The Insensitive Treatment of Domestic Violence in Zora Neale Hurston's
Their Eyes Were Watching God
Zora Neale Hurston's Their Eyes Were Watching God is considered in all respects to be a fundamentally and classically feminist piece of art. Alice Walker hails it as the book that "speaks to [her] as no novel…has ever done" (The Washington Post 3). This comes four years after Alice Walker nearly single handedly resurrected the already forgotten but epic feminist and novelist. For years Their Eyes Were Watching God was out of print and Zora Neale Hurston out of popularity, but with her revival came a surge of positive feminist discourse surrounding her and her most famous work pronouncing her "the patron saint of black women writers" (The Washington Post 3). The story is of a first generation free black woman, Janie Crawford, whose dreams of self actualization and true love lead her through two unsavory husbands and self concealment to the love of her life, Tea Cake, and self love. Nearly all the aspects of Their Eyes Were Watching God such as minimal reliance on men, eventual non-compliance to societal standards, and, most importantly, the independent woman theme of the work are held up impeccably to feminist ideals and standards. However, Zora Neale Hurston's treatment of battering and domestic violence lacks in the fundamental ideals of feminism. Tea Cake, who in all other cases is presented as most liberating to Janie, forcefully, albeit sparingly, imposes violence upon her. How Janie and Tea Cake react to these events, either passionately or nonchalantly, creates a tension between feminist theory on domestic violence and Hurston's treatment of it. When viewed through a feminist lens, Zora Neale Hurston's Their Eyes Were Watching God presents domestic violence between Janie and Tea Cake in an insensitive and maladaptive way by promoting incorrect assumptions of romanticism and normal masculinity.
The instances of domestic violence between Janie and Tea Cake are unnecessarily romanticized. In one scene in particular, Janie suspects Tea Cake of cheating, so they get into an argument and she "cut him short with a blow" and they "fought on" (Hurston 137). Ideally, Janie or Tea Cake would realize the seriousness of the issue and deal with it more maturely. Realistically, Janie or Tea cake might leave the hot tempered relationship. But actually, they "wrestled on until…their clothes had been torn away…doing things with their bodies to express the inexpressible" and wake up teasing and flirting over the whole event (Hurston 137). Hurston's impermissible excuse for the violence appears to be passion. In Ann Jones's "Battering: Who's Going to Stop It?," Jones describes many peoples' beliefs in the "romantic scenario" despite the harsh truth of domestic violence (Jones 485). Some believe that violence is just another means of showing true, unbridled passion. Perhaps Tea Cake and Janie were just too embroiled in their love to realize their "crime of passion" (Jones 485). If this incident were treated with feminist ideology, Janie and Tea Cake's acts of aggression would lack all romance and provide plenty of imminent repercussions.
The second example of domestic violence is a more "classic" one; Tea Cake beats Janie, and she doesn't fight back. After Tea Cake perceives a threat from another man who is half-heartedly pursuing Janie, Tea Cake whips her to "relieve that awful fear inside him" (Hurston 147). The description of his beating is almost laughable at how obviously contradictory it is; "No brutal beating at all. He just slapped her around a bit to show he was boss" (Hurston 147). The man who is supposed to be what every straight feminist "dreams" of commits an unforgivable crime. Worst of all, Tea Cake's pampering of Janie and her bruises after their incident "made the women [friends] see visions" (Hurston 147). All the men go on to commend Tea Cake about his fine "tender" wife and how he treats her (Hurston 148). Ideally and with feminist values in mind, this instance would have been treated with more seriousness and disdain. This sort of abuse would be subject to government and hopefully societal intervention. In Maria Silveirihna's "Displacing the 'Political,'" she describes the necessity to make the "private" affairs of domestic violence and battering political. She argues that keeping matters such as domestic violence from political view acts "as part of a dominant speech legitimating women's oppression" (Silveirihna 3). Every member of Janie and Tea Cake's group undoubtedly accept Tea Cake's whippings as solely a private matter that should reap no repercussions. Masculinity also obviously plays a part in this instance of domestic violence. Tea Cake admits that he whips Janie to show he is boss, and all of their friends accept that this is a normal, even encouraged, performance for a husband to show his wife. In Sarah Galvani's review of several books related to masculinity and violence, she asserts that for many men and women "such violence is a 'normal' part of life" (Galvani 2). That Tea Cake is provoked to prove his masculinity is anti-feminist enough, but that he does it through violent means makes it shocking that Hurston even wrote this outcome of abusive behavior. The potential for this incident is great; Tea Cake could have let Janie do what she does best throughout the novel- speak her mind and get her way by fending off the possible suitor. Another chance for feminist glory is instead reversed to a neglectful situation of domestic violence.
Their Eyes Were Watching God is undoubtedly a wholly inspiring and liberating novel with feminist ideals encompassing the themes and discussions covered. However, despite the work's several merits for being a breakthrough for feminism, Their Eyes Were Watching God ignores the progressive potential to treat domestic violence and battering in a sensitive, forward way. Both isolated instances of domestic violence are handled without feminist ideals in mind, and the result is a shameful waste of the possible discussion of a controversial topic that would have surely been handled in a feminist way by Zora Neale Hurston today. Instead, the treatment of battering and domestic violence is skewed to fit romantic and masculine assumptions.
Their Eyes Were Watching God
Zora Neale Hurston's Their Eyes Were Watching God is considered in all respects to be a fundamentally and classically feminist piece of art. Alice Walker hails it as the book that "speaks to [her] as no novel…has ever done" (The Washington Post 3). This comes four years after Alice Walker nearly single handedly resurrected the already forgotten but epic feminist and novelist. For years Their Eyes Were Watching God was out of print and Zora Neale Hurston out of popularity, but with her revival came a surge of positive feminist discourse surrounding her and her most famous work pronouncing her "the patron saint of black women writers" (The Washington Post 3). The story is of a first generation free black woman, Janie Crawford, whose dreams of self actualization and true love lead her through two unsavory husbands and self concealment to the love of her life, Tea Cake, and self love. Nearly all the aspects of Their Eyes Were Watching God such as minimal reliance on men, eventual non-compliance to societal standards, and, most importantly, the independent woman theme of the work are held up impeccably to feminist ideals and standards. However, Zora Neale Hurston's treatment of battering and domestic violence lacks in the fundamental ideals of feminism. Tea Cake, who in all other cases is presented as most liberating to Janie, forcefully, albeit sparingly, imposes violence upon her. How Janie and Tea Cake react to these events, either passionately or nonchalantly, creates a tension between feminist theory on domestic violence and Hurston's treatment of it. When viewed through a feminist lens, Zora Neale Hurston's Their Eyes Were Watching God presents domestic violence between Janie and Tea Cake in an insensitive and maladaptive way by promoting incorrect assumptions of romanticism and normal masculinity.
The instances of domestic violence between Janie and Tea Cake are unnecessarily romanticized. In one scene in particular, Janie suspects Tea Cake of cheating, so they get into an argument and she "cut him short with a blow" and they "fought on" (Hurston 137). Ideally, Janie or Tea Cake would realize the seriousness of the issue and deal with it more maturely. Realistically, Janie or Tea cake might leave the hot tempered relationship. But actually, they "wrestled on until…their clothes had been torn away…doing things with their bodies to express the inexpressible" and wake up teasing and flirting over the whole event (Hurston 137). Hurston's impermissible excuse for the violence appears to be passion. In Ann Jones's "Battering: Who's Going to Stop It?," Jones describes many peoples' beliefs in the "romantic scenario" despite the harsh truth of domestic violence (Jones 485). Some believe that violence is just another means of showing true, unbridled passion. Perhaps Tea Cake and Janie were just too embroiled in their love to realize their "crime of passion" (Jones 485). If this incident were treated with feminist ideology, Janie and Tea Cake's acts of aggression would lack all romance and provide plenty of imminent repercussions.
The second example of domestic violence is a more "classic" one; Tea Cake beats Janie, and she doesn't fight back. After Tea Cake perceives a threat from another man who is half-heartedly pursuing Janie, Tea Cake whips her to "relieve that awful fear inside him" (Hurston 147). The description of his beating is almost laughable at how obviously contradictory it is; "No brutal beating at all. He just slapped her around a bit to show he was boss" (Hurston 147). The man who is supposed to be what every straight feminist "dreams" of commits an unforgivable crime. Worst of all, Tea Cake's pampering of Janie and her bruises after their incident "made the women [friends] see visions" (Hurston 147). All the men go on to commend Tea Cake about his fine "tender" wife and how he treats her (Hurston 148). Ideally and with feminist values in mind, this instance would have been treated with more seriousness and disdain. This sort of abuse would be subject to government and hopefully societal intervention. In Maria Silveirihna's "Displacing the 'Political,'" she describes the necessity to make the "private" affairs of domestic violence and battering political. She argues that keeping matters such as domestic violence from political view acts "as part of a dominant speech legitimating women's oppression" (Silveirihna 3). Every member of Janie and Tea Cake's group undoubtedly accept Tea Cake's whippings as solely a private matter that should reap no repercussions. Masculinity also obviously plays a part in this instance of domestic violence. Tea Cake admits that he whips Janie to show he is boss, and all of their friends accept that this is a normal, even encouraged, performance for a husband to show his wife. In Sarah Galvani's review of several books related to masculinity and violence, she asserts that for many men and women "such violence is a 'normal' part of life" (Galvani 2). That Tea Cake is provoked to prove his masculinity is anti-feminist enough, but that he does it through violent means makes it shocking that Hurston even wrote this outcome of abusive behavior. The potential for this incident is great; Tea Cake could have let Janie do what she does best throughout the novel- speak her mind and get her way by fending off the possible suitor. Another chance for feminist glory is instead reversed to a neglectful situation of domestic violence.
Their Eyes Were Watching God is undoubtedly a wholly inspiring and liberating novel with feminist ideals encompassing the themes and discussions covered. However, despite the work's several merits for being a breakthrough for feminism, Their Eyes Were Watching God ignores the progressive potential to treat domestic violence and battering in a sensitive, forward way. Both isolated instances of domestic violence are handled without feminist ideals in mind, and the result is a shameful waste of the possible discussion of a controversial topic that would have surely been handled in a feminist way by Zora Neale Hurston today. Instead, the treatment of battering and domestic violence is skewed to fit romantic and masculine assumptions.
No comments:
Post a Comment