Scalliwags as Role Models

A couple of summers ago I had to choose a class from a very limited selection, just so I could get the student aid money and live through the summer. The choice was between studying the writings of Thomas Jefferson or "teaching women writers."

The Jefferson class was full.

The college where I'm getting my degree does a terrible job of providing course descriptions, but given the fact that I didn't really care -- I had to take the class -- I simply signed up. I assumed that the class was geared toward helping women develop their voices within a sexist, patriarchal society. That was a wrong assumption. The class was focused on incorporating women writers into the canon of American curriculum. That means I read a lot of overlooked masterpieces of literature written by women.

I understood before the class, and have an even better understanding now, that the feminine voice is under expressed in the Western, not to mention Eastern, canon and that a proactive approach needs be taken to correct that. I, however, have a bit of a problem with identifying a single under-represented demographic and not taking steps to give voice to other under-represented demographics. Where was the African American contribution being studied in our program? The Asian American? The LGBT voice? And while there is no argument that the masculine, Caucasian voice has presumptively assumed the normative position, now that the normative is recognized as arbitrary shouldn't there be a re-examination of the formerly presumed masters within that context? First, what were the aspects of these writers that made them the presumptive norm; second, within this more expansive context how do these writers now contribute to the Western discourse?

Can you tell I'm a grad student?

To say that the class pissed me off would be fair. The politics of the professor were blatant. The ancillary reading assignments were feminist and post-feminist theory. I took great glee to point out that one of the pieces sited as cutting edge post-feminist theory was written by two women who went on to become astrologers for Teen People. The professor hated me, or at least I hope she did.

She assigned final projects, which were to present lesson plans based upon one writer studied in class, combined with one writer discovered on our own. I chose Rebecca West and Margaret Mitchell. There was an actual groan when I announced my authors.

Gone with the Wind is one of my favorite books. One summer when I was exceptionally poor I invested in a paperback copy and spent the hot summer evenings at the Checkers on Halsted and Addison, allowing myself a single extra-large Diet Coke, reading Wind and watching the merging of the suburban, jock culture spilling over from Wrigley Field with the drag queens going to Circuit. Yes, good times.

The novel, however, does have its detractors. There is no argument that it lacks literary style and there is a strong argument to be made that it is racist. But it cannot be denied that the book, not to mention the film version, have made an immeasurable contribution to American culture and that Scarlett is arguably the prototype for the modern woman. Whenever I'm asked for my favorite fictional character, I always list Scarlett O'Hara. I love that dame.

Still, the scene from both the book and movie that I remember most doesn't contain Scarlett. It happens at Twelve Oaks and all of the women are napping after the barbecue and before the ball, while the men smoke cigars and talk of war. All of the plantation aristocracy are a-swagger when Rhett Butler calmly and logically explains why the South can't win a civil war. The gentlemen in the room are offended and finding they cannot counter Rhett's logic, attack him personally. Rhett Butler simply bows and says, "I apologize for all my shortcomings," and then makes an elegant exit. In the past I always took that moment to be an Rhett's acceptance that he's flawed in the views of society he inhabits. I admired the ability to accept his flaws and remain composed instead of running and hiding behind the portiers. Today I see the scene for what it really is and admire it even more.

There is that cool second in which Rhett realizes he sees things more clearly, that he's in essence smarter than everyone else in the room, and the decision that he doesn't need to demonstrate that superiority further. Ashley recognizes it and follows Rhett, presumably to be a good host, but I have no doubt it's also to hear more of Rhett's views. In another time the two could have been great friends. All of this is unspoken in the text, but clear. Rhett who is the more complex character and his self-knowledge is enough for him. He's an Ayn Rand character displaced into a Dickensian, American-Gothic romance.

Now, this had no place in my lesson presentation. I drew parallels between West and Mitchell and introduced interpretive techniques that had not been discussed in class. We were to distribute copies of reading selections, and during my presentation the professor was frantically flipping through the sheets I'd distributed. After my presentation she admitted that she'd assumed that she knew the literature and had not read it. She also conceded that I made a strong argument for including the novel in a syllabus. I got an A in the class.

Now I draw new inspiration from Rhett Butler and adopt that scene as a role model for myself. While more often than not I am not the smartest, most insightful person in the room, I am most likely the most productively self-critical. This self criticism, I hope, heightens my self awareness, and with that self awareness I now need to move on to self acceptance.

I think I have a new favorite fictional character.