History or Herstory?

From the very beginning, history has been written by men. They were the ones who first had access to study in universities, to have a relationship with literature based on the reading or on the writing as well, and to think beyond the books. Then, the opposite happened to women. Since they had to devote their time only to raise their children, be a good wife and care about the house chores; their cognitive skills and intellectual capacity were left aside because these were not useful for the role they had to play in society. Men did not even realize how thoughtful and revolutionary their ideas could be. After this background of almost a century ago up to the present, there is still a current question, which is, how different could the understanding of the western world would be if men and women had started writing their thought both at the same time?

While the time passed by, women started feeling the need of expressing their inner thoughts and ideas as well as men did. Only the bravest ones dared to take a step forward and put in paper what they felt about her selves and the sad society they were living in. Virginia Woolf was one these. She was one of the most representative feminists who contributed to support the British literary world with the willing of including women’s writing in a trend that used to be completely male. She started exploring the books, not to be superior to them but to enrich readers’ minds and thoughts with both writing styles.

Virginia Woolf was an ahead of time critical thinker. In her essay “A room of one’s own” written in 1929, she claims that the main needs for a woman who writes are money and a room for herself. As stated in the essay: “a woman must have money and a room of her own if she is to write fiction”. This was due to the situation that the female gender was in because of the rejection from men, and the little importance that their intelligence and potential were given. She struggled for this in order to write in good conditions. She dared to say that women were able to write as brilliantly as men, and create transcendent pieces of writing, like the ones by Shakespeare.

The main topic of this essay is “Women and Fiction”; theme which represents the most inner thoughts and dreams of a generation of women after war times (First World War 1914 – 1918). Period which was very useful for women in order to think about their right to express themselves and speak out loud for what was fair and right for them, as mentioned above. Later on, women strove for their opportunity to study at universities and take advantage of their intellectual capacities and skills.

When Virginia Woolf wrote this essay, she made it with the purpose of making women aware of their own needs if they were to write. Due to the fact that men were the only ones who wrote up to then, gender equality was an issue that they had to struggle for if they wanted to be into literature as authors. Both, women and men’s minds have different qualities and should work together as a natural complement. Woolf calls it “The Unity of the Mind”, in the sixth chapter of the essay she states: “... it is natural for the sexes to co-operate. One has a profound, if irrational, instinct in favour of the theory that the union of man and woman makes for the greatest satisfaction, the most complete happiness” (p.p. 74) Based on this then, how objective would history had been if it had been written by men only? It would be totally questionable. Women needed to be acknowledged as authors, therefore to have a history written by both men and women, and not only by the male representatives.

Certainly, Virginia Woolf’s thoughts were an important basis for a transforming social change. Although she belonged to the upper class, she stood up for what was right, even when she stood alone at the beginning and supported women from all social backgrounds; educated and uneducated. She invited them to speak up for change and freedom, and challenge prejudices and the fear of being discriminated just because they were women. After all, this would benefit not only them but literature as such and the readers with the rich mixture of thoughts and writing styles from male and female writers.

rough draft

History or Herstory?

From the very beginning, history has been written by men. They were the ones who first had access to study in universities, to have a relationship with literature based on the reading or on the writing as well, and to think beyond the books. Then, the opposite happened to women. Since they had to devote their time only to raise their children, be a good wife and care about the house chores; their cognitive skills and intellectual capacity were left aside because these were not useful for the role they had to play in the society. Men did not even realize how thoughtful and revolutionary their ideas could be. After this background of more than a century before up to the present, there is still a current question, which is, how different could the understanding of the western world have been if men and women had started writing their thought both at the same time?

While the time passed by, women started feeling the need of expressing their inner thoughts and ideas as well as men did. Only the bravest ones dared to take a step forward and started putting in paper what they felt about herselves and the sad society they were living in. Virginia Woolf was one these. She was one of the most representative feminists who went against this male trend. She started exploring the books, not to be superior to them but to enrich readers’ minds and thoughts with both writing styles.

Virginia Woolf was an ahead of time critical thinker. In her essay “A room of one’s own” written in 1929, she claims that the main needs for a woman who writes are money and a room for herself. As stated in the essay: “a woman must have money and a room of her own if she is to write fiction”. This was due to the situation that the female gender was in because of the rejection from men, and the little importance that their intelligence and potential were given. She struggled for this in order to write in good conditions. She dared to say that women were able to write as brilliantly as men, and create transcendent pieces of writing, like Shakespeare’s…



Conclusion: Certainly, Virginia Woolf’s thoughts were an important basis for a transforming social change. She stood up for what was right, even when she started standing alone.

(to be continued)

Auden - Spender

Everytime we read poetry, we feel invited by the author to get to know his/her way of thinking in a certain moment of his/her life. How the inner thoughts and feelings are depicted, etc. However, reading either Steven Spender or W. H. Auden means aquiring elements, within a kind of poetry, which are mainly based on what happens outside their minds. In the poems we have read up to now, both authors tell about devastating issues such as a city in desolation, the feeling of being buried, the postwar situation of a nation, etc.
They nourish their intellectual capacity with elements from the outside; therefore it becomes easier for people to feel touched by their ideas because these are based on events that might be happening to them as well. On one hand, in the poem “September 1, 1939” by Auden we can appreciate how the “developed nations” happen to go to pieces in a war context, caused by corruption, power abuse, etc which turns out with people immersed in a feeling of hopelessness, but also with a sense of rebelion brought up by the fact of rejecting what politicians, as powerful people claim.
On the other hand, in “In no man’s land” by Spender we, as readers can plunge into the author’s mind when refering to a corpse’s state after being buried, how it “feels like” as lond as the time is going by. Both authors give us mirrors for ourseleves and for the society we live in by the poems we have been presented. Why is it that hard to struggle against suffering?

A present given by Virginia Woolf

Virginia Woolf was certainly a woman whose thoughts and position to face life were ahead of time. Due to the fact that in the 1920’s women were only devoted to raise their children, therefore to be a good mother and wife, they could hardly read or spend time on activities of their own interest, this is why were not thought as good writers or as good thinkers, either. In the essay “A room on one’s own” it was easy to realize about her inner thoughts about descrimination towars women’s capacities and her struggle for women’s rights to express their ideas through writing, as it had always been for men. However, what she wanted to reach, indeed, was a complement between women and men’s contributions to lead human being’s minds to go beyond the scope of their conceptions.

While the time went by, several changes started to happen. The need to put in paper their thoughts since the time they were allowed to vote, therefore to think on their own, was current than ever. They no longer felt themselves as simple housekeepers. Then, they showed their hidden talents in the different fields of study, demonstrating a chauvinist society that they could be as good as men, or even better.

In my personal opinion, women who started writing, ran up the flag of change and freedom for their silent minds, they challenged prejudices and the fear of being discriminated just because they were women. From those days up to now, I think it has been a great pleasure (and for me it is) to feel identified with books about women written by a woman.

Post Correction 2 ("The accidents that damage society")

So far, it has been almost impossible not to relate and to complement what we have learned in both of our courses of Literature. How much can we get to know an author from his/her work? Is it really necessary to read their biographical background first in order to get the main points of their writing, in this case? According to our experience up to now, it seems that yes, it is necessary. That is how we’ve had the approach to Mary Shelley, and Poe as well.As long as I read “The Signalman” by Dickens, I could picture a very lonely Dickens immersed in that kind of job, in which the train and its atmosphere represented nothing but his life; but also his lacks, fears, pains, etc all what he wanted to appear as a hollow, or invinsible. This is why all what was harmful for his feelings, became ghosts. Isn’t it that simmilar to real life? Even though those things that the Signal Man saw were ghosts, indeed, we’d wished our problems and frights were ghosts as well.I believe that it was easy to relate this Dickens’ piece of writing to a social issue, as it was with Oliver Twist, however, both show how decadent society might turn into, which was mainly depicted in the accidents that the Signal man frequently saw.

Post Correction ("I don't care if he is good, I care if he is lucky")

After reading this story by DH Lawrence, I immediately related it to the movie "Match Point" by Woody Allen (the title of the post is taken form there, by the way), where the characters, especially the protagonist puts so much emphasis on the luck issue, actually, that is one of the topics beyond the movie. All members of the family were so concerned about not having money, and not being able to keep up with the lifestyle they used to have, either, which was a consequence of not being lucky people. This was such a big issue for this family because it made them feel tremendously unhappy, especially when it is about the relationship between mother and children. How can someone pretend to make a living by taking for granted that luck will be in favor, instead of hard work and effort?

Despite the fact that it seems a clear short story, I think it is not easy reading at all. It has many interpretations; for me, the parents' behaviour towards their children depicted lack of awareness, and love, of course. It is unbelievable that two grown up people had raised their children with those kinds of values and way of thinking. As the case of the mother, it becomes really hard for me to picture myself as a future mother unable to love my children. What this family was invloved in was a very deep psychological trouble...

How powerful an image can be

The name of the fifth part of the poem called: "What the thunder said" best reflects the meaning of this poem by T.S.Eliot, in my point of view. "What the thunder said" can be interpreted as a prediction of the consequences of a catastrophe. Although this poem tells about nature mainly, this catastrophe might not only be a physical one, but an emotional one based on how decadent our society has turned into. That is why, as soon as we see the picture, we can involve feelings such as: desolation, hopeless, loneliness, fear, destruction, suffering, etc.

Nevertheless, whenever any kind of catastrophe passes by, there are still hopeful feelings or thoughts like love, because love is what really moves and touches people for different several things, like loving among each other, the willing for doing things, for reconstructing, for accepting, etc.

A simmilar impression I had when I first saw the picture related to the poem. At first sight , it was full of dull colours and a very grey surrounding with nothing but garbage around, but then I saw those two people very close to each other with all that paper around in that free area which was maybe needed to reconstruct something or just to think with no distractions.