September 2011 Issue 2

Featuring work by current and past writing consultants

Editor

Jessica Ross

Contributors

Elisabeth BuckElizabeth Preston

Jessica Ross

Special thanks to

University of Nevada, Reno Writing CenterAshley Hennefer

A

Letter from the

Editor

Hello again, everyone! I cannot even begin to tell you how I excited I am about our second issue. It’s been sort of stressful trying to balance working on Stellaria with school and work, but it’s also been tons of fun and I’m so happy that I’m involved in this. For those of you who don’t know, Stellaria is a literary journal started by writing consultants from the Writing Center at the University of Nevada, Reno. We decided that we had plenty of outlets to express creative writing, but not very many local opportunities for students to see their academic writing published. We’re working on starting up a Stel-laria Club on campus so that more people can be invovled with this amazing project and with producing the issues. The first issue of Stellaria featured creative writing, but this journal’s focus is on academic writing; however, we do plan to have one creative writing issue per semester in order to showcase all forms of writing. This particular issue is our first to feature academic writing and it’s also very exciting, because all of the academic writing in this issue is from past and current writing consultants. It was funny how some of the consultants responded to my asking them to submit: a lot of them said that they didn’t have anything “good enough” and some people said that they just picked an old paper at random and sent it in. I think that sometimes people forget that writing consultants are writers, too, and all writers feel attached to their work and ner-vous about sharing it. I laughed at my fellow consultants’ excuses and then realized that I was using those same excuses not to showcase some of my work, so I put my money where my mouth is and I put one of my papers in this issue. I hope everyone enjoys reading this issue, because I know I enjoyed working on it.

Jessica RossEditor/Superhero/Writing Consultant

Elizabeth Preston

Geography 103

Professor Eigenheer

August 9, 2010

Lake Baikal

1. Introduction

Located in south central Siberia, close to the Mongolian border (at 51°27’ to 55°46’N and 103°43’ to 109°56’E), lies a lake that is one of the most transparent lakes in the world (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Fed-eration”). It contains twenty percent of the world’s unfrozen surface freshwater (approximately 23,600 cubic kilometers) and is home to over 2,500 species of animals, approximately 2,000 of which are endemic (“Travels in Geology: Exploring Lake Baikal, the Sacred Sea”). This unique locale is Lake Baikal. Lake Baikal is 636 kilometers long by twenty-seven to eighty kilometers wide, and its total surface area is 31,471 square kilometers (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federation). It contains approximately 2,100 kilometers of coastline and twenty-two small islands, the main ones being Olkhon (730 square kilometers) and Greater Ushkany (9.4 square kilometers) (“Ozero Baykal”). The lake is walled in by mountains with the Khamar Daban mountains to the south, the Primorskiy and Baikalskiy ranges to the west, and the Barguzins-kiy and Ulan-Burgasy ranges to the east (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federation”). This lake is the Earth’s seventh largest lake in terms of surface area, and it is also the world’s deepest lake with a maximum depth of 1,637 meters (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federation”). There are 365 main tributaries that feed Lake Baikal, including the following rivers: Selenga, Turka, Barguzin, and Upper Angara; but, there is only one outlet -- the Angara River, which is a branch of the Yenesei. Lake Baikal is approximately twenty-five to thirty million years old (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Fed-eration”). Although many geologists have offered diverse theories as to how it came into existence, the current prevailing though is that the lake is of tectonic origin.

2. Formation of Lake Baikal

According to the United Nations Environment Program, the formation of Lake Baikal took place dur-ing the Palaeozoic, Mesozoic, and Cenozoic periods (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federation”). The Baikal Web World elaborates on this hypothesis:

Originally, the Baikal basin was certainly shallower and narrower. Probably it was a river bed, which accepted waters from [the] uplands of Zabaikalia and Mongolia. Individual parts of the Baikal basin, which [are] currently united, were considered by geologists and geographers as being developed at dif-ferent times. Some basins subsided more, some less. But this process took place in one and the same geological period, the Tertiary. . . . The Baikal became united late in Pliocene -- early in Quaternary. (“Baikal History & Formation Mechanism”)

The tectonic activity that most likely formed Lake Baikal, and still continues to mold the lake, resulted from Lake Baikal being located upon two tectonic structures -- the Siberian platform and the Sayano-Baikalsky folded belt (“Geology Structure and Earthquakes”). Here, the “tectonic movements along this border never cease and are manifested by earthquakes and by fluctuations of separate parts of the shores” (“Geology Struc-ture and Earthquakes”). The tectonic activity at Lake Baikal has caused a rift in the middle of the lake -- the Baikal rift, which is eight to nine kilometers deep and one of the “deepest active rifts on Earth” (“Geological Processes in the Baikal Rift Zone: Possible Terrestrial Analogs for the Valles Marineris Region of Mars”). Hy-drothermal vents, earthquakes (reaching magnitudes of five and almost six on the Richter magnitude scale), and tremors indicate that the rift is still active today. They result in “vertical displacements of the lake bottom” and produce landslides and collapses in the coastal zone (“Lake Baikal Seismic Activity”). While “block tectonics” are generally considered to be the main mechanisms in forming Lake Baikal, some geologists believe that “the phenomena of earth curve, which forms its folding, should [also] be taken into account” (“Baikal History & Formation Mechanism”). This suggests that “curve deformations are also responsible for the formation of the Baikal basin” (“Baikal History & Formation Mechanism”). Still other sci-entists, such as E.V. Pavolvosky and N.A. Florensov, believe that the depth of Lake Baikal comes from it being

a deep syncline, and that further alterations of the lake are caused by normal faults (“Baikal History & Forma-tion Mechanism”). Still, despite these differing opinions, there is one aspect to which most can agree upon -- Lake Baikal’s great transparency and purity.

3. Lake Baikal’s Waters

Lake Baikal is one of the most transparent and purest bodies of water on Earth. According to the United Nations Environment Program, the visibility of Lake Baikal’s waters can reach up to forty meters, and its mineral content is 25-50% lower than most freshwater lakes (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federation”). There are multiple reasons for this unique purity. One is that the lake’s zooplankton, such as tiny freshwater shrimp (Epishura baicalensis) filter the bacteria and algae and decompose and draw the suspended organic matter down to the lake’s bottom (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federation,” “Transparency of Lake Baikal Wa-ter”). Other reasons include that the shores are primarily rock, and that there is little disturbance of floor silts because there are not many shallow areas along Baikal’s shores (“Transparency of Lake Baikal Water”). The times of greatest visibility tend to be during late summer and early fall, although some claim that equally ex-cellent visibility may occur in the late spring and early autumn (“Ozero Baykal,” “Transparency of Lake Baikal Water”). Another exceptional characteristic of Lake Baikal’s waters is their constant chemical composition, which is primarily due to currents continually mixing the water masses in the lake (“Lake Baikal Water Chemical Composition”). This mixing also oxygenates the water. According to Baikal Web World, the sur-face waters of Lake Baikal can reach as much as 115-120% oxygen saturation, and even the deepest waters of the lake are never below 70-75% levels (“Currents of Lake Baikal Water”). Deep convection of Lake Baikal’s waters also aids in oxygenating the deep waters. This deep convection can happen anywhere on the lake, but principally depends upon the temperature of the water and the surrounding environment. Baikal Web World describes the deep convection process as occurring when,

. . .the gradual warming of the coastal waters brings about a so-called ‘thermobar,’ during which the compact part of the water body under the effect of compression [moves] downwards and gradually [reaches] the bottom. In this way, the deep waters are diluted by the surface waters. (“Currents of Lake Baikal Water”)

There are two types of currents in Lake Baikal: permanent (geostrophic) and drift. The permanent currents are cyclonical and thereby move counterclockwise. These cyclonical currents can be found in most of Lake Baikal’s waters. However, the deep water currents tend to move clockwise, which creates mixing and churning. It is these countercurrents that reduce the permanent currents’ speeds from an average of eighteen to twenty centimeters per second to four to six centimeters per second (“Currents of Lake Baikal Water”). The second kind of current, drift, is caused by the winds at Lake Baikal. Their effects on the water’s surface layers influence even the deepest water layers. The United Nations Environment Program states that, in general, “north-westerly winter winds blow from the cold land to the lake” and that “summer winds blow from the lake to the warmer lands” (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federation). However, the speed and direc-tion of the air currents are chiefly determined by the mountain ranges surrounding Lake Baikal.

4. Winds

The most dangerous and strongest winds are categorized as gornaya (“mountain-bred) winds (“Cli-matic Conditions”). They typically blow in a northwest direction, arise quite suddenly, and can reach speeds of up to fifty meters per second (“Climatic Conditions,” “Baikal Winds”). The longitudinal winds of Lake Bai-kal include the verkhovik and the kultuk. The verkhovik blows from the north of Lake Baikal and is fiercest in December before the lake freezes over (“Baikal Winds). The kultuk blows from the lake’s southern end and

can create waves over three meters high (“Baikal Winds,” “Climatic Conditions”). Like maritime climates, there is a sea-breeze effect on Lake Baikal that is caused by the differences in pressure over land and the surface of the water. These breezes blow from the land toward the sea, particularly in autumn and before the lake is frozen over (“Climatic Conditions”).

5. Climate

Although Lake Baikal is classified as a continental climate, because of the massive amount of water and area that Lake Baikal encompasses, the area oftentimes takes on the characteristics of a maritime climate with the lake creating its own “distinct microclimate within 25 [kilometers] of its shores” (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federation”). The United Nations Environment Program states that the lake “moderates coastal con-ditions where temperatures may be 5°C lower in summer than further inland” (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federation”). While the lake region’s annual and daily temperatures fluctuate greatly, in general, the winters are “long, dry, and cold” with an average air temperature of -25°C and frozen water (which will stay frozen from approximately January to May, and will not completely thaw until June) (“Lake Baikal: Russian Federation,” “General Info,” “Ozero Baykal”). The summers also tend to be cool and short, and they have an average air temperature of 17°C (“Ozero Baykal”). The lake receives about 2,046 hours of sunshine each year while the annual amount of rainfall at the north end of the lake typically gets 200 millimeters to 350 millimeters, while the sound end receives 500 mil-limeters to 900 millimeters. Most of the rainfall on all parts of the lake occurs during the summer (“Ozero Baykal,” “Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federation”). Fogs, on the other hand, typically arise during the late spring and autumn. They are mostly advection and evaporation fogs, and they often can be found “on the shoreline bends, coves, bays, and at the open inlets of the rivers” (“Fogs on Lake Baikal”).

6. Ecological and Cultural Importance

Lake Baikal’s unique features, such as its transparency, constant chemical composition, and how it was created make it of great ecological importance. Its location (on a rift zone) makes Lake Baikal an example of “the evolutionary development of a rift zone of global scale,” and the hydrothermal vents created by the rift create an area that attracts many different animals, such as sponges (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federa-tion,” “Invertebrates of Lake Baikal”). Indeed, Lake Baikal contains quite diverse fauna, harboring over 2,500 species of animals, of which 2,000 are indigenous, and many animals live exclusively in Lake Baikal. For instance, Lake Baikal contains the only freshwater seals on Earth -- the Phoca sibirica, or nerpa seal (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federation”). Additionally, it is the only place in which the golomyanka fish can be found. This fish is made up of about 30% oil, which is rich in vitamin A (“Fauna of Lake Baikal”). Many hu-man inhabitants have used the golomyanka for food, fuel for oil lamps, and medicinal purposes. Along with the aforementioned ecological significances, Lake Baikal has also made its way into hu-man history via Muslim historical manuscripts, Russian books, and ancient Chinese records (“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federation”). It is also important to many of today’s humans, and has become somewhat of a tourism hotspot with thousands of people from around the world coming annually to see Lake Baikal’s crystal-clear waters. However, the transparency of Lake Baikal is being jeopardized by the Baikalsk Pulp and Paper Plant on the south end of the lake. This mill disposes of its liquid waste by pouring it into Lake Baikal. According to Baikal Web World, this pollution “exceeds the mineralization of Baikal’s waters more than six times” and adds many sulphates and chlorides to the water, thereby jeopardizing the lake’s clarity (“Pollution of Lake Baikal Water”). The wildlife of Lake Baikal is starting to show the pollution’s impact as previously unseen toxic organic substances have been found in high amounts in Lake Baikal’s zooplankton, plants, and in the fat of nerpa (“Pollution of Lake Baikal Water”). Currently, environmental groups have begun to pres-

sure governmental powers to place greater restrictions upon polluters.

7. Conclusion

Being one of the oldest and clearest lakes in the world, Lake Baikal is certainly unique. Its tectonic origin has caused the lake to be the deepest lake in the world, and it has caused the locale to be cradled by mountains that help to determine the winds and overall climate of the area. The rift zone that Lake Baikal is on has created environments for diverse aquatic fauna and flora, and its tectonic activity continues to mold the lake and its landscape. Human impact has put the lake’s world-renown clarity, as well as its plant and animal inhabitants, at risk. Hopefully, cogent environmental policies will be implemented that will allow Lake Baikal to continue to be the freshwater beauty that it has been for many millennia.

Works Consulted

“Baikal History & Formation Mechanism.” Baikal Web World. Baikal World, 2010, Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.bww.irk.ru/baikalorigin/baikalformation.html>.“Baikal Winds.” Magic Baikal. Magic Baikal, 2010, Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.magicbaikal.com/winds.php>.“Climatic Conditions.” Irkutsk. Fedor Babanine, 2003, Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.irkutsk.org/baikal/climat.htm>.“Fauna of Lake Baikal.” Baikal Web World. Baikal World, 2010. Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.bww.irk.ru/baikalfauna/baikalfauna.html>. “Fogs on Lake Baikal.” Baikal Web World. Baikal World, 2010. Web. 31 July 2010. <http:/www.bww.irk.ru/baikalclimate/baikalfogs.html>.“General Info.” Baikal Web World. Baikal World, 2010, Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.bww.irk.ru/baikalclimate/baikalclimate.html>.“Geological Processes in the Baikal Rift Zone: Possible Terrestrial Analogs for the Valles Marineris Region of Mars.” Lunar and Planetary Science XXXIV. Lunar and Planetary Institute, 2010, Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2003/pdf/1314.pdf>.“Geology Structure and Earthquakes.” Irkutsk. Fedor Babanine, 2003, Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.irkutsk.org/baikal/geology.htm>.Gurlev, S.A. “Currents of Lake Baikal Water.” Baikal Web World. Baikal World, 2010, Web. 31 July 2010. <http:/www.bww.irk.ru/baikalwater/currents.html>.Gurulev, S.A. “Lake Baikal Water Chemical Composition.” Baikal Web World. Baikal World, 2010, Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.bww.irk.ru/baikalwater/composition.html>.Gurulev, S.A. “Pollution of Lake Baikal Water.” Baikal Web World. Baikal World, 2010. Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.bww.irk.ru/baikal/pollution.html>. Gurulev, S.A. “Transparency of Lake Baikal Water.” Baikal Web World. Baikal World, 2010, Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.bww.irk.ru/baikalwater/transparency.html>.Hutchinson, Deborah, and Steve Colman. “Lake Baikal -- A Touchstone for Global Change and Rift Stud ies.” U.S. Geological Survey. U.S. Department of the Interior, 27 Apr. 2010. Web. 31 July 2010. <http://marine.usgs.gov/fact-sheets/baikal/>.“Invertebrates of Lake Baikal.” Baikal Web World. Baikal World, 2010, Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.bww.irk.ru/baikalfauna/baikalinvertebrates.html>.“Lake Baikal Basin: Russian Federation.” United Nations Environment Program. United Nations Environ ment Program, May 2006. Web. 8 Aug. 2010. <http://www.unepwcmc.org/sites/wh/pdf/ Lake%20Baikal.pdf>. “Lake Baikal Seismic Activity.” Baikal Web World. Baikal World, 2010, Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.bww.irk.ru/baikalorigin/baikalseismic.html>.“Ozero Baykal.” International Lake Environment Committee. International Lake Environment Committee, 2010, Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.ilec.or.jp/database/asi/asi-27.html>.Williams, David B. “Travels in Geology: Exploring Lake Baikal, the Sacred Sea.” Earth. American Geological Institute, 28 Apr. 2009. Web. 31 July 2010. <http://www.earthmagazine.org/earth/article/210-7d9-4-1c>.

Elisabeth BuckENG 662: American Poetry

Professor Ann Keniston3 May 2011

“I compare her to a fallen leaf ”: Women, Nature and “the Gaze”

in the Poems of William Carlos Williams

Male poetic perspective is often interpreted through an analysis of the “gaze”—the lin-gering, often voyeuristic lens through which a subject is observed. This is certainly not a new concept; poets for centuries have captured the attributes of their particular (often female) muse through this device. Petrarch did so with Laura, and Shakespeare fixatedly portrayed his “dark lady” in many sonnets. Thus, nature often becomes the appropriate metaphor for such articulation (see, for instance, Shakespeare’s Sonnet Eighteen— “Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day?”) It is difficult to discern, however, if the gaze—as interpreted through these comparisons of women to nature—is objectifying or complementary. This is especially evi-dent in the poetry of William Carlos Williams. Critic Jon Chatlos, in his discussion of Wil-liams’ poem “The Right of Way,” notes that Williams’ inclusion of a clearly (male) gendered narrator affects the reading of the piece: “The motorist is active, seeing, and speaking, while the girl on the balcony is passive, seen, and silent. To the explicit female space of the balcony corresponds the implicit male space of the motorcar. And the motorist arrogates to himself the right to ‘enjoy’ the road as perhaps only a male would” (142). The notion of “gaze” is therefore central to understanding how women are perceived by the male poetic persona. I therefore aim to analyze how Williams utilizes the convention of the woman/nature com-parison, as interpreted through Laura Mulvey’s notion of the cinematic male gaze. Thus, I contend that Williams is aware of his poetic predecessors and uses his gaze not to flatter, but instead to articulate perceived, realistic interpretations of both women and nature. Williams, however, perhaps uses his poems to express anxiety over the inevitable objectification that comes with “gazing.”

Laura Mulvey, in her highly influential piece, “Visual Pleasure in Narrative Cinema,” discusses the concept of scopophilia—the pleasure in looking. Mulvey states that this kind of pleasure, at an extreme level, is frequently derived from observation: “…it can become fixated into a perversion, producing obsessive voyeurs and Peeping Toms whose only sexual satisfaction can come from watching, in an active controlling sense, an objectified other” (2184). This concept is often demonstrated in narrative film—the audience is placed in the position of the voyeur and must thus identify with the dominant perspective, which is usu-ally male. “The determining male gaze,” Mulvey continues, “projects its fantasy onto the female figure, which is styled accordingly…” (2186). Thus, the woman is often made the objectified spectacle because the camera—as the eyes of the male—focuses on the aspects of the female form that are most desirable (legs, face, etc.) The audience has no choice but to concentrate on the elements that the filmmaker chooses—it is forced perspective at its most objectifying. Mulvey also discusses the power which this cinematic gaze holds: “As the spectator identifies with the main male protagonist, he projects his look onto that of his like, his screen surrogate, so that the power of the male protagonist as he controls events coin-cides with the active power of the erotic look, both giving a satisfying sense of omnipotence” (2187). There is thus no escaping from the “fetishistic” images in narrative, and the power of the male gaze/perspective is implicit in these constructions. The woman is unconsciously (but persistently) objectified due to the pervasiveness—and ubiquity—of male fixation.

Many of the concepts that Mulvey references as paramount—voyeurism, forced perspective, the spectacle/objectification of the female—all have apt parallels in Wil-liams’ poetry. While the concept of the gaze figures prominently in his poems, I wish to focus on three specifically that include wom-en/nature parallels: “The Young Housewife,” “Portrait of a Lady,” and “Queen-Anne’s-Lace.” However, it is perhaps worthwhile to first concentrate on a poem in which the gaze plays a particularly prominent role: “Proletarian Portrait” (1935). Although the narrator of this poem is not explicitly de-fined as male, the “big young bareheaded” woman in the poem is articulated by Wil-liams in a way that intimates masculin-ity—she is clearly an observed “other” (1). The poem’s persona captures the woman in a tableau, as she pauses on the sidewalk to retrieve a nail from her shoe. There is a prominent sense of voyeurism in this poem— she is (seemingly) unaware that she is being watched and scrutinized. The wom-an is certainly not an idealized other, and the title of the poem reinforces the unbecoming nature of her portrayal by Williams. This is a working-class, commonplace woman who is placed under a poetic microscope. Indeed—in parallel to Mulvey’s conclusions about the cinematic gaze—the poem’s male narrator focuses on specific physical attributes: her “apron” (2), “her hair slicked back” (3), and “her shoe in her hand” (7). These character-istics are not particularly sexualized, but the reader feels compelled to fixate on them in identification with the narrator. It is difficult to discern whether the persona is sympathetic toward the woman for being forced into oppressive footwear (“she pulls out the paper insole/to find the nail/That has been hurting her”), or is sim-

ply commenting on the spectacle of the scene for his personal amusement (9-11). There is mastery implied by this description, as the woman certainly has no control over the way that she is depicted in her very private, per-sonal moment. The poem focuses the reader on the supposedly “commonplace” scene, but the intense and specific scrutiny contributes to a sense of voyeurism. Once again, it is difficult to determine how Williams views the woman: is he ambivalent, amused, disdainful, etc? The gaze, however, certainly places undue inspec-tion on her, and—from a feminist perspec-tive—the reader cannot help but feel some-what discomfited by the excessively critical nature of Williams’ eye. This is an especially important notion that also figures in Williams’ comparisons between women and nature: the parallels characterize the figure of the woman as “real,” but place intense scrutiny on the par-ticulars of the body.“Queen-Anne’s-Lace” (1921) seems to be directly inspired by Shakespeare’s Sonnet 130. Just as Shakespeare takes aim at Petrarch’s us-age of the lofty nature/woman metaphor, and inverts it in this poem (“My mistress’ eyes are nothing like the sun;/Coral is far more red that her lips’ red…”), Williams also demon-strates his awareness of this tradition. The first line of the poem—“Her body is not so white as/anemone petals nor so smooth—nor/so remote a thing”—seems directly inspired by Shakespeare’s text (1-3). This poem is much more inaccessible than a great deal of Wil-liams’ work: it is often difficult to discern the nature of the metaphors and the overall “plot-line.” The gaze does, however, figure promi-nently—this is clearly a depiction of a woman’s body from a male perspective. There is a re-lationship between the “her” —the possessor of the body—and the “his” who leaves “tiny purple blemishes” wherever his hand “has

lain” (12-13). The central comparison here is the woman to Queen Anne’s Lace, which the Anthology of Modern Poetry defines as a “common white field flower” (166). The aspect of commonality—as in “Proletarian Portrait”—is again important here: this is not an extraordinary woman, but a “dime-a-dozen” one. While Williams doesn’t characterize the woman in reference to her particulars, her entire body is subject to the domination of the man, and, therefore, the scrutiny of the reader. The observer is once again made into the voyeur: “each part/is a blossom under his touch/to which the fibres of her being/stem one by one, each to its end,/until the whole field is a/white desire, empty,/a single stem...” (13-18). The “her” of the poem eventually disappears into “a pious wish to whiteness gone over” or “nothing” (19-20). By compar-ing the woman to an overtaken field—and by referencing nature throughout—Williams seems to comment on the ease of corruption of the female by the male. She is a flower that no longer possesses any individuality: she is common and invisible. However, the gaze that places such intense focus on the “her” is certainly objectifying—she is firmly the ob-ject of fixation for the “he” in the poem, and, consequently, the reader as well. But, signifi-cantly, is this indicative of Williams’ view? This poem can also be read as a commentary on the larger male tendency to objectify and corrupt the female figure. This concept is also shown in William’s “Portrait of a Lady” (1920), which may re-fer to Roger van der Weyden’s 1460 painting of the same name. The act of voyeurism is particularly interesting to note in this poem; Williams alludes to the 18th century artist Jean-Honoré Fragonard, specifically (ac-cording to the Anthology) his painting “The

Swing” (165). This piece depicts a beautiful young woman on a swing in the midst of a picturesque landscape. Problematizing the in-nocence of this scene, however, is the young man positioned beneath the swing, obviously enjoying a view under the lady’s skirt. Thus, there are two voyeurs in this setting—the young man, and the viewer for observing this intrusive action (whether the woman is a willing participant in this spectacle is perhaps up for debate—her expression in the painting could either reveal complicity or ignorance.) The male gaze is therefore paramount to this poem’s reading. The central female figure of Williams’ poem—unlike Fragonard’s por-trait—is, however, not depicted in a flattering light—the first metaphor compares the wom-an’s thighs to appletrees “whose blossoms touch the sky” (1-2). This is perhaps another deliberate (ironic?) inversion of the poetic tendency to compare attributes of women to elements of nature. A much more becoming representation would make the comparison to a smaller entity—not the large, bulky trunk of the appletree. Yet still, by beginning in this fashion, Williams draws deliberate attention to a very specific, intimate, often sexualized aspect of a woman’s body. The male perspec-tive of both the poem and the painting is evident immediately—it is through his gaze that the woman is interpreted. Williams also presents fractured im-ages of the woman’s body—in addition to her thighs, he mentions her “knees” (5) and her “ankles” (14). The two other referenced body parts are also coupled with nature metaphors: “…your knees/are a southern breeze—or/a gust of snow” (5-7) and “the tall grass of your ankles/flickers upon the shore—”(14-15). resentation of her.

The actual “lady” of the poem almost disap-pears behind these abstractions; it is very dif-ficult to discern the woman behind the man’s representation of her. This supports Mulvey’s claim about scopophilia—there is pleasure in the “looking.” Specifically, the poem parallels Mulvey’s statement that, “…the spectator [is] in direct scopophillic contact with the female form displayed for his enjoyment (connotat-ing male fantasy)…” (2188). The female form is certainly “on display” in both Fragonard’s portrait and Williams’ poem, specifically for male enjoyment. And yet, the thighs are appletrees, not “twigs” or another more slen-der element of nature. What purpose does it then serve for Williams to include such an unfavorable comparison? Is this another reference to the common, the “realistic?” If so, then this is certainly inelegant hyperbole. In addition, the persona of this poem seems to truly struggle with the act of articulating/depicting the lady. There is a clear anxiety that figures throughout (for example—“Agh, petals maybe. How/ should I know?”); how-ever, it is a clearly male anxiety (19-20). Nature metaphor thus serves as the means of attempted description, but the apprehen-sion of the persona could also be attributed to Williams: is he articulating his own poetic voyeurism, or analyzing the mentality of the voyeuristic figure in Fragonard’s painting? This is perhaps the central dilemma in “Por-trait of a Lady”—the unease over the pleasure of gazing. The connections between the voyeuris-tic gaze and women/nature comparisons are perhaps evidenced most perceptibly in Wil-liams’ “The Young Housewife” (1916). Ac-cording to the Anthology, Williams claimed upon writing this poem that, “Whenever a man sees a beautiful woman it’s an occasion for poetry—compensating beauty with beau-

ty” (165). Just as in Williams’ other poems, however, this subject isn’t explicitly beauti-ful, yet she is certainly an object of spectacle. Chatlos notes that “The Young Housewife” (like “The Right of Way”) also features a “poet-driver” who gazes furtively upon the subject. He states that, “The ‘thing seen’—in this paradigm, most often a female exposed suggestively to view—is evasive, resistant to visual attention that is too frontal or sus-tained. And the person who is looking and smiling—most often a male—feels he is see-ing something that perhaps ought not to be seen, doing something that perhaps ought not to be done” (146-7). Thus, Chatlos points out the inherent pleasure that the subject takes in observing the female, although it is at the expense of the oblivious female. The poem’s significance, however, is found pri-marily in the second stanza:

Then again she comes to the curbto call the ice-man, fish-man, and standsshy, uncorseted, tucking instray end of hair, and I compare herto a fallen leaf (5-9)

Williams’ choice of adjectives to describe the housewife—young, shy, uncorseted—cer-tainly aren’t indicative necessarily of beauty. Neither, however, is an image of a fallen leaf something that particularly inspires thoughts of exquisiteness: it is a thing that was per-haps once lovely, but is now separated from the tree—its source of life. The housewife is therefore depicted as a slowly fading entity—observable, still lovely—but soon forgotten. This metaphor perhaps grows more unset-tling when coupled with the final stanza:

The noiseless wheels of my carrush with a crackling sound overdried leaves as I bow and pass smiling. (10-12)

The women portrayed in Williams Carlos Williams’ poems are silent—they ap-pear as only static, fleeting images that serve to heighten the pleasure of the male observer. However, does Williams participate in this objectification? Or do his poems demonstrate awareness of—and commentary on—this tendency in the work of other poets? Critic Neil Myers argues that “more than any other recent American poet, William Carlos Wil-liams bridged the gulf between the technical innovations of modern poetry and the par-ticulars of ordinary life” (458). Both women and nature are frequently the “particulars” of Williams’ poetry, yet who possesses the authority to gaze upon them—to attempt to understand their purpose and significance? The poet must inevitably place his subject un-der scrutiny, but—as evidenced in “Portrait of Lady”—it is often difficult to discern whether Williams is the voyeur or the commentator on the voyeur. Thus, Williams’ reliance on na-ture to make comparisons—although a cli-ché—ultimately reveals a struggle for poetic authority. The gaze will always objectify, and Williams perhaps divulges his anxiety regard-ing this: it is difficult to articulate an observed environment/subject when the poet is always just that—an observer.

The poem’s narrator runs over the dried leaves—the thing that the fallen leaf must inevitability become. The implications of this line are intriguing: either Williams observes the poetic propensity to focus on the lovely and dismiss the faded, or Williams himself believes that a woman—once she has lost her availability—no longer merits attention. This poem may be a commentary on the fickle-ness and impermanence of youth/beauty, but it is perhaps rather unsettling that the per-sona runs over the leaves “smiling.” There is a sadistic element to the crushing of the leaves/woman. Thus, the gaze in this poem figures again to expose the woman as an object of spectacle for both the male narrator and the reader. She is still objectified—the voyeuristic element is intact—yet the nature metaphor reveals a potentially ironic commentary on the transience of her beauty. This is not a flat-tering poem, but it is one that indicates the inevitability of deterioration. The reader—be-cause of the gaze—must participate in the joy of the woman’s eventual demise.

Works CitedChatlos, Jon. “Automobility and Lyric Poetry: The Mobile Gaze in William Carlos Williams’ ‘The Right of Way.’ “Journal of Modern Literature 30.1 (2006): 140-54. JSTOR. Web. 27 Apr. 2011.Fragonard, Jean-Honoré. The Swing. 1767.Mulvey, Laura. “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema.” The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. New York: W.W. Norton, 2001. 2181-192. Print.Myers, Neil. “Sentimentalism in the Early Poetry of William Carlos Williams.” American Literature 37.4 (1966): 458-70. JSTOR. Web. 19 Apr. 2011.Van der Weyden, Rogier. Portrait of a Lady. 1460. National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C.“William Carlos Williams.” Anthology of Modern American Poetry. Ed. Cary Nelson. New York: Oxford UP, 2000. 164-201. Print.

“The Swing” (1767) by Jean-Honoré Fragonard

Pokémon Tutoring

Jessica RossEng 408B: Tutoring Student Writers

Prof. Maureen McBride

ften, when people hear the term “writing tutor,” they believe that, when meeting

with that tutor, they will have their papers edited. This, however, is not the way of the tutors of

the Writing Center at the University of Nevada, Reno. Tutors at the University Writing Center

are more focused on tutoring writers than papers, which means that they would prefer to give

a student advice to help them develop as writers than edit a paper that is brought to them. By

tutoring in this way instead of simply editing, tutors are helping to prepare students to be able

to write papers on their own. If tutors simply edited papers instead of tutoring the writer, then

the writers who used UWC would eventually learn to use it as a crutch; they would not feel

comfortable writing a paper on their own and they would bring in every paper. While students

are encouraged to bring every paper to UWC, the idea is still that students will eventually be

able to recognize their common mistakes and learn to be stronger writers without help. Writ-

ing tutors are not meant to be crutches. Tutors have more in common with trainers who try to

share all of their writing knowledge with a tutee before sending that tutee off into the world; in

this way, a writing tutor has much in common with a Pokémon trainer.

The first step to becoming a Pokémon trainer is to receive your first Pokémon. When

I began my adventure to become a renowned Pokémon trainer, I began my journey in Pallet

Town where Professor Oak provided me with my starter Pokémon: a Squirtle I named Com-

modore Shenanigans. After I received Commodore Shenanigans, I explored Pallet Town,

talking to anyone who had something to say, because I wanted to find out everything I could

about training before I actually got started with the Pokémon I was given. While no one ex-

actly “gave” me my first tutee, I was sort of given my first tutoring session: my first appoint-

ment was observed by a more experienced tutor, Ashley, who let me tutor someone who made

an appointment with her. After my first appointment, I asked Ashley everything I could think

of about what I did and how she would have done it differently so that I would know what I

needed to work on in order to become a great tutor.

O

In order to become an effective trainer, it is important to establish a strong relation-

ship with one’s Pokémon. That way, it is easy to tell what weaknesses each Pokémon has and

what can be done to help them become stronger. Similarly, it is important to establish a strong

relationship with my tutees. If a student brings all their assignments to me, then I will be able

to keep track of what we worked on in the past and what each student is working on and what

they are improving on. All of the students that I have strong relationships with try to see me

before making an appointment with another tutor, because I have worked with them before

and I know what sort of things they normally have trouble with and what techniques work the

best to try to help them learn more about writing. Not everyone learns in the same way, so it is

important to know what makes learning easier for every individual person.

Every time I caught a new Pokémon, I had an entirely new being to work with. I made

sure to learn everything I could about each new Pokémon I caught, and did what I could to

help them become great, too. Each new Pokémon brought a new set of skills, strengths, and

weaknesses to the table, and I was sure to establish strong relationships with each Pokémon

before I took them to a serious fight, because I first wanted to make sure that they were strong

enough to handle it.

Battling other Pokémon trainers in the game is similar to helping tutees write

their papers. After giving my Pokemon the best training I can, I can then give them whatever

help they need to defeat their enemies so that they will gain more experience and leave the

battle victorious. This is very similar to how I treat a tutoring session – I answer any questions

the tutee might have, and point out any problems I may find in their writing, so that they may

turn in an excellent paper and learn how to be a more confident and excellent writer in the

end. If the Pokémon gets injured in a way that I cannot fix, I will take it to Nurse Joy so that

she can help me, and if a tutor asks me a question that I cannot answer, I will ask a more expe-

rienced tutor for their advice.

While tutoring has much in common with training Pokémon, there is one major dif-

ference between the two activities: while tutors help tutees to eventually become independent

and write excellent papers on their own, Pokémon never leave their trainers to fight battles.

During battles, a trainer directs a Pokémon on what moves to make and tells them when to

call it quits and let someone else take over the battle for them. A tutor, as previously men-

tioned, is not meant to be a crutch, but a student who can help a fellow student gain confi-

dence and experience with writing.

It may not be necessarily true that all tutors tutor in the same way, but for the most part,

they all tutor with the hopes of achieving the same result: making the student stronger and

more capable. Tutoring is like Pokémon training because the same steps and principles are

followed, and there is a strong sense of accomplishment felt by a tutor who sees a tutee write a

great paper and by a trainer who sees a Pokémon defeat a strong enemy.

Elizabeth Preston is a recent graduate of the University of Nevada, Reno. She is currently a freelance writer and has been published in The Storyteller. When not furiously pouring stories into the keys of her pink laptop, Elizabeth can be found reading, fishing, baking, and studying for the GRE.

Preston

Contributor bios

RossJessica Ross is the editor of Stellaria and a writing consultant at the UNR Writing Center. She will graduate next year with a degree in Language and Linguistics and a minor in Cultural Anthropology. She loves writing and enjoys showcasing her eccentricity and ridiculosity in all aspects of her writing.

BuckElisabeth Buck is the current Graduate Assistant at the University Writing Center. She is pursuing her M.A. in English Literature, with an emphasis in Renaissance Drama. Her greatest experience in graduate school thus far was the opportunity to teach an English 102 course with a Disney theme in Spring 2011. After graduating from UNR, Elisabeth hopes to one day pursue a PhD in Rhetoric and Composition.

Write. Edit. Sleep.

unrs

tella

ria.w

ordp

ress

.com