Voice: How the Suppression of Women has Limited Their Role in Society and Silenced Their Voice Throughout Male-Narrative Literature

Throughout history, women have undergone a silent struggle; a struggle where they are oppressed by the male counterparts in all aspects of society. Men controlled how the women ran their homes, when and what kind of jobs they could have, and what kind of entertainment they could participate in.  This includes literature.  For centuries men have controlled what type of literature women were given and they controlled how female characters were depicted within these works.  By examining the power-structured relationships that existed between the sexes for centuries, one can understand how this relationship has carried itself into literature.  By looking at Norris’ idea of the female voice which is silenced by male narrators, one can see how this power-structure carries over into works of literature. Derek Walcott’s epic poem Omeros is one example of how female characters are not given a true voice within a text.  Walcott paints the female characters in his poem as one sided.  Because he is male, he cannot understand the struggle behind his female characters’ actions.  He does not see them as empathic characters and takes their actions at face value. 

  Then, as women begin to question the role they play in society, the depiction or ‘voice’ of female characters begin to change, especially when the writer is female herself.  We see this shift in Barbara Kingslover’s novel The Lacuna.  In this novel, Kingslover introduces us to Salome, who is anything buy the typical housewife and doting mother.  In spite of Salome’s flaws, which are abundant, the reader is given insight as to Salome’s struggles as a woman.  We are given a sympatric voice to Salome and given the understanding that as a woman, Salome’s options are limited.  She is trying to make the most of her limited resources, but she does not always choose wisely.    Written from a male writer, the readers would not be given this same portrayal of Salome.  We would see a character more like Helen in Omeros.  One that appears cold, and selfish.  A woman who is only looking after herself and has no regard for the lives she disrupts in order to get her means.

Power-Relationships: How Women were Placed in an Immovable Position with Limited Power and Voice 

In order to understand how female characters can be depicted in such extreme ways, one first has to recognize the struggle woman have faced throughout time.  Early feminist writers Kate Millet and Betty Friedan both write about the struggles women faced in gaining power, breaking barriers and gaining an appropriate language to help share their “voice”. 

Kate Millet discusses in her writing Sexual Policies about the power-structure that is set in society.  To understand this power-structure one first has to understand that her goal is to “attempt to prove that sex is a status category with political implications” (http://www.marxists.org/subject/women/authors/millett-kate/theory.htm.). What she means is that although she uses the word politics, for lack of a better word, her main purpose is to show the correlation between sex and power.  Millet further goes on to say;

The word “politics” is enlisted here when speaking of the sexes primarily because such a word is eminently useful in outlining the real nature of their relative status, historically and at the present. It is opportune, perhaps today even mandatory, that we develop a more relevant psychology and philosophy of power relationships beyond the simple conceptual framework provided by our traditional formal politics. Indeed, it may be imperative that we give some attention to defining a theory of politics which treats of power relationships on grounds less conventional than those to which we are accustomed. I have therefore found it pertinent to define them on grounds of personal contact and interaction between members of well-defined and coherent groups: races, castes, classes, and sexes. For it is precisely because certain groups have no representation in a number of recognized political structures that their position tends to be so stable, their oppression so continuous. (http://www.marxists.org/subject/women/authors/millett-kate/theory.htm.)

Millet is trying to show that our language has limits.  She is forced to use the word “politics” because that is the easiest way for one to understand a relationship of power; if put in political terms.  But the power-relationship that Millet sees in regards to the sexes is simply not one of politics alone.  This power struggle is on every level, political, religious, economic ect…  That it affects every aspect of one’s lifestyle.  She also goes on to state how this power-relationship labels people in terms of races, casts, classes and sexes.  These are all ways in which power is distributed.  What race you belong to gives you more or less power than another.  What class you belong to allows you more access to resources than others.  What sex you are allows you certain advantages over another.  These statuses become our defining identities.  One is expected to act a certain way because they belong to this race and this class.  Their options are limited and restricted.  There is no way of them ever breaking out beyond their pre-contrived options, which are placed by the powers in charge: white, rich men.  Since one can never change their sex or their race, their position within the political structure is secured.  They can never rise or fall from their position.

If our position is concrete in this political structure, then one has to live with the position they are placed in.  This position controls all aspects of our lives.  What kind of job we can have, how much money we can make, where we can live and what accesses to education we are allowed.  Women have been at the lower end of this power spectrum for centuries.  Our roles have been determined by the men in our lives.  The only way we can gain in the power-relationship was through our father’s or husbands.  When women were trying to break free from the restrictions put upon them by this power-relationship they were limited once again by language, or lack of language.  Betty Friedan talks about this problem Chapter one of The Feminine Mystique.  She states “Just what was this problem that has no name? What were the words women used when they tried to express it? Sometimes a woman would say ‘I feel empty somehow . . . incomplete.’ Or she would say, ‘I feel as if I don’t exist.’”  (http://www.h-net.org/~hst203/documents/friedan1.html)   The “problem” is that women are bound to a certain status in life that they cannot escape. There are certain roles and expectations placed upon them by men that they have to fulfill in order to gain any sort of recognition or acceptance in society.  Women feel like they don’t exist because their existence is wrapped around their children and their husbands.   Without them, a woman does not exist in society. 

Friedan takes on this theory further by examining “when a woman tries to put the problem into words, she often merely describes the daily life she leads. What is there in this recital of comfortable domestic detail that could possibly cause such a feeling of desperation? Is she trapped simply by the enormous demands of her role as modern housewife” (http://www.h-net.org/~hst203/documents/friedan1.html).  Women are struggling to find a role in society that is outside of the household.  Not finding fulfillment in completing the duties of a housewife is an issue that many women are struggling with but yet cannot find a defiant term for their unhappiness because the language they are given is a language of men.  Women cannot look in a book and find the answer to their anxieties and discontent because men can never relate to these feelings.  Any advice they are given is given to them by someone not belonging to their status, someone who holds more power in the power-relationship status. 

Keeping this idea that women are limited to using a language to describe their experience which was created by parties who do not understand their experience, it is evident to see that women are oppressed by the limitations of their language.  Their “voices” cannot be fully heard when using the language of men.  Norris picks up on this concept within literature. Norris believes that in literature female characters are not given a true voice.  One of the major restrictions that female characters face in literature is that they are presented through the voice of a male narrator, and usually a male author, and also that many works of fiction “assume a patriarchal role in relation to the reader” and applies it to its female characters. (Norris 204). Both of these issues, while found in “The Dead”, which is the main work Norris concentrates on,  can be found in many works of literature, especially in regards to the Canon, and the problems that arise from these factors can be found in many works of literature.

Norris spends a significant amount of time focusing on the male narrator or male voice in “The Dead”.  She states that “ ‘The Dead’ must therefore be read not as one text but as two texts: a ‘loud’ or audible male narration challenged and disrupted by a ‘silent’ or discounted female counter text that does not, in the end, succeed in making itself heard”(Norris 192).  How are male writers and male narrators going to speak about the restrictions and limitations of being in a lower level of power in regards to the power-relationship when they are always at the top level?  Male writers have never had to experience what it is like to be restricted in the ways that women are restricted by, so women’s struggles with coming to terms with these restrictions, trying to break away from them, and the dissatisfaction that comes from being on a lower level of power is all foreign to the male narrator. Therefore the female characters in these works of literature are not given an accurate voice or the proper language to grant them an impacting voice to offer to the readers. Think back to the women Friedan is writing about.  How are they supposed to put a voice to their unhappiness if they are looking towards men to give them this voice; to name a problem that they cannot ever understand themselves, because they have never been in the same position as women? 

Female characters are not given true voices.  How can they when the narrator presenting them is male?  The narrator is going to share with his audience what is important for his story, and bypass what he thinks is not, and this in many ways silences the female characters.   Only when the narrator is female, and usually when the author is female, do we then get to see this shift in active voice. Suddenly, readers begin to hear the females’ voices, and get insight into their feelings and reactions to the plot that involves them.  When a narrator is male, he unknowingly silences his female characters; portrays them in an ideal way that men expect women to behave and act in literature and in society.

                Another issue that Norris finds in “The Dead” which can be found through works of literature is that “‘The Dead’ refuses to instruct readers about female oppression and thereby refuses to assume a patriarchal role in relation to the reader; rather it presents readers with textual problems that they must labor to puzzle, understand, and solve for themselves” (Norris 204).  By ignoring or omitting the centuries of struggle women have faced in order to receive equal rights as their male counterparts, texts of literature leave gaps in regards to their female characters.  How can one write about the struggle and power-relationship when they are writing from a status of power?  Males have always been the one to hold the power, so they cannot begin to understand what it’s like to not be in such a position.  This idea can be seen in works of literature and not just restricted to male and female depictions.  We can also apply this idea to characters that are of different races, another one of the positions that Millet describes in her power-relationships that are unchangeable.    Male narrators and male authors do not understand what it is like to not be in a position of power and therefore cannot give accurate voices to both female and ethnic characters. 

Although Norris focuses her article on “The Dead”, her ideas can be used in numerous texts.  The struggles that male writers have when giving female characters authentic voices is something that can be seen in countless works of literature. One work that shows this is Omeros, by Derek Walcott.  We see how Walcott depicts female characters in his novel as one sided and how this depiction often leaves the reader with a harsh view of his female characters. Barbara Kingsolver on the other hand, does give her female character voice. Although her character is not one to be celebrated, Kingsolver is able to create a sense of empathy for Salome by giving her an accurate voice.  Because Kingslover belongs to the same position in the power-relationship as her character, she is able to give the readers enough insight to Salome’s actions.  She is able to give her female character voice, unlike Walcott and other male writers.

Silenced: How Helen’s Voices are Silenced in Omeros

 In Omeros, we meet a female character named Helen, but we also get to meet an island, that is given feminist qualities, and also shares the name Helen.  Both of these “characters” are seen through a male perspective, and their story therefore is a male perception.  Walcott has two texts within his epic poem.  He has his voice, and the silent voice of his female characters.  The first of the two female characters we will explore is the Island of St. Lucia. 

            St Lucia is personified throughout this whole novel.  Walcott refers to the island as Helen; St Lucia is often called Helen of the West because she was fought over by both Britain and France.  Walcott often writes how St. Lucia is losing her natural beauty and charm and is being corrupted by commercialism and tourism.  We see this in the passage:

            This island of St. Lucia, quittez mon dire z’autres!

            Let me tell you is heading for unqualified

disaster,  ces manailles-la, pas blague, I am not

Joking.  Every vote is your ticket, your free ride

On the Titanic: a cruse back to slavery

In liners like hotels you cannot sit inside

Except as waiters, maids.  This chicanery!

Like that man hopping there, St Lucia look healthy

With bananas and tourists, but her soul crying (Walcott 107)

Walcott is discussing how industrialization is bad for St Lucia and that it will take away her soul.  This is his perspective as a male.  What one does not see is St. Lucia’s feminine voice.  Although it is an island, according to Walcott’s personification, Helen, the island, soul is crying.  Perhaps what Walcott fails to see is that by allowing tourism onto St. Lucia, gives her more wealth and prestige.  She is able to provide her people with more employment and opportunities by allowing tourism to use her.  She may be selling herself, but it is a choice she is proud to make.  Yes, she has bananas and natural beauty that can provide a sufficient live for her inhabitants, but by allowing tourism and commercialism, she is bridging the gap between her people and the Eastern world.  She is allowing them to be influenced by one another.  She is allowing her children to have access to a better education, so they can have the opportunities to succeed in ways that would not be possible without tourism and commercialism.  By this perspective, Helen is acting like a true mother, giving up the best of herself in order that her children have better opportunities.

We see Walcott is troubled by the tourism and commercialism that is corrupting Helen’s soul.  We see again in the passage “for the land that was lost, a woman who was gone” (Walcott 175).  The woman that Walcott once knew is gone, and there is now a different woman.  A woman who is finding new ways to provide for herself, who is breaking away from tradition and moving towards a more modern world.  This voice, the voice of the Helen of the West, is not seen within a “loud” text of this poem.  One has to look beyond the surface to see that she has a voice and an opinion about what is happening to her, and that it is not the same as Walcott’s. 

  Helen, the character, also has two texts.  We are given the picture of a woman, who is very promiscuous and who often leaves her lovers for someone who is of better social status.  First, she leaves Achille for Hector, and then she has an affair with Plunkett.  All the reader is given about Helen is her hurtful or “unwomanly” actions.  We are never given her back-story. We are introduced to Helen by learning that she stripped off her costume at her waitress job after the customers became to grabby with her, that she is pregnant and doesn’t know who the father is and according to Maud “but the girl lies so much and she stole” (Walcott 29).  We never once, get to hear Helen’s thoughts or perspective about her situation.   We never get her history, or find out where her family is.  Helen the person mirrors Helen of the West because two men are fighting to control her beauty, wealth, and fertility. While she is desired for her natural beauty, she is criticized for allowing men to use it.  Their story, their true voice, is silenced within the male narration of the text.

Do You Hear That?:  How Kingslover Gives her Female Character a True Voice

            Kingslover, as a female writer, does provide her readers with the insight of Salome’s oppression.  Although Kingslover paints Salome as a bad mother she does allow the readers to have some empathy towards this character. 

One of the first impressions we get of Salome is a women who is proud to have “pure” Spanish blood; “probably it pleased her to be the green-eyed Spaniard among the Indians, or rather, the Criolla: Mexican-born but pure nonetheless, with no Indian blood mixed in” (Kingslover 9).   The readers also learn that Salome is very judgmental and hateful of the Indian girls “’Indian girls’ she spat. ‘What kind of man would chase after that?  A corn-eater will never be any more than she is’” (Kingslover 12).  Upon first encountering this text and Salome’s reaction to people of mixed-blood, Salome appears to be a very snobbish and unappealing character. 

What Kingslover does however, is show us later in the text, why Salome is so hateful against these girls. Kingslover does this on the next page when she tells us that “the last galopina was a pretty girl, Ofelia, too much admired by Enrique, given the sack by Salome” (Kingslover 13).  Because Salome and Enrique are not married and because she relies on him to provide for herself and her son, she is constantly oppressed by him and his authority.  Salome is very much aware that she can be replaced at any time and that if she is, her son and herself would be left helpless.  We see that Salome is aware of this possibility when Harrison describes the contents of the Father Box to his readers.  The box contains a picture of Harrison’s father, a pocket watch, old coins, jeweled cuff links and fobs.  Kingslover lets her audience know that;

Strictly speaking, these things are yours, she’d told him.  But strictly speaking they were not even hers, she’d scooped them up in a hurry without asking, when she left and ran off to Mexico. ‘In case we needed something to sell later on, if we fell on hard times.’ If they fell on something harder than Enrique, she must have meant (Kingslover 26) 

The fear of being abandoned by Enrique or by some other man is a constant of Salome.  She is aware that due to her reputation and situation she will forever have to rely on a man to support her and her child.  Kingslover lets the readers know that Salome is known as:

The cat’s meow, a snake charmer.  Also a fire bell.  One of the oil men said to his wife, when the others were outside.  Explaning the situation.  Fire Bell meant still married, to the husband in America.  After all this time not divorced, some poor sod in D.C., an administration accountant.  She had the affair right under his nose with this Mexican attaché, [Enrique] she couldn’t have been more than twenty-five at the time and with that child already (Kingslover 15) 

Salome is known in the town and by Enrique’s business associates as the woman who left her husband in the United States.  She has a tarnished reputation.  It is because of this reputation that she is completely at Enrique’s mercy unless she can find another man to provide for her and her son.  In spite of her pure blood and beauty, it will be hard for Salome to find another man to take her in because of her reputation and because of Harrison.  This leaves her completely reliant upon Enrique.  She has to put up with his infidelities and mistreatment.  She has to deal with Enrique’s control because she is living in his house, and holds no claim over his money or property.   At one point, Salome is so nervous about her situation that she goes and visits a witch doctor so that she can become pregnant; “‘Enrique can’t be told about this,’ she said. ‘You know that, or course.’ ‘Does he want you to get a baby?’ She straightened her dress and pulled at the back of her stocking. ‘Well. It would change things, wouldn’t it?’”(Kingslover 42).  Salome knows that if she has a baby with Enrique that she will be tied to him forever.  She hopes that if she was carrying his child that Enrique will finally marry her and she will finally have some stability in her power-relationship. 

When Salome leaves Enrique for the Mr. P.T. Cash, the readers can see that she is just living up to her reputation; cheating and then leaving one man for another more successful and wealthy man.  But Kingsolver gives enough back-story and enough voice to Salome so that her readers understand that Salome is doing what she can to survive.  Salome will forever be controlled by men; she if fully aware of this. She is aware of her placement within the politics of power.    Salome is not a dignified character, yet the readers understand that she has limited options and limited power.  She is a woman, who will always be dependent upon a man to care for her and always need a man to give her any sort of status or power.   Salome’s reputation and past actions will forever haunt her; they are inescapable.  They hinder any opportunity she would have of gaining any real independence of her own.  Salome is controlled by the patricidal hierarchy of society both in a large and small scale.  Kingslover allows the audience to see this and allows a sense of empathy towards Salome.  Kingslover allows the readers to see Salome’s flaws and understand that some of her bad decisions are decisions she had to make because of the limitations, either brought on by society or by herself.   Kingslover gives Salome a true voice that one would not get if she was written by a male. 

Giving Voice Today:  Where Will the Future Take Us?

When reading texts it is important to keep in mind whose perspective you are getting?  Who is telling us this story?  Are they bias?  When looking at texts written and told through a male’s perspective one has to question their portrayal of the female characters.  Women have been oppressed by men throughout history.  Their struggles to deal with the stigmas forced upon them as well as their fight to break the restrictions placed upon them are often times silenced in texts.  Women can be portrayed as one dimensional or even poorly when told through the voice of a male character.  Like Helen, the readers only see a woman who is out for her own needs; a woman who jumps from one lover to another in order to better position herself in life and status.  Salome could easily be portrayed the same way Helen is, but the difference in these two women are not their actions or motivations but who is telling their story.  Kingslover, as a woman, is able to bring Salome’s true voice to the readers, the silent and the loud voice.  She as a woman understands the struggle woman face in regards to the “politics” of power-relationships within a male controlled society.  She understands that women have generations of struggle behind them and allows this silent voice to be shown.  This is why Salome, although not a celebrated character within the novel, is looked upon with sympathy and understanding among the readers.  How are other women in literature silenced?  Would we look at female differently if they were allowed to have their “silent” voices heard?  Would female antagonists be looked upon differently if they were portrayed in a female’s voice instead of a male’s?  What happens when female writers choose to ignore the silent voice and depict their female characters the way their male counterparts have for centuries?  How does our lack of language still limit the female voice within literature and within society today?  These are some of the questions we as scholars need to ask ourselves when reading texts and considering the depiction of female characters.  Understanding the power struggle that women have faced throughout time and giving this struggle legitimacy through the use of language and “voice” is the first way of breaking down the power-relationship barriers.  It is a way of allowing women to have a voice of their own and to own up to this voice, to give it life and let it be heard. 

Works Cited

Friedan, Betty. “The Feminine Mystique Chapter 1 “The Problem that has no Name”.” 1963. http://www.h-net.org/~hst203/documents/friedan1.html . 8 May 2011 http://www.h-net.org/~hst203/documents/friedan1.html.

jpg – www.zap2it.com/media/photo/2006-10/25696096.jpg

Kingslover, Barbara. The Lacuna. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2009.

Millett, Kate. “Chapter 2 of “Sexual Politics Theroy of Sexual Policies.” 1969. 8 May 2011 <http://www.marxists.org/subject/women/authors/millett-kate/theory.htm>.

Norris, Margot. “Not the Girl She Was at All: Women in “The Dead”.” Joyce, James. The Dead. Boston: Bedford Books , 1994. 190-205.

thumbs.dreamstime.com/…/12996151689o9Bj7.jpg

Walcott, Derek. Omeros. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1990.

www.advertrade.com/st_lucia_promo_website.jpg