From the discussion in class today, It sounded like most of us felt the same way about Allison's story. In light of how horrific the events that she went through are, I think we were quick to accept her truth, even though early in her story she says
"You believe me? I'm a storyteller. I'll work to make you believe me. Throw in some real stuff, change a few details, add the certainty of outrage. I know the use of fiction in a world of hard truth, the way fiction can be a harder piece of truth. The story of what happened, or what did not happen but should have-that story can be- come a curtain drawn shut, a piece of insulation, a disguise, a razor, a tool that changes every time it is used and sometimes becomes something other than we intended. The story becomes the thing needed".
So is this a true story? My guess is that it is, well... mostly. It seems like from the beginning she is offering up a disclaimer that things perhaps didn't happen exactly as she says. However, she also goes on about how nobody believed her rape, so maybe rather than writing a disclaimer, she is instead daring us to question her truth. But, I also wonder if perhaps the disclaimer is a way of protecting herself. She's used to people's disbelief, as she says the only person who believed her rape was her own mother. Regardless if her story is completely true, or half true, or altogether false, her story is completely believable. Why is that?
I think a big part of why we accept her truth so easily is the gravity of her story. Rape from an adult man to a child is unthinkable, vile, and horrific. It's a heavy topic. My assumption here is that because this story is so fucked up and sad, that we'd all be more fucked up to disbelieve her. It's a safer bet to believe these kinds of stories, because to deny someone's truth, especially when that truth is so dark, well, we'd be no better than Allison's Aunt who thought a five year old was "mistaken" about her rape. My guess (and I may be going out on a limb here) is that if her story was a positive one, we'd feel immensely more comfortable questioning it.
In you're conclusion Allison, you said something that struck me as odd. You said that "narratives are powerful when the author deeply identifies with his/her personal story". What personal story could an author not identify with? I'm trying to come up with a good example of such a story, but every time I start thinking of story from my past, I can bring myself right back into that memory, and identify with that 13 year old pock-marked face and bad haircut. Personally, I think a powerful narrative doesn't even need to be true, rather, I think it requires emotion and relatability. There are so many books that I have felt deeply affected by, and at least half of them are fictitious. To give the most relatable example, I began reading the Harry Potter series at a point in my childhood where I had no friends, felt disconnected from my family, and was bullied regular at school. Check, check, and check. Harry was just another awkward kid like I was, and his magical world where anything was possible and everyone adored him was greatly appealing. So for me, powerful narratives, can work as fiction and non-fiction.
I also wanted to touch on Ramage in his discussion of identity. I'm surprisingly starting to like him a bit more, but I still have to resist the urge to not nitpick him, because I think he makes ignorant statements sometimes, or maybe it's that he comes off sounding so pretentious, that I constantly want to knock him down a peg or two. His example of having a sex change to alter his identity had me a little peeved for transgendered people everywhere. It was mainly the statement that his "desire to change his sex would be strongly influenced by prevailing readymade models of gender". He's not all wrong, but having several transgendered friends makes me lash out at that statement. I just think it's a bad example for his argument. Transgendered people are influenced by the current social constructs of gender as much as the rest of us, but I don't think that's where the desire comes from. Gender identity is very innate, and trans people typically have felt stuck in the wrong body their entire lives. I guess I felt like he used this example in a mocking and ignorant way. WOW. So much for me not ranting.
Ramage DOES however, have some excellent examples on the subject of identity. My absolute favorite being the middle-aged, upper class, biker guy (I'm sure they're all offended at Ramage like I was about my trans buddies....). His point about those men basically wearing a costume that's influenced by the media and social constructs actually felt spot on for me. I've known many middle aged men that had zero "biker attitude" but still put on the leather and drive around acting "tough". The only critique I have about this example, is he does put bikers into a box, and then explain's how they typically become bikers out of a socially constructed view of masculinity. I've driven motorcycles with my family since I was a kid, and we all just did it for fun. No leather required. He get's a pass on that a bit, because his argument does center around that stereotype, so the result was a bit inevitable.
On the subject of how appearances affect our identity, I've always found a quote by RuPaul to be deeply insightful. He famously says "we're all born naked, and the rest is drag". Now He doesn't mean that everyone is a drag queen, but rather that in a sense, we all wear costumes every day. We communicate something about ourselves with every t-shirt and jeans, or jeggings and tube top we put on. Typically we're saying "This is me. This is what I want to be perceived as today" or on our sweatpants no shower days we may be saying "I can't be bothered to give any fucks today". DRAG is an acronym for dressing resembling a girl, and the point is that we are always dressing to resemble something, or some kind of person, and that image we create out of ourselves, is inherently tied to how we view the identity of each other.
#ENDRAMBLINGRANT
No comments:
Post a Comment