For this blog entry, I want to focus on feminism, and how it relates to Buffy and Dracula. Through the characters of Willow Rosenberg and Mina Harker, I feel as though both texts emphasize and esteem the power of the female mind. Michele Byers writes, “(Buffy the Vampire Slayer) reveals that within a mundane exterior (not just of the body but also of lifestyle) lurks the possibility of excitement, of greatness” (Byers, 173-174). I see Willow and Mina as being characters that embody the idea from that quote.
For me, Willow was one of the main reasons I began to watch Buffy. I loved seeing a female character portrayed on television with so much intelligence, integrity, and grit. However, it’s not just Willow’s existence in the series, but the way that Joss Whedon highlights these qualities through other characters that makes it a great example of feminism in a modern series. For example, in the episode “Inca Mummy Princess” there is a dance scene in which the guitarist in the band, Oz, asks his friend “Who’s that girl?” in reference to Willow. We heard in an earlier scene that Oz is incredibly picky when it comes to girls, so this sets Willow apart as something special. The typically “hot” yet bland lead singer in the band thinks that Oz is referring to the sexy, foreign exchange student. However, Oz specifically identifies Willow although she is not the most beautiful girl in the room, as extraordinary and an equal. Thus, Joss Whedon demonstrates that qualities such as intelligence and integrity set women apart; and, in a certain sense, elevate them above their peers.
I see a similar treatment of women in Dracula through the relationship between Van Helsing and Mina. Although Lucy is the tragic, beautiful female character, Van Helsing holds Mina up as the feminine ideal for her intelligence and her compassion. He states, “'Ah, that wonderful Madam Mina! She has man's brain - a brain that a man should have were he much gifted - and woman's heart” (Stoker, 274). Although this may seem like a sexist statement, I feel as though he’s combining classical masculine and feminine archetypes (man’s reason and woman’s empathy) and demonstrating that women can have both. He also describes Mina as being a “teacher” (Stoker, 394) to the men in the novel because of her ability to use reason and intelligence to see clearly what the men could not. Thus, according to Van Helsing, Mina is on equal if not superior terms with men.
Katherine, I think that you raise many good points about Stoker's portrayal of Mina as a "feminist" character. However, I would not overlook that in order to acknowledge Mina's merits, it is necessary for Van Helsing to say that "she has a man's brain," the brain of a gifted man and "a woman's heart." I understand your reasoning behind why this is not a sexist statement, but is very hard for me to accept it. Because Stoker was writing in an undeniably sexist age, I don't think that we can label the text as "sexist" or "feminist." Certainly, Mina is a strong character, but it is acknowledged that she is a strong "female character." Because this has to be acknowledged, that Mina is a kind a anomaly or a paradox amongst women, I would argue that this indicates an inherent sexism of the 19th century that cannot be divorced from the reading of the text.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what the parameters are for the "undeniably sexist age"? This seems to intimate that such an age ended with the close of the C19? Or, conversely, that there is in fact an age that can be labeled egalitarian? Might it not be more productive to look at what kind of text we might reading? For example, a transitional text, one working toward a re-valuation of the feminine ("the New Woman") from within a patriarchal rhetoric? (To cannibalized a cliché: to fight the monster from within.) I say this all to draw a line of caution under our discussions of Stoker's "inherent sexism." Perhaps what one might read as sexism another might read as its antidote? Or, at least, an attempt at dissolution?
ReplyDelete