I recently, at the strong recommendation of a friend, saw the 2007 BBC adaptation of Jane Eyre. Why I had not seen this sooner is a mystery, but it is wonderful. I had previously seen two versions (the 1997 Zeffirelli version with William Hurt and the 1983 BBC version starring Timothy Dalton) and neither of these greatly impressed me, both, primarily because of the leading men: William Hurt came off as too old, and didn't have that charismatic spark that I believe Rochester has, and Timothy Dalton... I mean, come on, Timothy Dalton? He's too pretty to be Rochester. However, the BBC got it right in 2007 with Toby Stephens and Ruth Wilson. However, the film isn't great just because the casting matches up with my conceptions of the characters. It is surprisingly faithful to the text, both in letter and spirit. Much of the dialogue is lifted directly from the book, and every important event is accounted for. Of course, there are a few minor changes: for instance, Rochester hires a gypsy woman and hides behind a screen while she predicts the future for his guests, which isn't accurate, but it must be a bit unsettling to see the leading man actually in drag. At any rate, the film is definitely worth seeing, especially if previous versions left you a bit cold, and even if you enjoyed them, this is still a great adaptation. It must really mean something if I can get choked up watching a story that I know so well, and that makes me want to read the book again - which I am currently doing for at least the fifth time in my life.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Comps Week
Yesterday, I took the first part of my comprehensive exams. After reading and studying since February, it is a relief to have this part of my graduate program underway. Now, I just have to make it through parts 2 and 3 on Wednesday and Friday.
I felt pretty good about the questions I got yesterday. I had to answer three out of five, and fortunately, three were ones that I had approximately prepared for. I felt good about the questions while I was answering them - of course, afterward there is the temptation to second-guess - mostly worrying about whether I wrote enough. However, I am trying to minimize that impulse.
Favorite things from comps: Middlemarch by George Eliot and the poems by Gerald Manley Hopkins
Least favorite: Lukacs (did I even spell that right? anyway, he is incomprehensible)
Best strategy advice: start early, make a calendar, read a little bit each day, take notes immediately; also, having the notes of someone who had a similar list is great
Mistakes: taking notes in the book without transfering them to the notebook - you won't remember what the poem is about
Extra advice: don't labor over a text that is just too difficult or boring - you're eating into your time - read enough so that you have an idea of the content and style, then find a summary or someone's notes on it - chances are, you are not going to be asked about that specific text anyway
I felt pretty good about the questions I got yesterday. I had to answer three out of five, and fortunately, three were ones that I had approximately prepared for. I felt good about the questions while I was answering them - of course, afterward there is the temptation to second-guess - mostly worrying about whether I wrote enough. However, I am trying to minimize that impulse.
Favorite things from comps: Middlemarch by George Eliot and the poems by Gerald Manley Hopkins
Least favorite: Lukacs (did I even spell that right? anyway, he is incomprehensible)
Best strategy advice: start early, make a calendar, read a little bit each day, take notes immediately; also, having the notes of someone who had a similar list is great
Mistakes: taking notes in the book without transfering them to the notebook - you won't remember what the poem is about
Extra advice: don't labor over a text that is just too difficult or boring - you're eating into your time - read enough so that you have an idea of the content and style, then find a summary or someone's notes on it - chances are, you are not going to be asked about that specific text anyway
Monday, August 10, 2009
Some Fair Trade Companies
There are a few companies that are invested in making sure that their products are fairly made. I have found some through internet research and a few were recommended in Timmerman's book. I have not made extensive searches of all of them, but a few seem interesting.
Fair Indigo has a lot of clothes that look like things I would want to wear, ethics aside. The company is based in Wisconsin, and sources from factories around the world. For each item, it tells wear it was made and who made it, guaranteeing that it was made ethically. Many of the factories are family-owned and provide impressive benefits for their workers: a salary well above the local average, paid leave, vacation time, maternity leave, etc. I ordered a sweater from them, and was very pleased with it. Also, their prices seem relatively reasonable, and currently a large portion of their items are on sale.
Patagonia is a company I had heard of previously. They are best known for their outdoor-oriented apparel, although they do make some dressy clothing too. Their prices are high, but the quality is impressive. Their site also includes the "Footprint Chronicles" that "allows you to track the impact of specific Patagonia products from design through delivery." Part of this is the environmental aspect, and part is the ethics of working conditions.
Mountain Equipment Co-Op (MEC) is similar to Patagonia. They are an outdoor equipment company that produces clothing, mostly made in Canada, where the company is based. I was impressed with some performance shirts they had made from the remnants of material in the factories, including the wicking material that is popular in running shirts. These shirts only cost $5 ($4 US) and were made from fabric that otherwise would be thrown away. The only downside to this company is that shipping is rather high and you also have to be the customs fee, since it's being shipped from Canada.
The downside to shopping online is, of course, the environmental impact. It is more fuel efficient to buy from a local store, where goods have been shipped in bulk, rather than having UPS fetch your sweater from Wisconsin and haul it down to NC. However, if our overall purchases are reduced, and we buy sparingly when we need something (I didn't need the sweater, but I'm getting better at distinguishing needs and wants), then perhaps our overall carbon expenditures will be lessened.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Review: Where am I Wearing? by Kelsey Timmerman
Due to my interest in the clothing industry, I did some online research and came across Kelsey Timmerman's book, Where am I Wearing? A Global Tour of the Countries, Factories, and People that Make Our Clothes. The premise of the book is a quest to track down the origin of each item of Timmerman's typical ensemble: his shirt, underwear, pants, flip-flops, and shorts. His goal is to talk to someone who works in the factory who made the item, someone who could possibly have made it themselves. He wants to get a sense of what that person's life is like. His first trip, to Honduras where his shirt was made, he counts a failure. A fleeting encounter with a garment industry worker named Amilcar makes him realize that he was not fully prepared to truly uncover the gritty details. Subsequent trips to Bangladesh, Cambodia, and China are more successful. In each of these countries, he meets individuals who made his clothes. Or if not his clothes, they make our clothes (in some cases it was impossible to track down the exact factory, or the company moved, closed, or otherwise was inaccessible). The encounters that he has with these individuals are interesting: in some cases, he plays the benefactor - he gives Amilcar the shirt he is wearing, in Bangladesh he takes 20 some street children to an amusement park, in Cambodia, he takes a group of young female garment workers bowling. More often than not, however, they seem to be his benefactors - they cook for him, let him stay in their homes, teach him about their culture and country. In each case, they provide him access to information that he could not have otherwise obtained.
The conditions he encounters range. In Bangladesh, child labor exists, but, often it is a better alternative than what the children may be doing otherwise. In fact, many children indicated that they wanted to work, needed to work in the factories. They will be working somewhere - a labor-free childhood is not possible in their economy, and the factory jobs are often safer and more lucrative than selling flowers on the street or begging. In Cambodia, he realized that by most world standards the conditions for workers there were relatively good. Many workers had contracts, but they were often exploited by labor sharks in order to get them. Many of the workers were young women from villages, who left their family farms in order to work in the city. A significant portion of their earnings were sent back to the families, although the women themselves were only able to return for visits twice a year. Regardless, contributing to their family income is a priority. In China, he met a couple who had left their 13 year old son with his grandfather in their village so they could work in a shoe factory in the city. Although at first the couple recites to Timmerman the regulation hours they work in a day - between 9 and 12. Later, after they realize he is not a customer for the factory, they reveal the truth. They work between 80 and 100 hours a week, seven days a week. They are often forced to work off the clock, providing free labor. Complaints would lose them their jobs.
Timmerman's account of his travels is intriguing. He is not an activist. In fact, he makes fun of the die-hard American activists who perform die-ins (where they pretend to be corpses in order to gain the attention of lookers-on) and who chant slogans like "Diet, cherry , or vanilla, Coca-Cola is a killa." Timmerman doesn't see these tactics creating much change. On the other hand, Timmerman himself doesn't offer any earth-shattering new solutions himself. He makes the point that boy-cotting a company for human rights violations of its factory workers doesn't help the workers. Often they lose their jobs and are left worse off than they were before. He urges awareness: know where your clothes are made; and he recommends several companies that are fair-trade.
Timmerman's work is useful for its balanced view on the garment industry. He makes it clear that he had no particular agenda for his quest. His reporting puts a human face the industry that is not over-sentimentalized, but feels authentic and personal. He is able to put these workers in a context of their economies and national histories. Ultimately, Timmerman advocates, not guilt - which seems inevitable when we compare our wealth and resources with those who make our clothes - but awareness and compassion.
The conditions he encounters range. In Bangladesh, child labor exists, but, often it is a better alternative than what the children may be doing otherwise. In fact, many children indicated that they wanted to work, needed to work in the factories. They will be working somewhere - a labor-free childhood is not possible in their economy, and the factory jobs are often safer and more lucrative than selling flowers on the street or begging. In Cambodia, he realized that by most world standards the conditions for workers there were relatively good. Many workers had contracts, but they were often exploited by labor sharks in order to get them. Many of the workers were young women from villages, who left their family farms in order to work in the city. A significant portion of their earnings were sent back to the families, although the women themselves were only able to return for visits twice a year. Regardless, contributing to their family income is a priority. In China, he met a couple who had left their 13 year old son with his grandfather in their village so they could work in a shoe factory in the city. Although at first the couple recites to Timmerman the regulation hours they work in a day - between 9 and 12. Later, after they realize he is not a customer for the factory, they reveal the truth. They work between 80 and 100 hours a week, seven days a week. They are often forced to work off the clock, providing free labor. Complaints would lose them their jobs.
Timmerman's account of his travels is intriguing. He is not an activist. In fact, he makes fun of the die-hard American activists who perform die-ins (where they pretend to be corpses in order to gain the attention of lookers-on) and who chant slogans like "Diet, cherry , or vanilla, Coca-Cola is a killa." Timmerman doesn't see these tactics creating much change. On the other hand, Timmerman himself doesn't offer any earth-shattering new solutions himself. He makes the point that boy-cotting a company for human rights violations of its factory workers doesn't help the workers. Often they lose their jobs and are left worse off than they were before. He urges awareness: know where your clothes are made; and he recommends several companies that are fair-trade.
Timmerman's work is useful for its balanced view on the garment industry. He makes it clear that he had no particular agenda for his quest. His reporting puts a human face the industry that is not over-sentimentalized, but feels authentic and personal. He is able to put these workers in a context of their economies and national histories. Ultimately, Timmerman advocates, not guilt - which seems inevitable when we compare our wealth and resources with those who make our clothes - but awareness and compassion.
Personal Bests
This has been a couple of days of personal bests in running for me. Monday I ran my best 2.1 miles - 23:48, and today I ran my best 1 mile - 8:59. These are probably not very impressive to anyone who has been running seriously, but they are good for me. When I began running in February, I couldn't make it all the way around my apartment complex. Now I love running. I went running everyday that I was on vacation, and I run at least three times a week now. I have had many fewer migraines, and I feel good. Running could be the best anti-depressant available.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Who Are You Wearing?
I have recently made some choices about how I spend money. These decisions have been influenced by a number of things - my growing interest in sustainable eating (local, organic); reading Jesus for President (I don't agree with everything in the book, but their point about the marketplace is well taken); generally becoming more aware of the global condition through reading books like Enrique's Journey.
I remember exactly how I became aware of sweat-shops. In eighth grade, the special news program that was provided for our classes, Channel 1, had a story on sweat-shops. However, the focus was on Nike shoes (which I couldn't afford) and soccer balls (which I never played with), and the message that Americans were enjoying goods at the expense of children in other countries didn't exactly sink in.
Several months ago, I read a book called The Wal-Mart Effect, which was interesting if confusing (the author's position seemed a bit vague); in it, the author details how Wal-Mart has shaped the American economy and how business is done - the idea is to go to any lengths to purchase goods as cheaply as possible - which sounds good for American shoppers: that's why we can buy T-shirts for $4.99 and underwear in packs of 10. The person it is not so good for is the worker who makes those cheap products. In the book, the author tells the story of a woman who worked in a sweat-shop that made blue jeans to be sold to Wal-Mart. The conditions were horrible - she was not making a living wage, and the quota of jeans demanded of her meant that she worked many hours without breaks. In one horrible anecdote, she told of how a cruel boss was dissatisfied with her work, so he ripped the jeans from her sewing machine and beat her with them. It is entirely possible that this story was exaggerated or fabricated. Perhaps I am the naive reader of sensationalized tales of woe. But the thought that the very jeans I was wearing had at some point been used to beat the person who made them was nauseating.
I have to confess that, although this book changed my thinking, it did not change my habits. I did stop shopping at Wal-Mart, but I continued to buy from Target and other retailers, knowing that their practices, although enabled by Wal-Mart, are no better. I want this to change. I currently have more clothes in my closet than some people will ever see in their lifetime.
I feel that this is particularly important for Christians to consider. How can we claim to love everybody and desire to show that love if we continue to turn a blind eye to practices that so diminish the quality of life of those people? I am afraid that we have made frugality into a cardinal virtue in the church. It seems so very American, so very patriotic in a way, so very good to always be on the look out for the best deal, to get as much as we can for as little as we can. We call this frugality, thriftiness, and conservatism without recognizing that it is the grossest form of indulgence and excess. I hear so many people who say with such pride - "I only shop at Wal-mart - you can find anything there cheaper than anywhere else." (Isn't there a country song with a verse along those lines?) The implication is that we who shop cheaply are smarter and better - we are the salt of the earth. The hard-working, American, blue collar, traditional values kind of people. What isn't being considered is that someone else is paying for our ability to buy cheap.
At first after reading and thinking a bit, I felt faced with a rather bleak prospect. Capitalism seems an inevitable evil. The only option looked like some type of live off the grid, churn your own butter, commune. And I'm not saying that that's still not the best option. But it is not one that I am willing or able to attain at this point. Rather, I am trying to initiate steps in the right direction. I have all the clothes I need. And that stings a bit. I love buying clothes, I love clothes in general (I'm writing a dissertation on dress, you know). But I have enough clothes. When I find that there is something I need, I plan to try to buy second-hand first. Recycling clothing in this way keeps more money from being spent on unfair labor and it keeps perfectly usable materials from going to the landfill. If I can't buy second-hand, I plan to look for retailers that have been certified as practicing fair-trade - and from a cursory glance at the internet, it looks like there are plenty of options out there.
This will no doubt be hard. I know that possibly in just a few weeks, I will be standing in Target gazing longingly at a pretty dress that only costs $25. Or my sister will want to go on a shopping trip and I'll be faced with the prospect of following her from store to store empty-handed. But this is important. Not that anyone ever asks (I walk so few red carpets), but if they did want to know who I was wearing, I would be able to answer that I was not wearing the underprivileged women and children of the world.
I remember exactly how I became aware of sweat-shops. In eighth grade, the special news program that was provided for our classes, Channel 1, had a story on sweat-shops. However, the focus was on Nike shoes (which I couldn't afford) and soccer balls (which I never played with), and the message that Americans were enjoying goods at the expense of children in other countries didn't exactly sink in.
Several months ago, I read a book called The Wal-Mart Effect, which was interesting if confusing (the author's position seemed a bit vague); in it, the author details how Wal-Mart has shaped the American economy and how business is done - the idea is to go to any lengths to purchase goods as cheaply as possible - which sounds good for American shoppers: that's why we can buy T-shirts for $4.99 and underwear in packs of 10. The person it is not so good for is the worker who makes those cheap products. In the book, the author tells the story of a woman who worked in a sweat-shop that made blue jeans to be sold to Wal-Mart. The conditions were horrible - she was not making a living wage, and the quota of jeans demanded of her meant that she worked many hours without breaks. In one horrible anecdote, she told of how a cruel boss was dissatisfied with her work, so he ripped the jeans from her sewing machine and beat her with them. It is entirely possible that this story was exaggerated or fabricated. Perhaps I am the naive reader of sensationalized tales of woe. But the thought that the very jeans I was wearing had at some point been used to beat the person who made them was nauseating.
I have to confess that, although this book changed my thinking, it did not change my habits. I did stop shopping at Wal-Mart, but I continued to buy from Target and other retailers, knowing that their practices, although enabled by Wal-Mart, are no better. I want this to change. I currently have more clothes in my closet than some people will ever see in their lifetime.
I feel that this is particularly important for Christians to consider. How can we claim to love everybody and desire to show that love if we continue to turn a blind eye to practices that so diminish the quality of life of those people? I am afraid that we have made frugality into a cardinal virtue in the church. It seems so very American, so very patriotic in a way, so very good to always be on the look out for the best deal, to get as much as we can for as little as we can. We call this frugality, thriftiness, and conservatism without recognizing that it is the grossest form of indulgence and excess. I hear so many people who say with such pride - "I only shop at Wal-mart - you can find anything there cheaper than anywhere else." (Isn't there a country song with a verse along those lines?) The implication is that we who shop cheaply are smarter and better - we are the salt of the earth. The hard-working, American, blue collar, traditional values kind of people. What isn't being considered is that someone else is paying for our ability to buy cheap.
At first after reading and thinking a bit, I felt faced with a rather bleak prospect. Capitalism seems an inevitable evil. The only option looked like some type of live off the grid, churn your own butter, commune. And I'm not saying that that's still not the best option. But it is not one that I am willing or able to attain at this point. Rather, I am trying to initiate steps in the right direction. I have all the clothes I need. And that stings a bit. I love buying clothes, I love clothes in general (I'm writing a dissertation on dress, you know). But I have enough clothes. When I find that there is something I need, I plan to try to buy second-hand first. Recycling clothing in this way keeps more money from being spent on unfair labor and it keeps perfectly usable materials from going to the landfill. If I can't buy second-hand, I plan to look for retailers that have been certified as practicing fair-trade - and from a cursory glance at the internet, it looks like there are plenty of options out there.
This will no doubt be hard. I know that possibly in just a few weeks, I will be standing in Target gazing longingly at a pretty dress that only costs $25. Or my sister will want to go on a shopping trip and I'll be faced with the prospect of following her from store to store empty-handed. But this is important. Not that anyone ever asks (I walk so few red carpets), but if they did want to know who I was wearing, I would be able to answer that I was not wearing the underprivileged women and children of the world.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Domestic Vampires: Domesticity in Twilight Part 1
I had planned to respond to a CFP that I was forwarded about Twilight. I had come up with an argument and taken several notes. But then, when I went to write the proposal, I realized that what I wanted to write about would not fit with what the editors wanted (youth, media, culture studies). I, of course, am interested in the domestic aspects of the novel (among other things), and since I won't be writing a chapter for a book (sigh), I am posting my ideas here.
I came across an article in the December 2008 issue of the Atlantic Monthly about Twilight called "What Girls Want" by Caitlin Flanagan in which she discusses the phenomenon of the series, their immense popularity, and their appeal for older readers like herself (and me!) In an almost throw-away comment, imbedded in a parenthetical aside she writes
"Bella is an old-fashioned heroine: bookish, smart, brave, considerate of other's feelings and naturally competent in the domestic arts (she immediately takes over the grocery shopping and cooking in her father's household, and there are countless weirdly compelling accounts of her putting dinner together - wrapping two potatoes in foil and popping them in a hot oven, marinating a steak, making a green salad...)" (112). (emphasis mine)
Bella is a domestic heroine, in an age in which domesticity has fallen out of favor. My argument is that the Twilight series may be read as a parable that re-inscribes nineteenth-century domestic ideology. If domestic fiction imagines the home as the acme of human bliss, then Meyer's work imagines that bliss to occur between the perfect, hyper-masculine (but ever-so sensitive) vampire Edward and the brave, smart, and domestic Bella.
Bella's domestic abilities make her oddly suited to be a Cullen and a vampire. The Cullen family is a model of old-fashioned domesticity - they are necessarily bound as a family and tied to their house, since each foray into the outside world is a risk of exposure. In Meyer's 5th addition to the series Midnight Sun, an early draft of which was leaked onto the internet, followed by Meyer posting an official pdf, a description of the Cullen family paints a picture of domestic leisure: Emmett and Jasper play an elaborate version of chess, Alice works on a design project for Rosalie's wardrobe, Rosalie herself tunes up her car, Esme "hums over a new set of blue prints," and Edward himself composes Bella's lullaby at the piano. An updated, modern image of the middle class domestic family at rest, gathered around the fire with their individual pursuits: reading, games, sewing, etc.
Clearly, there is more to say here, but I will leave that to a later post.... Comment! Please!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)