yay! another update!

so, then, in order to attempt to give some sense of what's been going on in my life over the few weeks, i'll have to write another couple of entries, but it's all good. sigh. where to being? let's start with classes...

as i've mentioned previously, march 9th marked the end of the university's hilary term, as well as the end of my tutorials, meaning that the 9th was my last day for narrative and austen, which i'm definitely going to miss like crazy. i feel like i've grown so much through the eight weeks with both of these course, particularly in regards to my ability to work independently and to structure my own arguments and thoughts. i mean, all i got was a one sheet syllabus on the very first day of class with the paper topics for each austen novel and was pretty much told to go off and write somewhere between 2000 and 3000 words of decent argument and analysis, and... that was it. my austen course also gave me the ability to hone my literary analysis skills, something i haven't gotten the chance to do for a couple of years, not since i traded in my humanities courses for the social sciences (not that i'm complaining...).

but to approach the works of austen, who i've loved forever, ever since i watched that awesome bbc version of 'pride and prejudice,' was both a blessing and a challenge. how does one properly analyse and work with an author, so to speak, that one is so familiar with? i started out this course sceptical of secondary sources and what it could tell me, but after the amazing insights i've learned with the help of scholars like claudia johnson (who writes the most awesome book on all 6 of austen's works, along with her juvenelia, that places her in the socio-political-economic context of her time) and peter conrad, i don't think i'll be sceptical ever again. what became amazing, i think, was to see my progression of ideas over the course of my 8 week studies of austen's work. whereas i started off looking only at the surface and doing a minimal of analysis, i think by week 3, with pride and prejudice, i finally was able to use my own ideas, reject the ideas i disagreed with in the secondary lit, and embrace and expand the ones i did agree with. this course was also particularly salient for the application of my much-loved 'sociological imagination' (thanks, c. wright mills!!!!), because austen's works are truly social criticism through the vehicle of satire and comedy. at the heart of it, austen was not writing happy little love stories or nice, fluffy romances; she was both experimenting with the literary style (just compare Pride and Prejudice, Mansfield Park, and Persuasion; it's amazing to note the differences and the nuances of style, etc) as well as offering her sharp criticism of a society ultimately unfair and unjust towards women. this is a view that definitely resounds in a society that has experienced great shifts in how women are treated and in the rights and options that women now exercise. i think i summed this idea up pretty well in my final paper:

"As Austen demonstrates for the single woman living in the isolated English countryside, an advantageous marriage is rare and difficult to form, for the number of eligible bachelors is clearly disproportionate to the number of unattached women. Marriage in Austen’s works, then, becomes little more than an economic transaction, an institution entered upon to expand and enrich the family fortune, to align one’s family with the prestige and honour of another, and, in the end, to obtain protection from the almost certain fate of penury and destitution which awaited the spinster. Her heroines, with the exception of Emma, can all be said to be embroiled in conflicts that are literally an issue of life or death, for without the assurance of husbands, they
become wards of brothers, cousins, and other male relatives, dependent upon the charity and largesse in order to survive. In this way we are presented with such characters as the ever-prattling spinster Miss Bates, “poor…[and] sunk from the comforts she was born to” (Austen 1815:339); Mrs Smith, the “poor, infirm, helpless widow” (Austen 1817:108); Charlotte Lucas, who, at twenty-seven, finds herself a burden upon her parents and her family and sacrifices love and ideals for marriage to a man whom she can hardly esteem; and countless other women who Austen reveals to be lonely, bored, loveless, harassed, suffering from poverty and a want of control over their lives and their destinies. When considered in this light, Austen’s light-hearted
comedies cross the threshold into serious literature, filled with complex and important themes; many critics, however, have ignored this completely, thus limiting the power and scope of her novels to that of mere entertainment."

but as my tutor, val dodd asked, how much has actually changed? there's one really important passage from persuasuion in which the heroine, anne elliot, says, " 'We [women] certainly do not forget you [men] as easily as you forget us. it is, perhpas, our fate rather than our merit. we cannot help ourselves. we live at home, quiet, confined, and our feelings prey upon us'" (austen 165). when i read that quote to my roommate, she made a face and exclaimed, 'that's HORRIBLE. it's just like when you sit around and wait for a man to call.' with that idea in mind, when my tutor posed that question, i couldn't offer a resounding, 'yes, life is so much better for women!' strangely, there are a lot of ideas in austen's works, observations about the interactions between men and women, which are still the same today. sigh. so very, very interesting. i think the idea of applying a sociological lens to literature, as well as using literature in illustrate societal norms and values and such, is definitely going on the list of things "to research" for my future endeavors. yay!

now then, narrative. sigh. i really am going to miss that class, even though i pulled the world's worst all-nighters every single week and rolled in to class every friday morning at 10 looking completely wiped out and terrible. but, as i mentioned last time, i pulled together 2 chapter + synopsis to send to my tutor's publishing agent; it was finished on the 9th, but nigel suggested some minor tweaks, so i finally managed to finish them and mail it off this afternoon, so it should reach her by tomorrow. i'm super proud of my work, however, and super proud of what i've decided to do with my writing. initially when i was thinking about writing romance, i had a huge row with my inner sociologist and feminist, which more or less sat and poked holes in every single aspect of the romance genre: promoting sexist ideals in every way possible (why must every novel feature a handsome, brawny, "experienced" hero and a feisty virgin? why? what does this say about double standards for sexuality in our culture?); emphasising heterosexist norms of relationships; emphasising couple-dom and romantic love in such a way that all other relationships are eclipsed.... there are a lot more horrible problems i could think of, but you get the idea. the main question that remained, then, was kind of an ethical dilemma: if i write romantic fiction, am i contributing to a social structure that i work to criticise in my scholarly work? is there a conflict of interest here? does this make me hypocritical? i've struggled with that over the past two months, trying to find a style that i can write that allows me to stay within the bounds of the romance genre but also allows me to stay true to my beliefs and my ideals, but i think i've at last landed upon a compromise, if you will. i think i've been influenced by austen and her ability to write social satire and comedy and romance while still heavily criticising society, but my lovely idea has stemmed from my frustration with the general lack of people and characters of colour in mainstream literature. i think my cover letter to nigel's agent, carolyn whitaker, says best what i would like to do with my works of fiction.

"Ultimately, my goal is to publish books which feature strong, beautiful, intelligent and fiery heroines from multi-racial backgrounds. In my experience reading not only romance novels but popular fiction in general, I have found a deplorable lack of characters of colour, an absence that needs to be rectified. Indeed, it is this absence of diversity within literary genres, and my own desire to read stories about characters who shared my experiences, that propelled me to begin writing at the age of seven. My own family history has roots in Africa, Spain, the Philippines and the Americas, and I know that I am not alone in my multiracial heritage; indeed, this is a
trend that is growing, and I feel that the fiction market needs to reflect this societal shift. In addition, my training as a sociology student at the University of San Francisco has also provided me with a unique view of the world, one which seeks to look beneath and beyond social structures and institutions and to think outside of the box. My chosen field of study has
made me aware of the diversity of the world, a diversity that still is not reflected in mainstream literature. It is this sort of complexity that I wish to bring to my writing. My hope is to create a new literary genre, one that asserts the beauty, value and worth of women of colour as heroines without relegating them solely to the “culturally focused” section of the bookstore, one that paints a picture of the world that is far more realistic and inclusive than the one that currently exists."

again, the idea of that sociological imagination pervades everything that i do. i'm starting to think that i was made for sociological analysis and the social sciences. my current tale, then, though currently untitled, reflects this idea. my main character, simone elliot, is beautiful and multi-racial, and trying to fight against the limitations imposed upon her by the society structure because of the colour of her skin. i'm still working with it, tweaking at it, trying to find the right balance of social commentary with plot and romance, but i think i can pull it off. this is an interesting endeavor, an exciting one, and one that i am confident that i can pull off. but, well, we'll see what the publishing agent says.

philosophy, then, was my final class to get out of the way. don't want to dwell upon the pain of writing that paper, only that it was finished and completed and that i got an A-. this is the one paper, i think, where the "minus" is okay. sigh. and that, then, brings us up-to-date with my first three courses. i am now in the midst of the integral course; there will be more on that follow.

all in all, expect a blog devoted to my day in london, a bit on museums, photos, and some of the more interesting lectures given for integral, along with the fun field trips, and even a bit on my plans for back home. whew. that's a lot.