Nights at the Circus

Although I do agree with the gerneral concesus that Angela Carter's Nights at the Circus offers many necessary social criticisms, I had an incredibly difficult time getting through it. The over-enthusiastic decriptions and sarcastic tone had me feeling more like I was in a psychiatric home than in a fantasy world.

However, after sifting past the elaborate world of freaks created by Angela Carter I appreciated her critical points on women, postmodernism, freedom, and the construction of identity. Carter first represents gender roles as lifelong performances by detailing the overexaggerated feminine characterists of Fevvers. Fevvers talks to the journalist, Walser, after a performance while removing the layers of gender-representative makeup meant for her act. Walser is given insight into Fevvers life, and in the end Fevvers loves him for appreciating the identity that is her own, and not the role that she represents.

Ma Nelson's whorehouse is decribed as a female sanctuary in which the prostitutes feel empowered. Unfortunately, even these independent women fall victim to social constrictions enforced on monetary terms. Money proves to be a major factor in keeping women dependent on males, an issue slowly gaining recognition accross the globe.

Traditionally, the grotesque aspects of women have been hidden away in unspoken words. Carter makes a point of taking even the most feminine characters, such as Sleeping Beauty, and detailing their bodily functions. By doing so she critics the classical representation of women in society.

Fevvers' identity is a mystery throughout the novel. Although female, she is decribed with notions of both masculinity and feminity. This contrasts the norm of fairytales in which hyper-gender defined identities are used. The fact that Fevvers never reveals the truth to her physical identity is indicative of the constant development of personal identity, and, thus her own confusion over it.

Though I did not enjoy the novel for its story, I do admit Angela Carter wrote a clever political critique that is worthy of its status.

Are you a freak?

Since our class discussions on the novel Geek Love by Katherine Dunn I’ve been pondering the definition of a true freak. Although the novel emphasizes the physical differences of a true freak, it also brings attention to another type of freak:

“[..] There are those who feel their own strangeness and are terrified by it. They struggle toward normalcy. They suffer to exactly that degree that they are unable to appear normal to others, or to convince themselves that their aberration does not exist. These are true freaks, who appear, almost always, conventional and dull.” (Dunn, 282)

Although the characters in the novel are physically unusual, Dunn brings attention to the fact that the freak does not necessarily have to be obvious. I found the physical uniqueness of each of the characters intriguing, but what I found the most freakish about them was their skewed morals.

Arty gets off on overpowering others and capitalizes off an entire clan of aimless misfits. The parents, Al and Crystal Lil, create a freak show family for capital gain. Miss lick, who I found the most disturbing, creates an entire philosophy to justify her deranged need to deform others in an attempt for moral normalcy.

Regardless of our appearance we are all freaks in own way, but the scariest of all freaks is the freak of the mind.