|
ARE WOMEN EDIBLE? An essay by Kenneth Hermansson To eat or to be eaten, is that the feminine question? The human mouth is made for eating, talking and kissing, is it not? In the novel "The Edible Woman", written by the Canadian author Margaret Atwood, the mouth plays an important role. In this essay I will concentrate on one of the mentioned practises connected to the mouth, the eating, even if it seams that the main character of the novel, Marian has some problems not only with food, but with her social relations and with her love life too. The development of the "eating story" It is possible to discern a development by three steps of Marian’s life throughout the story. They are all connected with food, but also with the position of the narrator. The first part of the story is narrated bybthe main character herself. It begins with her hunger; Marian’s eating seems often to be hampered. "I had to skip the egg and wash down a glass of milk and a bowl of cold cereal which I knew would leave me hungry long before lunch time." (1) The position of the narrator changes in the second part of the story to be located outside the principle character. It is still Marian who tells the story; but she looks upon herself at a distance. The "I" of the first part becomes a "she" in the second. More or less, Marian stops eating. The foods accepted by her stomach become more and more limited and at the end one can detect a proper example of "self-starvation", or should I name it "anorexia"? The final part of the novel describes how the appetite returns and at the same time Marian comes back to herself. This is illustrated by her decision to make a cake in the shape of a woman, a picture of herself? When Peter, the groom, refuses to eat the substitute for his bride and takes to flight, Marian devours it. The stomach of the starving woman returns to normal. The edible woman can eat again. Symbolic cannibalism Is Margaret Atwood a feminist writer? Does the story of her novel describe the feminine struggle against man, marriage and love? The answer could be "yes". In the introduction of the novel, the author declares that she had been speculating about "symbolic cannibalism". She adds: "Wedding cakes with sugar brides and grooms were at that time of particular interest to me." (2) So no doubt, the eating as well as the refusal of food described in this novel has a symbolic meaning. The Edible Woman was written in the late 1960s. At this time the word "anorexia" was not yet known. However, the phenomenon was without any doubt present in the society, even if very few talked about it. A question that then could be raised is the following: Is there any connection between feminism and anorexia? To judge from the novel, it is. There are different explanations to the roots of anorexia. Physiological as well as psycological reasons have been suggested. Why does Marian’s stomach refuse food? If we combine the feminist and the anorectic aspects of the story, it seems that the unconscious of the young woman protests against the conventional female role that Marian is expected to enter by marrying Peter. When the relation with the lawyer becomes more serious and he proposes to her, Marian’s reaction is pictured in these words: "I drew back from him. A tremendous electric blue flash, very near, illuminated the inside of the car. As we stared at each other in that brief light I could see myself, small and oval, mirrored in his eyes." (3) Small an oval, mirrored in Peter’s eyes! Like an egg? The following morning at breakfast the egg problems begin, and with them the anorexia period!. The bride’s refusal to eat means that she looks upon herself as an egg that is going to be consumed. The conversation about the wedding day shows how much Marian has lost of her independence and of her own free will: "’I’d rather have you decide that. I’d rather leave the big decisions up to you.’ I was astonished at myself. I’d never said anything remotely like that to him before. The funny thing was that I really meant it." (4) As a matter of fact, Marian voluntarily gives up her position as a free and independent individual. She becomes symbolically an egg inside her shell and totally dependent on her future husband. An egg which is being eaten, an individual who is being consumed. While being consumed she is not able to consume, while being eaten she is not in the position to eat. Are women edible? Do the feminists feel that men are consumers while their wives are being consumed? If that is true, what a tragedy for both men and women! As I see it, cannibalistic men as well as sacrificed women are victims of a declined civilization. Let us restore a society where men and women can live and eat together in fellowship and love. A society where the human mouth is used for its original purpose. A society where there is no need for feminists writing incredible stories about self-contemptuous anorectics.
Footnotes 1. Margaret Atwood, 1995, The Edible Woman, page 12 2. Atwood, 1995, page 7 3. Atwood, 1995, page 83 4. Atwood, 1995, page 90
|