Serendip is an independent site partnering with faculty at multiple colleges and universities around the world. Happy exploring!

Reply to comment

skumar's picture

A conglomeration of my progressive thoughts on Middlesex

While my post will not answer the questions specific to this forum, I would like to present some of the ideas I mused over after today's class. I think I have come a long way in my conception of feminism and of intersex since reading Book 1 of Middlesex and I would like to share my mental transformation:

This afternoon, we discussed whether Middlesex was a tragedy or a comedy; a medical memoir or a fictional autobiography; a novel of inalterability or of change? I did not participate in this discussion in class because I could not articulate the way I felt. In other words, I felt pressured to chose between one or the other option. (My personal confliction to chose between one side or the other reminds me of Julia's analysis of our cateogorization activity in class. She says she was scared to mention some of the categories that she felt comfortable identifying herself a part of because she felt it would pressure others in the group to identify themselves in relation to that category). In the same way, I felt pressure, like Cal, to have to chose between deciding whether Middlesex was a tragedy or a comedy, a story of reincarnation or a story of rebirth. The unspoken tension I felt inside resonated with me. From Book 1 to Book 4, I had been frustrated with Cal's indecisiveness and failed to understand the difficulty of chosing between two equally attractive options. The ability to sympathize with Cal was just one of my revelations! To return back to my intitial discussion of how I would "categorize" the novel, I would say that it is impossible; Middlesex could be both a tragedy and a comedy, a story of inalterability or a story of change, a medical memoir and a fictional autobiography. Why is it necessary to chose? I just want to say that Middlesex is a fusion, a melange of all of the above.

I was enlightened to overcome this superficial sense of categorizing...everything. At the beginning of my intellectual journey through Middlesex, I could only percieve two sexes: a male and a female. It was difficult, I must admit, to accept the "grey" area between white and black, the middle sex. I thought about this today, tested my preconcieved mindset. Sometimes--no, most of the time-- I find myself indecisive. Should I wake up at 6:40 or 6:45 tommorow morning? Should I wear sneakers of flip-flops? When I am really stumped, I ask someone-- my mom, my sister, my friend-- to make the decision for me... to put me out of my agony! In the same way, Callie decides to become Cal after reading Dr. Luce's report. At first, I was frustrated that Callie would not make up her own mind, yet having thought about my own experience, I came to terms with how difficult it is for me to decide between simple, everyday things. I cannot imagine how painful, and mentally disturbing, for Cal to decide between two sexes.

Futhermore, my revelation encouraged me to think about the title: "Middlesex." I got that the novel is about a middlesex, an intersex. However, there are several occurences in the Eugenides' novel that substaniates my claim that no one thing in the novel is certain; every dimension of the novel has an in-between, indecisive state. After reading Middlesex, I am left confused about Cal's gender. Gender, Cal says, is not important. I do not think that Cal would categorize herself, despite her transformation, as being male or as being female. Additionally, the mind and the body seem to function both causually and distinctively throughout the book; at times, the mind controls actions as executed by the body, at other times, physical appearance of the body satisfies the mind. Futhermore, the book cannot be labeled as being just a comedy or just a tradegy; Middlesex is both hopeful and remorseful. I hope I am getting my point across that everything in the novel has a middle ground, a "grey area." Eugenides' Middlesex is two-fold, a parallel construction that challenges societies' tendency towards categorization .

Lastly, I would like to introduce how my understanding of "Middlesex" altered my understanding feminism! In my last post in the forum on feminism (about our definitons of feminism, a feminist question, and the ways in which Middlesex points to a feminist question) I said I thought feminism was equated with a woman feeling comfortable with her body. Now, I think feminism is about breaking boundarie, shattering the divide between one or the other. In other words, feminism is a theory that refutes societies general inclination to sterotype, to make a disctinction between "right" and "wrong," "left" or "right," "male" or "female." Essentially, feminism is saying: Look, what is wrong with deciding on both options? In this way, I think feminism appeals to a larger, broader spectrum of people: men, women, intersex, no sex. There is no set interpretation of the term "feminism." Feminism does not have to resonate only with women. (With this, I really think it is necessary to change the term. Hm.What else could "feminism" be called?) So to answer the question again, Middlesex undoubtedly presents us with feminist questions.

Reply

To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.
5 + 2 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.