6.24.2014

Testimony as a Potential Cure of PTSD

Analysis on William P. Young's The Shack
Book Cover
            Unfortunately, more than often one consequently undergoes a dreadful depression and impenetrable silence after a traumatic event. It is an occurrence we see displayed in William P. Young’s The Shack as Mack is subjected to “the great sadness” succeeding the horrendous kidnapping and murder of his daughter, Missy. The Shack illustrates the struggle of overcoming trauma through Willie’s testimony of Mack’s journey toward overcoming and surviving trauma. Dori Laub describes the importance and process of this journey of traumatic and emotional victory in his essay, “Truth and Testimony: The Process and The Struggle.”
            According to Laub there are three levels of witnessing traumatic event; the first one being witnessing one’s own experience, the second one being witnessing one’s story of their experience, and the third level is witnessing the process of witnessing. Mack and his family undergo the first level of witnessing when they are inside witnesses of their victimization by the kidnapping of Missy at the camp site. Willie undergoes the second level of witnessing as he is the listener of Mack’s story as well as the re-teller of it. The final level of witnessing is what will help Mack overcome the event as he starts to realize the process of witnessing what he is going through.
            Willie isn’t the only one who is involved as a listener in the second level of witnessing. The Holy Trinity, which Mack meets at the Shack, Jesus, Sarayu and God, or Papa are also a witness to Mack’s story. Papa aids Mack in the reliving and re-experiencing of the event by sending Mack an invitation back to the abandoned shack, the scene of the crime where they came across poor Missy’s bloody dress. As Mack and the three of them exchange dialogue about the horrific event, Papa, Jesus and Sarayu become the receiver of Mack’s testimony. Their purpose, therefore, is to serve as a “companion on the eerie journey of the testimony” and share with Mack the mutual “struggle to go beyond the event and not be submerged and lost in it” (Laub, 62).
            Telling one’s traumatic story could be a process filled with struggle and affliction as one processes their memories and thoughts of a certain event in attempts to piece their story together. “There are never enough words or the right words to articulate the story that cannot be fully captured in thought, memory, and speech” (Laub, 63). Because of the difficulty in telling their story, many trauma survivors are fated to live their lives in an inevitable “loneliness and bereavement.” Accordingly, Mack fell into an unpierceable silence when tackling “the great sadness” he succumbed to ensuing Missy’s abduction and murder. “The Great Sadness entered his life and he almost quit talking altogether” (Young, 13). According to Laub, it would be essential for survival that Mack breaks through, talks and tells his story. One must express their imperative to tell in order for the continuance of life. Mack, however, seemed temporarily at a silent, frozen pause. “The survivors did not only need to survive so that they could tell their stories; they also needed to tell their stories in order to survive” (Laub, 63).
Relative Illustration (Created by Analiz Jee)
            According to Laub, this incapability to overcome the stress of trauma in order to battle silence makes the “impossibility of telling” that allows “silence about the truth to commonly prevail.” It is important for Mack to defeat the silence accompanied succeeding a traumatic event because the longer remains silent about it, the longer it becomes distorted within one’s mind. “Survivors who do not tell their story become victims of a distorted memory which causes an endless struggle with and over a delusion” (Laub). Mack is already somewhat delusional as the events cause him to question his prior beliefs and he becomes quite blameful and angry towards God. A non-delusional Mack would not have self-isolated himself emotionally from his family and friends who were unable to “thaw his heart, or penetrate the bars of his self-imprisonment” until after his experience with the divine trilogy during his re-visit to the shack.
            Dori Laub explains that one of the consequences of allowing a traumatic event to become distorted in the mind is that it begins to affect one’s perception of themselves. According to Laub’s account of a Holocaust survivor he interviewed for the Fortunoff Video Archive, “her previous inability to tell her story had marred her perception of herself. The untold events had become so distorted in her unconscious memory as to make her believe that she herself, and not the perpetrator, was responsible for the atrocities she witnessed.” The distorted way in which she perceives herself causes her to fail at being an “authentic witness” to her own self (Laub, 65).
            Kate, Missy’s sister is an excellent example of a character who fails to be an authentic witness to herself. Her self-perception is false and distorted based on her memory of the traumatic experience. She fell into a similar impenetrable silence as well. “Kate seemed to have been affected the most, disappearing into a shell, like a turtle protecting its soft underbelly from anything potentially dangerous. It seemed that she would only poke her head out when she felt fully safe, which was becoming less and less often. Mack and Nan both worried increasingly about her, but couldn’t seem to find the right words to penetrate the fortress she was building around her heart... It was as if something had died inside her, and now was slowly infecting her from the inside, spilling out occasionally in bitter words or emotionless silence” (Young, 39). Unlike Mack, she didn’t get an invitation from Papa to help her overcome and tell her story but Mack was given a valuable token of vital information as Sarayu, the colorful and windy personification of the Holy Spirit, expressed to him how Kate blames herself for the kidnapping and death of her sister. Her distorted self-perception caused her to feel an unbearable guilt as she blamed herself and not the perpetrator for the horrendous acts committed to Missy. “What Sarayu told him was so obvious. It made perfect sense that Kate would blame herself. She had raised the paddle that started the sequence of events that led to Missy being taken” (Young, 133). Thanks to this enlightenment Sarayu helped him achieve, he was able to console his daughter to overcome her own struggles when he awoke from a coma. As he told her she shouldn’t blame herself, Kate’s unspoken guilt came pouring out and she began her own process of healing through dialogue and witnessing.
            According to Laub, “a witness is a witness to the truth of what happens during an event. The truth of the event could have been recorded in perception and in memory, either from within or without by any of a number of ‘outsiders’.” Willie is an outside witness and friend of Mack who records the story. Laub believes that “ultimately, God himself could be the witness.” In The Shack God is personified and literally becomes a witness and receiver of testimony as Papa exchanges dialogue with Mack and tries to help him overcome the tragedy. “‘Well, Mackenzie Allen Phillips,’ she laughed, causing him to look up quickly, ‘I am here to help you.’ If a rainbow makes a sound, or a flower as it grows, that was the sound of her laughter. It was a shower of light, an invitation to talk, and Mack chuckles along with her, not even knowing or caring why” (Young, 87). Through talking and engaging in dialogue with Mack, the Holy Trinity was able to convince Mack to let go of his bottled emotions, express his story and eventually forgive the killer for what he did in order to heal.
After Mackenzie’s younger daughter died and he kept his feelings under lock and key in the depths of his heart and soul, he was helplessly entangled in “the great sadness.” However, with the assistance of Papa’s invitation, he was able to relive the events, be relieved of his pain and patch up his relationship with God through talking and testimony, which Laub calls a “dialogical process of exploration and reconciliation of two worlds- the one that was brutally destroyed and one that is- that are different and will always remain so.”  Mack felt as if an immense weight had been lifted from his shoulders once repressed memories began to come back to him and he let out his words, tears, anger and rage during his journey to and experience in the shack in which Missy’s blood-stained red dress was found on that dreadful camping trip three years earlier.
Although the events happened in his dreams while he was in a coma for four days after crashing his car on his way to the shack, there was a noticeable difference in Mack when he awoke. Not only did his visions help him to find Missy’s undiscovered body in order to bury it and help the entire family carry on and heal but Mack woke up with a profound transformation. The great sadness was gone and he was ready to begin a life filled with happiness and simplicity.

Laub considers testimony as being an essential part in the process of facing loss. Although it doesn’t undo what was done or bring back the dead, it does offer a sense of relief that allows possible repossession of yourself and life after being faced with a traumatic experience. Overcoming silence and participating in testimony is “the realization that the lost ones are not coming back; the realization that what life is all about is precisely living with an unfulfilled hope; only this time with the sense that you are not alone any longer” (Laub, 74). The Shack really shows how it is necessary to eventually be open and expressive about your feelings, and not to repress memories in order to alleviate depression and the strong, passionate emotions that are accompanied after trauma has occurred and continue to attempt living a fulfilled life. 

Imposed Gender Roles Within "The Glass Menagerie"

The best thing a person can be in life is who he or she is.
Quite often in life, there are conventional roles that are placed on individuals by society. These roles are usually defined by stereotypes based by one’s race, gender, ethnicity or social class.  Many times, people may suffer from existential anxieties in attempts to redefine themselves as an individual apart from these set roles. Often, however, one may not live to their fullest potential because it is metaphysically easier to simply fall into these roles in attempts to obtain the acceptance of others than to be the product of independent thought.
            Simone de Beauvoir refers to these roles and incapability to develop a unique identity as “the other.” In Tennessee Williams’ tragedy play, The Glass Menagerie, there is a profuse amount of imposed gender roles. This is especially true in the imposing of what the mother, Amanda Wingfield’s idea of what femininity is on her daughter, Laura Wingfield. This is evident from the very beginning when the family is discussing Laura’s lack of “gentleman callers" and her ideas of what women should be to attract and entertain these "gentleman callers" (Williams, Tennessee, 684).
According to De Beauvoir, many people, like Amanda, are ultimately the other because they have chosen to be. Amanda is the perfect example of a woman who enjoys her role as other because it allows her to escape the anxiety of defining herself as subject. It seems that when one does try to break free from other in attempts to simply develop their own personality, they may suffer consequences that affect the quality of life. Some of these punishments that one may suffer from is shown in Amanda’s stringent unthoughtful criticisms toward her daughter (de Beauvoir, 124).
Because Laura does not get any suitable men trying to court her, Amanda is afraid she will not have a man to take care of her and develops aspirations for her daughter to become a secretary. Amanda signs Laura up for school in hopes that she can develop a life for herself. This was never in Laura’s plans, however and although she allows her mother to believe she is going to school, she really is not. In a way, Laura feels the need to deceive her own mother and as a result has to oppress herself around her own family in order to avoid hearing any criticism or negative comments. This is dimly ironic because by not simply being true to herself, Laura has multiplied the criticism because now, not only does she get criticized for not attending her typing classes, but she gets criticized for being deceitful as well. Amanda does not only question Laura’s femininity in comparison to other people but also her entire adulthood. When she finds out Laura has been lying to her she tells her, “I thought you were an adult; it seems that I was mistaken” (Williams, 685).
The roles that are imposed on people often leaves one in a state of delusion. In the case of femininity, one can say that Amanda is delusional about what her daughter truly wants to be like as she makes plans for what Laura's life and personality should be according to her standards. Amanda covers her incapability to deal with reality by focusing on Laura, through her criticisms and through her unrealistic expectations. Rather than focusing on her own transcendence and defining herself as an individual apart from these standards, she is focused on hopes that Laura will fit the same standards, remaining in the same state of immanence as her mother.
Laura, although secretly defiant of her mothers’ imposing, is also in a state of self-delusion and otherness because she often feels the need to create an illusion fitting of Amanda's standards in order to avoid hearing criticism. She never wanted to go to business school, she would have rather secretly explored, and she did. During the hours where she was supposed to be at school, Laura was visiting the museum, the park, the movies, shops, etc. Although she managed to do what she wanted behind her mother’s back, her worries are evident as she explains the reasons for lying to her mother. She did not just lie for the sake of being deceitful. She lied because she did not want to disappoint her mother: "Mother, when you're disappointed, you get that awful suffering look on your face, like the picture of Jesus' mother in the museum! I couldn't face it." This tendency to avoid disappointing the people around her, is what inhibits Laura's genuineness from flourishing. (Williams, 686).
The very advice given to Laura by her own mother proves that parenthood may be one of the primary institutions within the patriarchy that emphasize the value of gender roles in society. Too often, women are not understood in themselves independent from men, but are defined and valued in terms of their relation to men. While mothers like Amanda continue to give their daughters this kind of advice the difficulty to define oneself independent from men will prevail, leaving many women in a state of immanence. Women are highly capable of transcending, but the traditional relationship between man and woman dooms many women to an existence of immanence in which she never progresses or develops her own unique identity (De Beauvoir, 128).Through imposing these traditional values on Laura, Amanda is encouraging of this lack of progression. "It is proved that there is a description of gender role socialization within mother-daughter relationship, that Amanda has been socialized certain gender roles explicitly to Laura, by using specific ways in socializing those gender roles" (Tungka & Darta, 1).
Amanda warns Laura of the consequences of not taking up the business career and plans that she has made for her daughter. She asks of Laura, “what is there left but dependency all our lives?” and warns her by depicting a horrible alternative life as the consequence of not following Amanda’s plans, “I know so well what becomes of unmarried women who aren’t prepared to occupy a position. I’ve seen such pitiful cases in the South-- barely tolerated spinsters living upon the grudging patronage of sister’s husband or brother’s wife!-- stuck away in some little mouse-trap of a room-- encouraged by one in-law to visit another-- little birdlike women without any nest-- eating the crust of humility all their life! Is that the future we’ve mapped out for ourselves?” She advises her daughter that if she cannot make a business career of herself that she ought to marry some nice man to depend on (Williams, 686-687).
Amanda, as a dominant single mother tries to prepare Laura for the sole purpose of finding a husband after failing to complete her classes. Amanda is filling her position in a patriarchal institution by forcefully socializing the role of a housewife to Laura through her advice. She wants Laura to stay "fresh and pretty-- for gentleman callers!" (Williams, 682).
Laurie Arliss explains in her book Gender Communication that parenthood is one of main foundations that result in the social conditioning of an individual because parents are the very first agents of society in a child's life since birth. While raising a child, parents react differently toward their child's behavior in relation to their gender by reinforcing what is considered feminine behaviors in girls and what is considered masculine behavior in boys. By purposely preparing children for appropriate adult sex roles, one may never transcend thus raising an individual who does not live to their fullest potential. Some examples of social conditioning by parents is the rewarding of 'strong, solid and independent' behaviors in boys and 'loving, cute and sweet' behaviors in girls. Children are also conditioned by the very beginning through their toys as boys are usually playing with toy soldiers, cars and participating in sports, while girls are surrounded by dolls and play kitchen sets. Arliss refers to this condition as "anticipatory socialization." On the reverse side, parents also may act negatively toward behaviors deemed as the opposite of gender appropriate through either disciplinary verbal sanctions or physical punishment. This negative reinforcement is called "non-anticipatory socialization" (Arliss, 133-134).
Amanda conditions Laura by determining how she ought to behave in order to attract any potential suitors by claiming how girls in her days "knew how to talk" and that she, unlike Laura, "understood the art of conversation." She explains to her son, Tom that she and the girls from her time "knew how to entertain their gentleman callers. It wasn't enough for a girl to be possessed of a pretty face and a graceful figure-- although I wasn't slighted in either respect. She also needed wit and a tongue to meet all occasions" (Williams, 682).
Amanda also tries to condition Laura's interests and personality by advising that not only should she be a good conversationalist but that she also should not be so quiet and shy and that she ought to be more outgoing and encourages her to get dressed up and go out rather than stay at home. Amanda asks her, "Laura are you going to do what I asked you to do, or do I have to get dressed and go out myself? 
Rather than accepting Laura's differences in her personality she tries to adjust her shy character toward a more charming and vivacious one. While Amanda is helping Laura get ready for a date with Jim O' Connor, she questions her trembling and nervousness. Any of Laura's actions that do not fit Amanda's ideals of what it means to be feminine confuses her: "I don't understand you, Laura. You couldn't be satisfied with just sitting home, yet whenever I try to arrange something for you, you seem to resist it." Amanda seems to be frustrated with any of Laura's differences and does not believe that she should simply be satisfied with her own individual pastimes, which is sitting at home with her old records playing and taking care if her glass menagerie. Not only does she impose social standards on to Laura but she also imposes beauty standards by enhancing her bosom, stuffing her bra with two powder puffs. She calls them "Gay Deceivers" and when Laura expresses her refusal to wear them, Amanda forces her to and insults her by saying, "to be painfully honest, your chest is flat" (Williams, 705).
By enforcing gender roles from the very beginning of life many people are growing up to not fulfill their full potential. As a result, parenthood is a biological institution "lying under the patriarchal society, which aim to ensure that all potential on earth, and including women, shall remain under male control." Through this social conditioning brought on by one’s parents, daughters are placed in the "subordinate position, where male will always be the center or the purpose on their life" (Humm, 269).
Simone de Beauvoir agrees with Humm's claim by stating that "humanity is male, and man defines woman not in herself but in relation to him; she is not considered as an autonomous being." By being kept in a position of inferiority through these types of social conditionings, women have become inferior to men and because of the emphasis on social conformity, the emancipation of woman has been seen as a danger that threatens conservative morals and interests. This social conditioning have created an atmosphere where a man's self-entitlement allows him to never even have to question his place on earth in comparison to a woman's. "One of the benefits that oppression gives the oppressors is that it makes the most humble men among them feel superior... When compared to women, the most mediocre male can think of himself as a demi-god" (de Beauvoir, 124-127).
Everything that Amanda does in preperance for Laura's date with Jim is under the agenda to please him while there is no focus on Laura's needs or what makes her happy. She even goes as far as letting Laura take responsibility for the dinner that she prepared, giving Jim the illusion that Laura actually is this subordinate, male-serving character. "You know that Laura is in full charge of supper! It's rare for a girl as sweet an' pretty as Laura to be domestic! But Laura is, thank heavens, not only pretty but also very domestic." Not only does Amanda's dialogue between her, Jim and Tom in this scene impose roles toward women, but it also imposes what a man should be attracted to on women. Amanda selfishly puts her marriage plans for Laura into play by delivering the most convincing good impression that she can possibly leave on Jim. (Williams, 711-712).
Amanda does not mean to lead her daughter toward this path of immanence. As a parent, she has good intentions and realizes the consequences of straying away from the role as other. Simone de Beauvoir does not deny these consequences either. She warns readers that “to refuse to be the Other, to refuse complicity with men, would require that women renounce all the advantages that alliance with the superior cast confers upon them” the same way that Amanda warns Laura of the consequential alternative lifestyle for not conforming to her expectations. Aside from Amanda’s “barely tolerated spinsters” example, de Beauvoir offers her own example of a well-known female author who refused to allow her portrait to appear in a photo series dedicated to female authors. According to de Beauvoir, she wanted to be included among the men, not solely women “but she used the influence of her husband to obtain this privilege” making it nearly impossible to obtain masculine respect and acknowledgement without using her husband as a means to getting to that position (De Beauvoir, 124-125).
Although there may be social consequences for not filling the role of other, De Beauvoir also warns her readers of the more grim metaphysical consequences of not justifying her existence as a unique individual. She warns the reader, “along with the economic risk, she also eludes the metaphysical risk of a freedom that must invent its own ends without help. Indeed, besides the urge of every individual to affirm himself as subject, which is an ethical urge, there is also the temptation to flee one’s freedom to become an object.” This temptation that Amanda has fallen into and urges for her daughter to as well “is a disastrous path-- passive, alienated, lost; on it one becomes prey to someone else’s will, cut off from one’s transcendence, defrauded of all worth. But it is an easy path.” It is an easy path for one such as Amanda whom seems incapable of developing a personality based on independent thought but voluntarily devlops one based on oppressive traditional values. Just because Amanda has conformed to the role of other, however, does not mean that she is any less happy than someone who has decided to define themselves based on their own exclusive mindset because to a certain extent, it eliminates some despair as it “evades the anguish and the stress of taking upon oneself an authentic existence… Woman does not affirm herself as subject because she does not have the material resources, because she feels that the bond that ties her to the man is necessary even if it lacks reciprocity, and because she is often pleased with her role as the Other” (de Beauvoir, 125).
By allowing Laura to decide little regarding her own future, Laura's responsibility to define herself as an individual is being put at risk. By not trusting Laura to make decisions for herself she is risking her falling into a state of immanence. Amanda's lack of trust that Laura can lead her own life is evident in the dialogue between her and her son. Amanda tells Tom, "we have to be making plans and provisions for her... It frightens me how she just drifts along... I mean that as soon as Laura has got somebody to take care of her, married, a home of her own, independent.” This is an ironic use of the word “independent” because Amanda’s idea of independent is apparently to be completely reliant on a husband. She continues, “I put her in business college-- a dismal failure! I took her over to the Young People’s League at the church. Another fiasco. She spoke to nobody, nobody spoke to her. Now all she does is fool with those pieces of glass and play those worn-out records. What kind of life is that for a girl to lead?” (Williams, 696-697).
Amanda focused all her energy on planning a life out for Laura, rather than focusing on her own transcendence. It is ironic how much effort she put into finding Laura a husband because the one gentleman that she found suitable is unavailable. Jim turns out to be engaged to marry a woman by the name of Betty soon. Amanda fails to see the error of her ways and blames Tom for the whole disaster since he was the one who introduced Jim to the family even though he did not even know about Betty.
Through her negative criticisms, Amanda offers Laura all but negatives sanctions as a consequence for her gender/age inappropriate behavior. Through the automatic connotation of Laura's shy and nervous nature with negativity and silliness, Amanda makes Laura feel inferior for who she naturally is. Through her parenting tactics, Amanda's character shows how parenthood can be a primary enforcer of misogyny within a patriarchal society, as well as an enforcer of all imposed stereotyped roles of the world. As long as these social oppressions exist, the importance of being a human being above all the peculiarities that distinguish humans from one another will rarely take part in shaping humanity to its fullest potential.






Works Cited:

Arliss, Laurie. 1990. “Gender Communication.” New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
De Beauvoir, Simone. “Woman as The Second Sex.” Traversing Philosophical Boundaries. 3rd
          Edition. Hallman, Max O. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth, 2007, pg. 121-129.
Humm, Maggie. 1992. “Feminism, A Reader.” Great Britain: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Tungka, Novalita Francisca & Darta, Deta Maria Sri. “The Study of Gender Role Socialization
          Between the Major Female Characters in Tennessee William’s The Glass Menagerie.”
Williams, Tennessee. “The Glass Menagerie.” The Heath Introduction to Drama. 5th Edition.       

          Miller, Jordan Y. Lexington, Ma.: D.C. Heath and Company, 1996, pg. 679-728.