People function as an omen/object, similar to the albatross being a good-luck object in Rime of the Ancient Mariner. Could you fall in love with a good-luck object? A trophy wife or power couples, are they really in love with each other or just the attention that being with that other person brings? In society, some people believe that being with a certain type of person redeems them.
Beauty is not about seeing an object but rather seeing lines and color. There is a battle between these two ideas of beauty within the novel. When Kiki's breasts are described as sisterly, motherly, etc. rather than sexually. Seeing the beauty of what breasts represent for women rather than what breasts represent for men. Also, when Jerome falls in love with the idea of the family of Kipps rather than Victoria herself. Mrs Belsey's body is anatomized; her daughter said her mother was beautiful when she married her father but let herself go. However, Mrs. Kipps says of the other woman that she carries herself well.
"Each couple is its own vaudeville act."
"What was one night in Michigan set against the idea of love?" Kiki is willing to forgive Howard because she still loves him and doesn't think one night should determine their entire relationship. She later finds out that it was not simply a one-night stand with an unknown woman but an affair with Claire that lasted three weeks.
Claire is more similar to Howard than Kiki in education but Kiki has more wisdom of the world than Claire. She is objectified, the opposite of the Kiki. But does she have any substance or are her looks all she is?
"Define genius." "How was something about that work of art that wasn't genius?" The left vs the right - the multicultural views want to stop valuing the author while the canon views don't. The couple is arguing about Mozart's Requiem. Carl wants to say that the Requiem was finished by other artists after Mozart's death but doesn't. Genius is collective, not individual.
No comments:
Post a Comment