Friday, October 28, 2005

Y is for Yearning-*second attempt to post

What’s worse than a mother not being able to produce? Well, I can think of a lot of things but in the biological sense, nothing. We are all on this planet to do nothing other than to distribute our genetics, at least as is consistent with the world as we know. Yerma, due to factors in and out of her own control is stuck in a void of childless ambition. With nothing other that brush ups with friends and a sociologically impotent husband to keep her company, what reason is there really for her to keep her sanity? An obvious exhibition of the lack thereof is the final part of Act III, sceen II where Yerma grabs her husband, Juan, by the throat and strangles him to death. Was I surprised by this? Not really. I was beginning to feel similarly against Juan merely because of a lack of his manliness. But then again, it is better for society if we only propagate better genetics. I think Lorca does a fair job of keeping the bias spread fairly evenly among the characters and gives a deep enough background so that we, the audience, are able to form our own opinions without having the details hidden. This helps so that we don’t instantly shun Juan and are still capable of analyzing both he and Yerma subjectively. As for sexual imagery, it’s everywhere. Yerma’s nickname should be yearns, because that’s what she does for a man to come sweep her off her feet and be stuck between her loins. She seems to want another man but has too much pride in her family to ever break her nuptial arrangement so what does she do? She kills her husband and now she is free. I have a feeling this could bring some consequences.

1 Comments:

At 10:12 AM, Blogger Kirk Andrew Everist said...

You make an excellent point about Yerma's murder of Juan as a liberating act - freeing her from her crippling filial duty. I would only add that her own sense of identity has become so bound up in her sense of obligation - her honor to her marriage in a very practical and intimate sense - that by destroying Juan, she destroys herself. She dissolves the bonds, but she has defined herself in terms of those bonds. Without going so far as to psychoanalyze the character, there's much here that psychoanalysts would find interesting.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home