‘Close as a kiss’: Gyn/Affection in Margaret Atwood’s The Penelopiad
Data(s) |
24/09/2015
|
---|---|
Resumo |
Margaret Atwood’s novella The Penelopiad (2005) seemingly celebrates Penelope’s agency in opposition to Homer’s myth in The Odyssey. However, the twelve murdered maids steal the book to suggest the possibility of what Janice Raymond calls gyn/affection, a female bonding based on the logic of emotion that, in Atwood’s revision, verges on Kristevan abjection, the sinister and the fantastic, and serves a cathartic effect not only in the maids but also in the reader. This essay aims to question the generally accepted empowerment of Atwood’s Penelope and celebrates the murdered maids as the locus of emotion, where marginal aspects of gender and class merge to weave a powerful metaphorical tapestry of popular and traditionally feminized literary genres that, in plunging into and embracing the semiotic realm, ultimately solidify into an eclectic but compact alternative tradition of women’s writing and myth-making. La novela de Margaret Atwood, The Penelopiad (2005), celebra en apariencia la agencia de Penélope frente al mítico personaje femenino de la versión de Homero. Sin embargo, las doce doncellas asesinadas se convierten en las verdaderas protagonistas del libro al sugerirse la posibilidad de lo que Janice Raymond denomina gyn/affection: un vínculo entre mujeres basado en la lógica de la emoción que, en la revisión de Atwood, conecta con la abyección de Kristeva, lo siniestro y lo fantástico, y sirve como efecto catártico no sólo para las doncellas sino también para el lector. Este ensayo pretende cuestionar el empoderamiento de la Penélope de Atwood y celebrar, de este modo, el papel de las doncellas como receptáculo emocional. En ellas los aspectos marginales de género y clase se funden para tejer un poderoso tapiz metafórico de géneros literarios populares, tradicionalmente etiquetados como femeninos que, al sumergirse dentro del orden semiótico, solidifican una ecléctica pero compacta tradición alternativa de escritura de mujeres y creación de mitos. |
Formato |
application/pdf |
Identificador |
http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/AMAL/article/view/47697 10.5209/rev_AMAL.2015.v7.47697 |
Publicador |
Ediciones Complutense |
Relação |
http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/AMAL/article/view/47697/46671 /*ref*/Abel, Elizabeth (1981). “(E)Merging Identities: The Dynamics of Female Friendship in Contemporary Fiction byWomen”, Signs, 6.3: 413-435. /*ref*/Auerbach, Nina (1978). Communities of Women: An Idea in Fiction. Cambridge: Harvard Up. /*ref*/Bhabha, Homi K. (1994). “Of Mimicry and Man: The Ambivalence of Colonial Discourse”, in The Location of Culture. London and New York: Routledge: 85-92. /*ref*/Braund, Susanna (2012). “‘We’re Here Too, the Ones Without Names’. A Study of Female Voices as Imagined by Margaret Atwood, Carol Ann Duffy, and Marguerite Yourcenar”, Classical Receptions Journal, 4.2: 190-208. /*ref*/Bruzelius, Margaret (1999). “Mother’s Pain, Mother’s Voice: Gabriela Mistral, Julia Kristeva, and the Mater Dolorosa”, Tulsa Studies in Women’s Literature 18.2: 215-233. /*ref*/Cosslett, Tess (1988). Woman to Woman: Female Friendship in Victorian Fiction. Brighton: Harvester P. /*ref*/Darias-Beautell, Eva (ed.), (2012). Unruly Penelopes and the Ghosts: Narratives of English Canada.Waterloo, Ontario:Wilfrid Laurier UP. /*ref*/De Beauvoir, Simone (1953). The Second Sex. New York: Bantam Books. /*ref*/Ðlapkauskaitë, Rûta (2007). “Postmodern Voices from Beyond: Negotiating with the Dead in Margaret Atwood’s The Penelopiad”, Literatura, 49.5: 138-146. /*ref*/Doane, Mary Ann (1991). Femmes Fatales: Feminism, Film Theory, Psychoanalysis. New York and London: Routledge. /*ref*/Florby, Gunilla (2009). “Pragmatic Penelope or Timeless Tales for the Times”, in Jason Finch et al. (eds.), Humane Readings: Essays on Literary Mediation and Communication in Honour of Roger D. Sell. Amsterdam: John Benjamins: 135-144. /*ref*/Friedman, Marilyn (1989). “Feminism and Modern Friendship: Dislocating the Community”. Ethics, 99.2: 275-290. /*ref*/Grosz, Elizabeth (1990). “The Body of Signification”, in J. Fletcher & B. Andrew (eds.), Abjection, Melancholia and Love: The Work of Julia Kristeva. London & New York: Routledge: 80-103. /*ref*/Irigaray, Luce (1985). This Sex Which is not One. Trans. C. Porter and C. Burke. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press. Korkmaz, F. Tuba (2011). Rewriting Myths: Voicing Female Experience in Margaret Atwood’s Surfacing and The Penelopiad and Marina Warner’s Indigo and The Leto Bundle. Lambert Academic Publishing. /*ref*/Kristeva, Julia (1982). Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection. Trans. Leon S. Roudiez. New York: Columbia UP. Kristeva, Julia. (1989) [1973]. “Talking about Polylogue”, in Toril Moi (ed.), French Feminist Thought: A Reader. New York: Basil Blackwell: 110-117. /*ref*/Nischik, Reingard M. (2009). Engendering Genre: The Works of Margaret Atwood. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press. /*ref*/Raymond, Janice G. (1986). A Passion for Friends: Towards a Philosophy of Female Affection. Boston: Beacon Press. /*ref*/Rivière, Joan (1991). “Womanliness as a Masquerade”, in A. Hughes (ed.), The Inner World and Joan Rivière. Collected Papers: 1920-1958. London and New York: Karnac Books: 90-101. /*ref*/Rousselot, Elodie (2011). “Re-Writing Myth, Femininity, and Violence in Margaret Atwood’s The Penelopiad”, in Sanja Bahun-Radunovic and V. G. Julie Rajan (eds.), Myth and Violence in the Contemporary Female Text: New Cassandras. Surrey: Ashgate: 131-144. /*ref*/Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky (1985). Between Men: English Literature and Male Homosocial Desire. New York: Columbia UP. /*ref*/Shastri, Sudha (2008). “Revisi(ti)ng the Past: Feminist Concerns in Margaret Atwood’s The Penelopiad”, in Ana Antón-Pacheco et al. (eds.), Sites of female terror: en torno a la mujer y el terror. Navarra: Aranzadi: 141-150. /*ref*/Shepherdson, Shepherdson (2000). Vital Signs: Nature, Culture, Psychoanalysis. New York and London: Routledge. /*ref*/Staels, Hilde (2009). “The Penelopiad and Weight: Contemporary Parodic and Burlesque Transformations of Classical Myths”. College Literature, 36.4: 100-118. /*ref*/Suzuki, Mihoko (2007). “Rewriting the Odyssey in the Twenty-First Century: Mary Zimmerman’s Odyssey and Margaret Atwood’s Penelopiad”. College Literature, 34.2: 263-278. /*ref*/Wilson, Sharon Rose (2008). Myths and Fairy Tales in Contemporary Women’s Fiction: From Atwood to Morrison. London: Palgrave. |
Direitos |
Amaltea. Revista de Mitocrítica es una revista de acceso abierto, que significa que todo el contenido está disponible gratuitamente, sin cargo alguno para el usuario o su institución. Los usuarios pueden leer, descargar, copiar, distribuir, imprimir, buscar o enlazar los textos completos de los artículos de esta revista sin pedir permiso previo del editor o del autor. Esto está de acuerdo con la definición BOAI de acceso abierto.Los artículos a texto completo incluidos en Amaltea. Revista de mitocrítica son de acceso libre y se distribuyen bajo una licencia de Creative Commons de Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) http:// http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es_ES. Por tanto, cualquier acto de reproducción, distribución, comunicación pública y/o transformación con fines comerciales requiere el consentimiento expreso y escrito del editor. Amaltea. Revista de mitocrítica is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access."Full-text articles published in Amaltea. Revista de mitocrítica are open-access and published under a CreativeCommons License Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.en. Reproduction, distribution or public communication of these articles with commercial purposes requires the Editor’s prior written. Redistribution for academic purposes is permitted, provided that the source and authorship are properly acknowledged, and that the journal is credited with the first publication, by adding a link to the journal's official URL. If available, the DOI of the article in question should also be included. Amaltea. Revista de mitocrítica est une revue à accès ouvert qui signifie que tout le contenu est librement disponible sans frais pour l'utilisateur ou pour son institution. Les utilisateurs peuvent lire, télécharger, copier, distribuer, imprimer, chercher ou lier les textes complets des articles dans ce journal sans demander l'autorisation préalable de l'éditeur ou de l'auteur. Ceci est cohérent avec la définition de BOAI d'accès ouvert.Les articles en texte intégral inclus dans Amaltea. Revista de mitocrítica sont disponibles gratuitement et distribués sous un contrat Creative Commons de Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) http:// http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es_ES. Par conséquent, toute reproduction, distribution, communication publique et/ou transformation à des fins commerciales nécessite l'autorisation écrite et explicite de l'éditeur. |
Fonte |
Amaltea. Revista de mitocrítica; Vol 7 (2015): Mito y emociones / Myth and Emotions; 19-34 |
Palavras-Chave | #Margaret Atwood; Penelopiad; Myth; Odyssey; Female friendship; gyn/affection; hetero-reality #Margaret Atwood; Penelopiad; Mito; Odisea; amistad femenina; afectividad femenina; hetero-realidad. |
Tipo |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |