.

Writing symbolizes a re-appropriation of existence for Oates’ femalecharacters. Self-generating and unpredictable, they create themselves throughlanguage, subverting victimization and patterns of abuse through thetransformative power of narration.

7. ConclusionJoyce Carol Oates examines, in steely, unflinching prose, horrific

circumstances of physical abuse and sexual victimization that can be difficult todigest. The shocking nature of these situations has at times overshadowed adefining quality of her fiction; the depiction of subjugated women initiating andpursuing the excruciating process of forging new identities by way of narrativeconfession.

Perhaps it would be fruitful to re-examine the true meaning of revenge and howthis plays out in the context of narration posited as a mechanism of survival andidentity-building. It is because violent, particularly sexually violent aggressiontoward women seeks to suppress the victim’s autonomy and self-worth that thenarrative act constitutes such a subversive and singularly triumphant statement.Oates dramatizes the potential of revenge to become a positive, redemptive processrather than a destructive enterprise. The power of an individual to harness theinherent possibility of revenge lies in her ability to transform its very meaning, its

Jenaeth Markaj

__________________________________________________________________

essence into something more fulfilling, cathartic, and lasting than the most fittingretaliatory act could dream.

Possibly the most significant point related to the social significance of Oates’writing is that the salvation achieved by her narrators through writing invitesemulation. At a time in history in which many women of the world are deprived ofthe opportunity to defend themselves against victimization or exact justice uponthe perpetrators of such abuse, her writing suggests methods by which women cansurmount oppression and recreate themselves through language. Narration, asmodelled in Oates’ fiction, represents a higher form of revenge, an instrument ofempowerment that crosses cultures to touch all classes, races, and generations ofwomen in its redemptive and generative function.

1 R Fossum, ‘Only Control: The Novel of Joyce Carol Oates’, Studies in the Novel,Vol. 7, 1975, p. 286.2 JC Oates, You Must Remember This, Harper and Row, New York, 1987, p. 185.3 JC Oates, Man Crazy, The Penguin Group, New York, 1998, p. 212.4 Ibid., p. 213.5 Ibid., p. 212.6 Ibid., p. 213.7 Ibid., p. 213.8 Ibid., p. 213.9 JC Oates, Beasts, Carrol & Graf Publishers, New York, 2002, p. 6210 Ibid., p. 85.11 Ibid., p. 26.12 Oates, Man Crazy, op. cit., p. 5.13 Oates, Man Crazy, op. cit., p. 1.14 Oates, Man Crazy, op. cit., p. 6.15 Oates, Man Crazy, op. cit., p. 7.

Bibliography

Cixous, H., ‘The Laugh of the Medusa’. New French Feminisms. Schocken Books,New York, 1981.

Curti, L., Female Stories Female Bodies. New York University Press, New York,1998.

Davis, A., Blues Legacies and Black Feminism. Vintage, New York, 1998.

Unlikely Heroines

__________________________________________________________________

Dike, D., ‘The Aggressive Victim in the Fiction of Joyce Carol Oates’. Greyfriar:Siena Studies in Literature. Vol. 15, 1974, pp. 13-29.

Fossum, R., ‘Only Control: The Novels of Joyce Carol Oates’. Studies in theNovel, vol. 7, 1975, pp. 285-297.

Giles, J., ‘Destructive and Redemptive ‘Order’: Joyce Carol Oates’. Marriages andInfidelities and The Goddess and Other Women’. Ball State University Forum,1981.

Goodman, C., ‘Women and Madness in the Fiction of Joyce Carol Oates’. Womenand Literature. Vol. 5, Issue 2, 1977, pp. 17-28.

Johnson, G., ‘Fictions of the New Millennium: An Interview with Joyce CarolOates’. Michigan Quarterly Review. Vol. 45, Issue 2, Spring 2006, pp. 387-400.

Oates, J. C., Beasts. Carrol & Graf Publishers, New York, 2002.

–––, Foxfire. The Penguin Group, New York, 1993.

–––, I Am No One You Know. HarperCollins Publishers, New York, 2004.

–––, Man Crazy. The Penguin Group, New York, 1998.

–––, The Faith Of A Writer. HarperCollins Publishers, New York, 2003.

–––, You Must Remember This. Harper and Row Publishers, New York, 1987.

Petite, J., ‘ ‘Out of the Machine:’ Joyce Carol Oates and the Liberation of Women’.Kansas Quarterly. Vol. 9, Issue 2, 1977, pp. 75-79.

Steinberg, S. ‘Prolific Oates’. Publishers Weekly. Vol. 251, Issue 37, 2004, pp. 54-55.

Wesley, M., ‘Reverence, Rape, Resistance: Joyce Carol Oates and Feminist FilmTheory’. Mosaic. Vol. 32, September 1999, pp. 75-86.

Jenaeth Markaj, Independent Scholar, is interested in the contributions ofcontemporary women writers to modern scholarship as well as the ways in whichintercultural processes shape and arise in contemporary literature.

Experiences of Revenge as Reflected in the ContemporaryPashto Short Story

Anders Widmark

AbstractApproaching a decade of US/NATO military engagement in Afghanistan, thescholarly interest over the area has gradually reawakened. However, emphasis hasthough mainly been directed towards the political and social implications of war,while cultural functions and expressions still remain by and large unexplored. Thisis especially true about the Pashtun community.1 Research has suggested thatrevenge, included under the Pashto concept of badal, is an essential elementconstituting Pashtun identity. Badal, which is part of a larger set of unwritten tribalcodes of honour called pashtūnwalī, does not apply to a neutral conception ofrevenge but is more related to the ‘defence of honour’. Previous studies, as well asthe media, have often emphasised this idea rather incautiously, stressing desire ofrevenge or vindictiveness to be a main characteristic of this group’s collectiveidentity. Far from being a static phenomenon, pashtūnwalī displays great variationof observance depending on both temporal and local context. This study engagesthe contemporary Pashto short story genre, being the most popular and widelypractised type of modern narrative prose fiction among the Pashtuns, and exploreshow the concept of revenge is formulated upon within this type of texts. The studydelves into the question whether revenge, considering that modern Pashto literatureis mainly an urban reality, is narrated according to its traditional denotation of‘defending honour’, or if a more neutral or materialistic type of revenge may bediscerned. It will also investigate whether revenge is a typical characteristic ofPashtun life, as has been proposed in prior descriptions, or if it is a theme of onlyperipheral occurrence. Searching for keywords related to ‘revenge’ in Pashto shortstories published on the Internet followed by a close reading analysis of eachentrance, an assessment of the urban Pashtun view upon revenge may be deduced.

Key Words: Pashto, Pashtun, pashtūnwalī, literature, short story, revenge, badal,honour, Taliban, Afghanistan, Pakistan.

1. Introducing Pashto and PashtunEarly references to Pashtun, and studies thereof, are jointly marred by the fact

that they only consider one side of the coin. There is a tendency to emphasise thedark side of the Pashtun, to accentuate attributes which define him as being rigidlyunruly, primitive and warmongering, something of which examples are abundant;‘Trust a snake before an harlot, and an harlot before a Pathan’2 and ‘The Pathansare strange people. They have all sorts of horrible customs and frightful revenges.’3

Experiences of Revenge

__________________________________________________________________

Although somewhat taken out of context, these accounts are in factsymptomatic for how the Pashtuns have been portrayed throughout the times.Though these particular citations belong to an older generation, we may even todaydistinguish similar stereotyped descriptions, especially in the media but also infictive expressions, in the West as well as in the East.

Having this said, and to which much more could be added, we are now ready toapproach the core subject matter and proceed with the definition of Pashto andPashtun. Pashto is spoken by approximately 40 million speakers mainly distributedalong the Afghan-Pakistani border. The preservation and practice of Pashto is animportant element of a broader Pashtun identity. Apart from designating alanguage, you can also ‘have’ Pashto or ‘do’ Pashto. Having or doing Pashto thussuggests commitment to the Pashtun code of honour, i.e. to pashtūnwalī. This codeis based upon a set of concepts all of which are essentially related to honour(‘izzat). It ‘sets up ideal standards of behaviour and acts as a constant yardstick tomeasure normative or deviant behaviour’.4 Although pashtūnwalī covers anabundance of subsidiary elements, it is often summarised in three main categories,or principle duties; revenge (badal), hospitality (melmastiā), and forgiveness(nanawatai). The primary meaning of badal is ‘retaliation’ but it can also signal‘exchange’ (in marriage arrangements) or indicate ‘change’ more generally.According to the code, the Pashtun is obliged to avenge any insult upon one’shonour. To leave an injury unsettled will bring shame upon the offended. There isan often cited proverb that says: ‘See! After a hundred years a Pakhtun takes hisrevenge, and he says, Still I have taken it quickly’,5 though one should alsoconsider that: ‘Pathan culture is not only or essentially composed of strict codes ofrevenge, blood-feud and aggressive hospitality, as anthropology has sometimes ledus to believe’,6 and that the virtue of forgiveness, mercy, and reconciliation areequally important elements of the code.

2. Contextualising Revenge

Consider what might compel a manTo kill himself, or another.

Does oppression not demandSome reaction against the oppressor?7

Before approaching the primary material it may be fruitful to discuss revengemore generally, reflecting upon the concept in a wider Afghan-Pakistani context.Readings within such a context show that revenge, as a topic, appears incontemporary narratives throughout the area. Years of conflict have nurtured ageneral sentiment of injustice and we meet a complex constellation of causes andeffects, i.e. of what or who the wrongdoers are and in what way one seeks and

Anders Widmark

__________________________________________________________________

accomplish restitution. Among these narratives, a tendency may be discerned inhow male and female narratives differ in their attitude towards revenge. First of allit must be recognised that due to limitations of women’s access to the public spacein general, female narratives are less frequent in comparison with male ones.Female exclusion from the literary space is even more apparent. The female voiceis mainly articulated through a male proxy narrator, i.e. women are generallydepicted and represented by male authors from an inevitable masculine (imaginedfeminine) perspective. The few instances when their own voice is heard, it islimited by societal taboos and self-censorship, or is adapted to a male style ofexpression. Male and female narratives relating revenge are both linked to honourand justice, though expressed with a different focus. Female narratives uponrevenge tend to be formulated within a discourse of female empowerment andemancipation, as an act of revenge for male, societal and institutional oppression.

In the short story ‘La revanche’, by Safia Haleem,8 we meet such a situation.The leading character, Mariam, lives a life of luxury and ease. However, she ismentally tormented by the knowledge of her husband’s love affairs, which hebrushes aside saying that: ‘I swear, these women are not worth one of yourhairs…I live for you; you are the light of my house’,9 and when she asks forpermission to start working, her husband quickly dismisses her idea by posing acounter-question: ‘Do you want to dishonour my family? Such a thing has neveroccurred at our home’.10 It is also related that she has been forced into the marriageagainst her will, as a transaction to safeguard the honour of the family. Therevenge, as it develops, is open to interpretation; at a funeral ceremony, peoplecongregate and the women are busy debating fashion. Mariam withdraws from thecrowd under the pretext of performing her prayer; in the ablution room she noticesa wristwatch that has been left behind by one of the other women. She puts it in herpurse as an act of revenge, though, the question remains; revenge for what? Inagreement with the characteristics of the short story genre, the open endingpresents us with a wide range of interpretative possibilities as regards thehypothetical destiny of Mariam and her intent behind her action. The best way tolook for an answer is probably to ask what the revenge is not. The act can neitherbe said to have been inspired by a single specific incident, nor can it be seen asrelated to the defence of honour, at least not in the context of pashtūnwalī. The actof revenge appears to be symbolical, and even irrational, since her involvement inthe theft is never revealed. The act of revenge gives rise to a personal and unilateralsense of satisfaction, a symbolic and silent statement directed towards all theinequalities of life; against masculine superiority, the yoke of tradition, thesuperficiality of modernity, and certainly also against her husband’s mistresses.

Within the folk poetic tradition of the Pashtuns, the most popular verse form isthe landəy, an unrhymed couplet that is composed anonymously, often by women.Traditionally sung and composed at the gudar, a place on the bank of a riverwherefrom water is taken by the women, one of the few places rural women can

__________________________________________________________________

meet and socialise outside their homes. Nowadays the landəy is found also in othercontexts; in ‘higher’ literature, as lyrics in popular music as well as topic ofdiscussion in the social media. Anonymity and the fact that the verses are sungmainly among fellow women present ‘an opportunity to express feelings aboutsexuality’11 and about other taboo topics.

In a setting where the saying ‘for a woman either the home or the grave’12 canbe a reality, the landəy provides a means for women to express discontent withtheir situation, criticising prevailing ideologies of masculinity. A major theme thatreverberates throughout this genre is the arranged marriage and the misalliance.Here, the landəy materialises as songs of vengeance against a despicable husband,‘the little horror’, who has been forced upon her in marriage. In accordance withthe mechanisms of folk literature, these narratives circulate and are re-created inspace and over time. As such, they will transcend the strictly feminine context inwhich they once were created and enter a collective mind, and their message willultimately reach an addressee.

Thirty years of war and crisis have resulted in a disintegration process of tribalculture and its networks, as well as in the formulation of new identities in newsettings. A general observation coming from readings of contemporary narrativesengaging the concept of revenge is how these tend to differ depending on who thenarrator is; journalists and scholars commenting from the ‘outside’ insist onderiving every act of revenge from a tribal discourse, while Pashtuns, or Afghansand Pakistanis in general, either dismiss the connection completely, or discussrevenge as an effect coming from assaults on universal principles, human valuesand justice, rather than from tribal codes. In the autobiography of his, Abdul SalamZaeef, a former Taliban member, states that: ‘Many Taliban belonged to the sameethnic group, and often people get confused by this and say that tribal heritage wasimportant to the movement. In reality, it was purely incidental; the movementstarted in the birthplace of the tribe, but even though the tribe assisted in its rise itnever played a role later on’.13 Readings of contemporary Afghanistan andPakistan display a confusion of contradicting opinions, a situation in whereeveryone appears to be angered, or feels mistreated by another, nourishing a stateof revenge and counter-revenge. The Pashtuns feel that they are being stigmatised,almost metonymised as being Taliban or terrorists by misleading descriptions suchas ‘Afghanistan’s Pashtun tribes (a.k.a. Taliban)’.14 In Pakistan, the Pashtuns feelslighted over governmental language policies etc., and are angered by the largenumber of civilian casualties caused by the Pakistani army and U.S drones. TheTaliban, on the other hand, feel that they were unlawfully removed from power bythe U.S. to avenge September 11 and do not look upon themselves as offenders,but as victims. There is a widespread belief that the British engagement inAfghanistan is nothing but a pretext to avenge their fathers and grandfathers whofought in the Anglo-Afghan wars. In a poem entitled ‘Kasāt’ [Revenge] signed by the penname Khpəlwāk [The Independent], the core rhetoric of the Taliban is

Anders Widmark

__________________________________________________________________

manifested. It depictures the international forces in Afghanistan as avengers,justifying a call for counter-revenge:

/…/ A Buddha is [re]built in the home of the idol-breaker,It is evident that they are avenging the Somnath temple. /…/ Theprostitution market will be kept busy,Our traditions and customs will be taken away. /…/The nation will be denied an independent economy,And be forced to take alms from the PRT’s.The sign of the cross will appear everywhere,As they are taking revenge for the Ayyubids. /…/. 15

3. Reading RevengeIn the initial quantitative phase of this study the number of keyword hits was

surprisingly high. However, the analysis showed that a majority of these wasrelated to the secondary meanings of the word badal, that is ‘exchange’ and‘change’, and not to its denotation of ‘revenge’. Two short stories make explicitreference to revenge in their titles. In ‘Kasāt’ [Revenge] by Muhammad Nu’mān Dost,16 the scene is set to a graveyard. The anonymous main character relates that‘when I approached the cemetery, it screamed, as if it was expecting me. Thegraves heaved and then, the lids began to open, and I did not now what to do. Icould have tried to run, but my legs were exhausted and I did not have the power tomove. I was surrounded by skeletons coming from all directions and some of themwere running against me.’ The story turns out to be a nightmare; the dead arisefrom their graves and approach the main character saying: ‘Why did you kill us?What made you a merchandiser of our youth? Why did you orphan our children?’When he wakes up everybody in the house surrounds him whereupon he says:‘Thank God I am not a leader.’ The title of the story thus alludes to the kind ofdivine revenge that awaits the unjust leader in the afterlife. In ‘Mīna aw Intiqām’ [Love and Revenge] by ‘Asmatullāh Latīfī,17 a recollection of a past memory isnarrated, an eternal triangle drama with all the necessary ingredients, two men anda woman; love, revenge and death.

Besides these two examples, reference to revenge could only be found in adozen of short stories. Readings of these display several types of revenge whichcan be categorised into different revenge situations. Honour-based revenge relatedto pashtūnwalī proved to be of most frequent occurrence. These situations takeplace in a rural setting and are most often triggered by a murder, resulting in ademand for blood revenge. However, this demand for retribution does not alwayslead up to an ‘eye for an eye’ situation, but can be settled by other means. In‘Parday Petay’ [The Stranger’s Insult] by Sulamal Shīnwārī,18 a woman’s honour isat stake when a stranger insults and touches her. She urges her husband to avengethe stranger saying: ‘are you still sitting here, stand up and take revenge for me,

__________________________________________________________________

and should you feel the slightest doubt, let it be my blood that is spilled’. A jirga,i.e. a council of tribal elders, is called for to settle the dispute; however, thenarrative does not reveal the final destiny of the offender.

In the context of pashtūnwalī, not only murder provoked calls for revenge. Thenarratives also related scenarios where men’s sense of honour, or virtue of chivalry(ghairat), was under threat, resulting in a revenge situation. In the fable-like shortstory ‘Dwa Kalī’ [Two Villages] by Nūr Muhammad Lāhū,19 another aspect ofpashtūnwalī is addressed. The main plot revolves around a conflict between twovillages over water. The inhabitants of one of the villages suffer from shortage intheir water supply due to a severe drought. As an act of submission, they decide tovisit the elders of the other village as a plea for help and assistance. However, sincethe request is refused, ignoring the obligation to assist someone in need, a violationupon the Pashtun honour code has been committed, which leads to a demand forrevenge.

Also other revenge situations are related in the narratives. Common to all ofthese is how they are evoked in a context of conflict and war. Also in thesesituations, demands for vengeance are most often derived from an unjust killing ofa person. However, here the connection with pashtūnwalī is less transparent than itwas in previous situations and invites us to a more neutral interpretation ofrevenge; as a natural response to the conditions of life in war and crisis, and toviolations of universal and human principles.

4. Final CommentsInitially, this study addressed the problem of how the Pashtuns have been

depicted in previous works, and how this has come to infect many contemporarynarratives related to this particular group. In references to pashtūnwalī, theobligation of retaliation is often given primary focus, while other important aspectsof the code are mentioned only in the passing. This, together with a one-sidedfocus upon the rural Pashtun, is certainly some of the main reasons why thePashtun continues to be characterised as revenge-driven and vindictive.

Considering the fact that revenge situations only could be found in fourteenshort stories, and that most of these did not speak on the subject in any detail, theanalysis of the material cannot claim to present us with any general truths.However, what it can tell us is how, and under what circumstances, revenge as asubject or theme is narrated in contemporary Pashto short stories. The analysisshowed that a majority of the revenge situations took place in a rural setting, in acontext of pashtūnwalī. In the revenge situations that took place in an urban milieu,violation of honour in its tribal sense proved to be of minor importance. Narrativesthat problematised the concept and function of revenge in a Pashtun setting werefew and do not stand out as typical in the analysed material.

Anders Widmark

__________________________________________________________________

1 A reduced and modified version of the LOC transcription system of Pashto wordshas been used here. No distinction will be made between polygraphemes, i.e.different graphemes representing one phoneme, such as ( ( ظ– ض - ذ –ز allrepresenting the phoneme [z] in Pashto. Retroflex consonants have beenunderlined.2 R Kipling, Kim, MacMillan & Co Ltd, London, 1960 (1st ed 1901), p. 252.3 WS Churchill, My Early Life: A Roving Commission, Thornton ButterworthLimited, London, 1930, p. 144.4 AS Ahmed, Millennium and Charisma among Pathans: A Critical Essay inSocial Anthropology, Routledge, London, 1976, p. 57.5 MN Tair & TC Edwards, Rohi Mataluna: Pashto Proverbs, Revised andExpanded Edition, Resource Publications, Eugene, Oregon, 2009, p. 69.6 M Banerjee, The Pathan Unarmed: Opposition & Memory in the North WestFrontier, Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2001, p. 208.7 SA Muslim Dost, ‘They Cannot Help’, Poems from Guantanamo: The Detainees Speak, M Falkoff (ed), University of Iowa Press, Iowa City, 2007, p. 34.8 S Haleem, Confiture d’orange: nouvelles, Caractères, Paris, 2004, pp. 55-67.9 Ibid., p. 62.10 Ibid.11 W Heston, ‘Landạy’, South Asian Folklore: An Encyclopedia, Routledge, NewYork, London, 2003, p. 351.12 MN Tair & TC Edwards, op. cit., p. 227.13 AS Zaeef, My Life with the Taliban, Hurst & Company, London, 2010, p. 116.14 E Margolis, ‘U.S. Stirs a Hornet’s Nest in Pakistan’, Winnipeg Sun [Online], 17May 2009.15 Khpəlwāk, ‘Kasāt’ [Revenge], http://www.shahamat1.org, 23 April 2010, cachedcopy retrieved 4 May 2010. ‘The Idol-Breaker’ is an allusion to Mahmud ofGhazni. He attacked India several times during the first half of the 11th century (theSomnath temple in 1024). PRT is an abbreviation for Provincial ReconstructionTeam. The reference to the Ayyubid dynasty most certainly alludes to Saladin andThe Capture of Jerusalem in 1187.16 M Nu’mān Dost, ‘Kasāt’ [Revenge], http://www.benawa.com, 10 November2009, retrieved 20 January 2010.17 ‘I Latīfī, ‘Mīna aw Intiqām’ [Love and Revenge], http://www.benawa.com, 27August 2009, retrieved 20 January 2010.18 S Shīnwārī, ‘Parday Petay’ [The Stranger’s Insult], http://www.baheer.com, 20August 2007, retrieved 2 November 2009.19 NM Lāhū, ‘Dwa Kalī’ [Two Villages], http://www.benawa.com, 22 August2009, retrieved 26 January 2010.

__________________________________________________________________

Bibliography

Ahmed, A.S., Millennium and Charisma among Pathans: A Critical Essay inSocial Anthropology. Routledge, London, 1976.

Banerjee, M., The Pathan Unarmed: Opposition & Memory in the North WestFrontier. Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 2001.

Churchill, W., My Early Life: A Roving Commission. Thornton ButterworthLimited, London, 1930.

Heston, W., ‘Landạy’. South Asian Folklore: An Encyclopedia. Routledge, NewYork, London, 2003, pp. 351-352.

Khpəlwāk, ‘Kasāt’ [Revenge]. http://www.shahamat1.org, 23 April 2010, Cachedcopy retrieved 4 May 2010. Also available at http://bloguna.com/Sarvari/view/7591, 20 November 2009, retrieved 16 May 2010.

Kipling, R., Kim. MacMillan & Co Ltd, London, 1960 (1st ed. 1901).

Lāhū, N.M., ‘Dwa Kalī’ [Two Villages]. http://www.benawa.com, 22 August2009, Retrieved 26 January 2010, http://www.benawa.com/kandahar/fullstory.php?id=28606.

Latīfī, ‘A., ‘Mīna aw Intiqām’ [Love and Revenge]. http://www.benawa.com, 27August 2009, Retrieved 20 January 2010, http://www.benawa.com/kandahar/fullstory.php?id=28766.

Margolis, E., ‘U.S. Stirs a Hornet’s Nest in Pakistan’. Winnipeg Sun [Online]. 17May 2009, Retrieved 12 May 2010, http://www.winnipegsun.com/comment/columnists/eric_margolis/2009/05/17/9482521-sun.html.

Mills, M.A., Claus, P.J. & Diamond, S., (eds), South Asian Folklore: AnEncyclopedia. Routledge, New York, London, 2003.

Muslim Dost, S.A., ‘They Cannot Help’. Poems from Guantanamo: The Detainees Speak. Falkoff, M. (ed), University of Iowa Press, Iowa City, 2007, p. 34.

Nu’mān Dost, M., ‘Kasāt’ [Revenge]. http://www.benawa.com, 10 November2009, Retrieved 20 January 2010, http://www.benawa.com/kandahar/fullstory.php?id=30465.

Anders Widmark

__________________________________________________________________

Shīnwārī, S., ‘Parday Petay’ [The Stranger’s Insult]. http://www.baheer.com, 20August 2007, Retrieved 2 November 2009, http://www.baheer.com/baher/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=2360.

Tair, M.N. & Edwards, T.C., Rohi Mataluna: Pashto Proverbs, Revised andExpanded Edition. Bartlotti, L.N. & Khattak, R.W. (eds), Resource Publications,Eugene, Oregon, 2009.

Zaeef, A.S., My Life with the Taliban. van Linschoten, A.S. & Kuehn, F. (trans. &ed), Hurst & Company, London, 2010.

Anders Widmark is a PhD student at Uppsala University, Department ofLinguistics and Philology. Besides teaching Persian and translating Dari/Pashtoliterature, he is writing a thesis with the working title Voices at the Borders, Proseon the Margins: Exploring the Contemporary Pashto Short Story.

Maternal Revenge and Redemption in Postfeminist Rape-Revenge Cinema

Documents

Einstein's Revenge

Death's Revenge

EPK Revenge

Spatial Narrative and Postfeminist Fiction: Margaret ... ·...

Dionysos Revenge

Revenge Gallery

ATULA'S REVENGE

Modern Correctional Philosophy. History Ancient societies...

Odysseus Revenge

Edison Revenge

Rivalry revenge

Revenge Tragedy - Lisa...

Shark Baits Revenge

Hamlet & Revenge

Roman's Revenge

RAPE AND INDECENT ASSAULT IN CAMBODIA rape report.pdf ·...