Essay 1 Example by Holly Riedelbach
Holly Riedelbach
English 210
February 7, 1997
The Victimization of New Criticism and Deconstructionism:
A Practical Application of Critical Theory
New Criticism and Deconstructionism are two of the most popular critical 'isms' in present practice. Incidentally, they are also frequently cited as warring approaches--subsisting on opposite ends of the methodology spectrum. Separate meanings do not always have to arise from their respective uses, however, as one has the ability to complement and/or enrich the conclusions reached by the first with employment of the other. This can be proven by applying both theories to the same work--Sharon Olds' "The Victims"--and comparing the outcome resulting from each school's assumptions.
By looking at Olds' poem in traditional New Criticism fashion, the reader is able to identify a satisfactory resolution through the work's auditorily pleasing tempo and completeness of the author's thematic concerns. The speaker begins her/his narration with a simple statement of unambiguous feeling-- "When Mother divorced you, we were glad" (ln 1). This apparently straightforward emotion develops throughout the course of the text, however, into something much less defined. It almost reverses itself entirely. Yet the author's style of presenting this evolution (through, of course, her speaker) prevents reader alienation. Though no concrete rhythm is markedly evident, the absence of distinct stanzas creates an impression of human coherent thought--entirely reasonable yet constantly metamorphosing and steering itself through new, often conflicting, channels of consideration.. To further this idea of rational contemplation, the end of each line drops off undecidedly into the following line. This rhythmic pattern moves the reader through the speaker's experience so logically that the eventual conclusion reached by the 'victim' seems the obvious and even necessary culmination of the preceding speculations.
An integral component of New Criticism requires all conflict within a poem to be resolved by or before the ending lines. Tension in "The Victims" stems from the speaker's changed perspective towards her/his father's state. The reader is first shown the issue through the child's initial reaction in a simplistic good/bad prey/predator scenario: the evil Father hurt the forbearing Mother and is now being justly punished. The victim is clearly defined and easily understood as the latter and her children. As the poem proceeds, however, the speaker begins to expose more complex observations and judgments contained in the situation until the formerly established victims' status is threatened. This inconsistency is solved with the employment of a simple paradox and brought into being by the aforementioned system of reasonable human thought. That is, the speaker narrates a story which begins with the father having everything, (money, control, high societal status), losing it as a result of his hegemonious abuse, and finally ends when he has brought upon himself the same victimization he inflicted upon his dependents. In short, by inadvertently giving his wife everything she would take, from emotional abuse to physical possessions, he eventually gave away even himself. The poem rationally ends when its subject has "given it all away and ha[s] nothing left" (ln 25). The irony of the abuser ending up with nothing because he has, in a sense, inflicted it all upon others completes or resolves the speaker's divided sympathies and creates a very agreeable--albeit conveniently cyclic--exposition of the poem.
Yet dissonance, according to Deconstructionist views, occurs naturally (due to the author's subconscious conflicts during creation) and synthetically (in the conscious premeditation of the writer) in all poetry and does not necessarily warrant justification or resolution. Indeed, by examining even more issues of which Olds may or may not have been aware, general understanding is increased (but not entirely reversed). For instance, the primary binary oppositions of extravagance versus poverty, giving versus taking are problematic threads for New Criticism to untangle but act as a solid starting point for Deconstructionism. A portrait of the father's exorbitant lifestyle-- "your secretaries your lunches with three double bourbons" (ln 9-10)--counters and highlights later description of his eventual indigence-- "Now I pass the bums in doorways, the white slugs of their bodies gleaming through slits in their suits of compressed silt" (lns 18-20). Whether or not the speaker's own father became, literally, one of these "bums in doorways" is not important. The fact that she/he associates him with the physically and (quite possibly) emotionally destitute deserves more attention as it is through the speaker's presentation of her father that the interpreter is drawing conclusions. This opposition is carried into the giving/taking theme as the child articulates her/his emerging thought processes. The father starts out with 'everything--' giving and giving to the mother until he has nothing left. The mother in turn takes and takes until, by the end of the narrative, their former positions have been reversed. Notice how, too, these indefinite terms of 'taking' and 'giving' are given completely different connotations then one might have initially assigned them in the text. "She took it and took it, in silence" (ln 1-2) can mean any one or more than one of several different things. In the context of the first line--"When Mother divorced you, we were glad--" the speaker would appear to be showing an absolute sympathy for her mother and directing the reader's compassion there as well. Yet with the remainder of the poem illustrating the father's misfortune and by drawing in timely outside cultural information, the 'victim' title and status blurs. Is the father, who put on his "dark carcasses" (ln 13) daily and marched dutifully off to work the real victim? Or is it the long-suffering wife who endured his three doubled bourboned breath each evening when he returned home and piled his frustrations on her? A third possibility lies with the children who were forced to watch the disintegration and determine sides. The author imbibes the work with all these directions and the speaker presents them from a particular point of view--both leaving final evaluation with the reader.
Taking a closer look at the father as victim theory involves bringing in the outside, cultural influence referred to earlier. The date of the poem suggests that it came into being around the same time as the traditional victim caste of human (and especially American) society began to be questioned. On some level--author-conscious or otherwise-- "The Victims" can be Deconstructionally viewed as a direct product of this trend. This standpoint is reinforced by the allusion to Nixon--his "helicopter lift[ing] off the South Lawn for the last time" (ln 6-7) evokes differing responses from opposing political viewpoints--just as the image of spent men lying uselessly about like "ships gone down with the lanterns lit" (ln 22-23) divides reader compassion based on individual experience and opinion. Those who have witnessed a divorce solely from the mother's side or view her as an ally against an abusive father would surely have a different definition of 'victim' than those who perceived their father as the martyr or have no experience with the issue at all. Similarly, Nixon supporters would tend to label him as a victim of the press, his opponents, or an endless number of other scapegoats while his opposition would emphasize his victimization of others. Further, the fact that the father's voice is taken away, as suggested by the confiscation of his communicative tools, i.e.-- "pencils" and "reams of paper--" (ln 11) adds support to the new victim theory. (Incidentally, this can also be effectively applied for New Criticism purposes as well--the process of reversal becoming so complete that the instigator loses his right or ability to speak out against his former prey--completing the transposition even more tidily.)
Both New Criticism and Deconstructionism are viable tools in the explication process. For the purpose of this poem, the latter began where the former stopped--enlarging the reader's spectrum of evaluation and allowing the work to exist in several different spheres. One final consideration of who Olds intended the victims to be, or how much the reader valued the speaker's interpretations of victimization, is enhanced by the title itself. By choosing to label it "The Victims," rather than just The Victim leads one to believe in the possibility of an extended application on a reader-personal level. It simultaneously disregards the idea of one rigid definition of 'victim' and embraces the possibility of this condition existing latently--inherently even--within all humankind.
Works Cited
Olds, Sharon. "The Victims." Schakel, Peter and Jack Ridl. Approaching Poetry: Perspectives and Responses. St. Martin's Press, New York 1997. 30.
Go to Stephan Flores' Home Page.