![]() | Middlesex (novel) has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have deleted this message because I don't think it is true. I added fiction as the genre, which I *think* was the only missing field, because it is not in a series and was not translated from another language into english. If I'm missing something please tell me. Tartan 20:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Note to self: http://www.powells.com/biblio/1-9780312422158-1, http://www.indiebound.org/book/9780312427733, and http://www.bookbrowse.com/reviews/index.cfm?book_number=1318 contain snippets/links to a number of reviews. Cunard ( talk) 07:47, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
http://www.welt.de/print-welt/article271526/Den_Goettern_sei_Dank.html ( http://www.webcitation.org/625B7EUlp) – list of omens Eugenides experienced while and after he wrote Middlesex. Cunard ( talk) 10:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Following a request from Cunard ( talk), I have done a copy edit of this article. There are still a few issues which I have not had time to review, so if anyone has time and wish to help, please do. For FA articles, only the first mention of a word or term should be wikified. There are some words that are wikified more than once, and sometimes, they are not wikified on its first mention, but further down. This needs to be corrected. I also do not have the time now to go through the peer review. I will try to do that tomorrow. Cheers. -- S Masters ( talk) 17:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I will be conducting this review. I've done an initial read-through and so far, it's in excellent shape. The article has obviously benefited from some thorough copy edits and reads very well. Perhaps more importantly, it appears to be well sourced and covers all the broad aspects of the article. I am going to go through the available sources in a second look through, but in the meantime, here are some initially comments, almost all of which will be easy to address. Please respond to each item line-by-line and I'll strike them as we go... — Hun ter Ka hn 05:55, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Lead:
Background and publication
Plot
Autobiographical elements
Style
Themes
Reception
Honors and adaptation
Misc
I'll place this on hold for now. I expect to come back with some more comments after I do a thorough look through the sources, but I'd encourage you to make changes based on my above comments in the meantime. Thanks! — Hun ter Ka hn 05:55, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Here, as requested, are some comments on what I believe is a first-class article. I have not read the book yet, so some of my comments may seem nitpicky and naïve. They may help, however, in the final polishing stages before what I assume will be a FAC nomination.
I've reworded the sentence to make the connection clearer. Cunard ( talk) 06:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I've rephrased that paragraph. Is it better? Cunard ( talk) 06:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I hope you find these comments helpful. I will watch this article's progress with much interest. Brianboulton ( talk) 21:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I think that the article is in generally excellent shape. Please let me know when you send it FAC. Brianboulton ( talk) 10:08, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
In general, there is a lot of good material here, but I think there are some organizational kinks to work out and perhaps some sourcing. I would suggest obtaining a copyeditor after you work on these larger issues, someone who can go over each and every sentence before FAC.
The section title is "Background and publication", and I can't think of any other publication information to include there. Cunard ( talk) 07:31, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Citations 63 and 66 are to pages in the novel, while citation 65 is to a book by Angela Pattatucci Aragon. Aragon's analysis of the novel's themes included the quotes from the novel (citations 63 and 66). I prefer using quotes from the novel to quotes from the secondary source because the prose of the novel is generally clearer and better written. The wording of the secondary source is less able to convey the emotion and atmosphere of each scene. Is there another way I can make it clearer that the examples/quotes are pulled from the secondary source? Cunard ( talk) 02:15, 17 May 2010 (UTC)While his female classmates are turned off by the blood in The Iliad, Cal is "thrilled to [read about] the stabbings and beheadings, the gouging out of eyes, the juicy eviscerations".[65] Cal ponders his gender identity and how males and females associate with each other,[63] reflecting, "Did I see through the male tricks because I was destined to scheme that way myself? Or do girls see through the tricks, too, and just pretend not to notice?"[66]
I hope this is helpful! Awadewit ( talk) 21:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Chu, Patricia E. "D(NA) Coding the Ethnic: Jeffrey Eugenides's Middlesex." Novel: A Forum on Fiction 42.2 (2009): 278-283. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Dalling, Graham. "Enfield in the Time of Charles Lamb." Charles Lamb Bulletin 34.(1981): 25-34. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Breger, Claudia. "Gen-erativkrafte: Poesie und Wissenschaft in Jeffrey Eugenides' Middlesex." Engineering Life: Narrationen vom Menschen in Biomedizin, Kultur und Literatur. 201-217. Berlin, Germany: Kulturverlag Kadmos, 2008. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Koch-Rein, Anne. "Intersexuality-In the 'I' of the Norm? Queer Field Notes from Eugenides' Middlesex." Quer durch die Geisteswissenschaften: Perspektiven der Queer Theory. 238-252. Berlin, Germany: Querverlag, 2005. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Davros, Michael G. "Loss and Transformation on the Road in Jeffrey Eugenides's Middlesex and Don DeLillo's Underworld." The Image of the Road in Literature, Media, and Society. 148-153. Pueblo, CO: Society for the Interdisciplinary Study of Social Imagery, Colorado State University-Pueblo, 2005. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Kehlmann, Daniel. "Narrative Heat." PEN America: A Journal for Writers and Readers 9.(2008): 88-96. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Collado-Rodriguez, Francisco. "Of Self and Country: U.S. Politics, Cultural Hybridity, and Ambivalent Identity in Jeffrey Eugenides's Middlesex." International Fiction Review 33.1-2 (2006): 71-83. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Sifuentes, Zachary. "Strange Anatomy, Strange Sexuality: The Queer Body in Jeffrey Eugenides' Middlesex." Straight Writ Queer: Non-Normative Expressions of Heterosexuality in Literature. 145-157. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2006. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Consonni, Stefania. "'Stuck in the Middle with Eu': Genetica e letteratura in Middlesex." Nuova Corrente: Rivista di Letteratura 54.139 (2007): 145-171. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Ciocoi-Pop, Ana-Blanca. "Suicide as Affirmation and Gender as a Conscious Choice: The Deconstruction of Identity in Jeffrey Eugenides' Major Novels." American, British, and Canadian Studies 10.(2008): 80-90. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Eugenides, Jeffrey. "The Omens." Brick 73.(2004): 127-129. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Shostak, Debra. "'Theory Uncompromised by Practicality': Hybridity in Jeffrey Eugenides' Middlesex." Contemporary Literature 49.3 (2008): 383-412. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Sielke, Sabine. "Translation and Transdisciplinarity: Mapping Contact Zones between Literary and Scientific Practice." Cultures of Translation. 149-173. Newcastle upon Tyne, England: Cambridge Scholars, 2008. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Sykes, John D., Jr. "Two Natures: Chalcedon and Coming-of-Age in O'Connor's 'A Temple of the Holy Ghost'." Flannery O'Connor Review 5.(2007): 89-98. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Womack, Kenneth, and Amy Mallory-Kani. "'Why Don't You Just Leave It Up to Nature?': An Adaptionist Reading of the Novels of Jeffrey Eugenides." Mosaic: A Journal for the Interdisciplinary Study of Literature 40.3 (2007): 157-173. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Lee, Merton. "Why Jeffrey Eugenides' Middlesex Is So Inoffensive." Critique: Studies in Contemporary Fiction 51.1 (2010): 32-46. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
The article uses "hermaphrodite" multiple times. People with 5-alpha-reductase deficiency are not, in fact, hermaphrodites in any medical sense: they do not have both male and female gonadal tissue. They are male with a deficiency of an enzyme in the testosterone pathway, and so have testes and, post-puberty, a phallus. As a technical term, "hermaphrodite" refers to a vanishingly small percentage of people. As a social term, it is considered offensive, and the term "intersex" is to be preferred. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.41.10.132 ( talk) 21:50, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
From an interview with Jonathan Safran Foer ( link):The idea was to write a fictional book about a hermaphrodite, and I wanted it to be medically accurate - to be a story of a real hermaphrodite, rather than a fanciful creature like Tiresias or Orlando who could shift in a paragraph; to avail myself of the mythological connections without making the character a myth.
While "intersex" is the term preferred by some, the wording of the author's statements in interviews indicates that "hermaphrodite" is the more suitable term for the book. Cunard ( talk) 01:41, 12 July 2011 (UTC)The book, like its hermaphroditic narrator, was meant to be a hybrid. Part third-person epic, part first-person coming-of-age tale.
"I wanted to write about hermaphroditism," Mr. Eugenides said. "But hermaphroditism led to classicism, classicism led to Hellenism, Hellenism to my Uncle Pete. I didn't set out to write a Greek-American novel. I used the history because it served my story."
Mr. Eugenides first contemplated hermaphroditism about 20 years ago when he read a memoir by Alexina Barbin, a 19th-century French hermaphrodite. But he became frustrated that "it was written by a convent schoolgirl, and it seemed to be written by a convent schoolgirl -- very melodramatic, evasive about the anatomical details," he said, adding, "She was unable to describe her emotions." He decided "to write the story that I wasn't getting from the memoir."
Mr. Eugenides's research into hermaphroditism, sexology and the establishment of sexual identity amounted to what Cal and his parents go through. Mr. Eugenides consulted experts and read widely, but he has never met a hermaphrodite.
As someone who provided a lengthy review of the article a year or so ago I have been asked to comment on the hermaphrodie/intersexual issue. I am not familiar with the usags or nuances associated with these terms, but I have read the above debate. The first point that occurred to me was: has anyone publicly taken Mr Eugenides to task for inappropriate use of the term "hermaphrodite"? If so, that would be a useful hook for raising the issue within the article, avoiding the issue of Wikpedia "making the call". Otherwise, if the term has offensive connotations it might be advisable to use the strategy suggested by Etoile in the above discussion. For example, if I were writing an article on an Evelyn Waugh novel I would not use the terms that Waugh habitually employs to describe non-Europeans, unless this was in the voice of one of his characters. Brianboulton ( talk) 11:33, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
I have friends who are intersex and as someone who identifies as neither fully male or female and who is a friend and ally to intersex people, I am wondering why you weren't more sensitive to terminology. Why are you using the word "hermaphrodite" in your book—a word choice that is either terribly ignorant or unforgivably callous. I admired the book so much for the humanity it gave to the central character and I was so disappointed to have it dashed by this thoughtless use of the word "hermaphrodite." Can you please explain why you chose this?
I alluded to this concern in a previous answer, but let me address it directly here. First of all, Reece, I appreciate the issue about terminology you raise. I've had conversations with intersex people about this very subject and, as you can see from this very sentence, I do try to use the term "intersex" when referring to actual, living persons. Middlesex, however, grows out of Greek mythology. The story of Hermaphroditus, the beautiful son of Hermes and Aphrodite, is one I retell, in modern guise, in two different sections of the book. The nymph Salmacis fell in love with Hermaphroditus when he took a swim in her designated pool one day. He rebuffed her advances, but she clung to him, pleading with the gods to keep the two of them from ever parting. Her prayers were answered. Hermaphroditus and Salmacis were physically fused into one being.
Why am I going into all this? Because when I use the term "hermaphrodite," I'm referring not to a person or a group of people but to a literary character. Hermaphroditus had many children: Tiresias obviously, but also Virginia Woolf's Orlando. Hermaphroditic figures appear in the mythology and folklore of just about every culture that exists. As a writer, I use the term "hermaphrodite" when speaking about such characters.
But you're right. When speaking about real people, I should—and I do my best to—use the term "intersex." One of the first source materials I consulted when I began writing Middlesex was the journal Hermaphrodites with Attitude published by The Intersex Society of North America. The writers in the journal have co-opted the term "hermaphrodite" in the way gay men and women have reclaimed the word "queer." Is it surprising, then, that my narrator, who is intersex, might use the term at times? It's paradoxical: Cal can say "hermaphodite" but I can't. Or shouldn't.
I don't know if this will satisfy you, Reece, but I hope it gives you some idea of my thinking on the subject and testifies to the fact that I have thought about it. As a writer of English, I resist any depredations to its marvelous vocabulary. I could never support a moratorium on the use of the word "hermaphrodite." I do entirely agree with you, however, that people should be aware that the proper term to apply today, when talking about human beings, is intersex. This distinction is getting ever more widely known, I think. Your question speeds that process along, and I thank you for it. I do appreciate the fact that you admired the "humanity" of my book and might add in my defense that anyone who reads Middlesex will undoubtedly respect the humanity of its narrator and central figure. Which is the main thing, after all.
Thank you, Riggr Mortis ( talk · contribs), for your superb copyediting of the article's prose. In reply to your edit summary, I originally had a link to the disambiguation page Olympus. It was changed to Mount Olympus ("Fix links to disambiguation page"), then Mount Nif ("fix link; most likely candidate in Asia Minor, given the description"), and finally Uludağ ("fixing again; found more detail in referenced sources that identified the mountain"). I've asked R'n'B ( talk · contribs) to comment here. Cunard ( talk) 21:39, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Coming back and re-reading this article (as well as comments at its FAC), thoughts ran into my head. Instead of listing them, I am going to be bold and implement them for discussion. I use To Kill a Mockingbird as a model; I am not endorsing this article as an FA—there are issues with it—but I think it serves quite well as one, structure-wise.
On the first parts of the article about Middlesex, separating "Publication" into its own section seems pretty distracting to me, particularly when it is just a presentation of facts and figures, not behind-the-scenes information. As such, I condensed it and brought the Spanish acquisition into the main text instead.
Focusing back on the parts behind Eugenides conception of the novel, the source for "elusive historical figure" never stated who was the figure; hence, we should not state Barbin to be the figure either. The sentences about Euginedes's attempt to establish a narrative voice cut too close to the source, so I quoted them instead. Finally, even though the bit about his marriage and housing in MacDowell are in the footnotes, it still seems irrelevant to novel and best removed. The changes have been enacted as such. Jappalang ( talk) 06:51, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
For the footnote about his marriage, I agree that I included much information better fit in Eugenides' article. However, I believe
is sufficiently relevant to the novel that it can be retained in a footnote with everything else excised. Cunard ( talk) 07:12, 18 October 2011 (UTC)"At MacDowell Colony, Eugenides' studio was a "master bedroom of a large white wooden farmhouse". His room was ornamented with a large fireplace and a Persian rug. Eugenides enjoyed the place, writing, "It was like having a country house suddenly, like going from being a starving artist to a landowner." Eugenides met Karen Yamauchi, who would become his wife, at the colony's community dinner."
The content about Yamauchi is also background information. I initially had it in the "Autobiographical elements" section, but 75.2.209.226 ( talk · contribs) removed it, writing that it was "wordy, awkward, and redundant to Background section". I think the information about Eugenides' meeting Yamauchi at the colony flows better as a footnote in the "Conception, research, and publication" section since the section discusses the colony. (The Eugenides-Yamauchi's relationship in parallel to Cal-Julie is already discussed in the "Autobiographical elements" section.) Cunard ( talk) 07:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
I think Fictional settings and Plot summary are too closely linked. The Fictional settings is "trying too hard" in my view to establish links between our world and that of Middlesex, resulting in the sore thumb of Bithynios. The village is likely fictional (if the place is real, Eugenides's writing of its history could be offensive if not based on actual records), but without mention in a reliable source, we cannot claim as such. Mixed with historical events, the village's authenticity raises questions. The Plot summary tries to leave out the details found in settings but cannot seem to work as effectively as if they were included. The chronology is jumbled in the first part, probably becuase of an intent to clarify Cal/Callie's status.
I think trying to squeeze in little bits of analysis into the Plot (e.g. entendre) does not work here, and would be better worked into other sections (Themes, Styles). Jappalang ( talk) 08:18, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Where did you find the information about "Cal's opinion of the events in hindsight and of his life after his father's funeral prefaces each chapter"? I don't know remember whether Eugenides prefaced every chapter with Cal's opinion, though I haven't read the book in over a year. It might be more accurately rephrased as "Cal weaves his opinion of the events in hindsight and of his life after his father's funeral throughout the book." Cunard ( talk) 08:38, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Change 3 The Autobiographical elements section seemed a bit disorganized to me. I set up three paragraphs: Eugenides's introduction, Eugenides vs Cal, and his family vs Cal's. There were some repetitous elements, the most obvious to me was the author's quotes. Some stuff also strikes me as not quite fitting in with the "autobiography" theme. The deterioration of Zebra Room did not seem pertinent ("And in a way my upbringing is just like a slow time-lapse film of everything falling apart on that street, because we would have to go down it almost every day." does not seem to be describing Cal's life). I think the omens bit plays no part in the story of "his" life. The one paragraph dedicated to it seems a bit too overwhelming for something that did not make it into the book nor affected its writing. Jappalang ( talk) 01:17, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
I agree the discussion about Eugenides' omens doesn't fit well anywhere here, so I'll move it to Eugenides' own article. Cunard ( talk) 09:08, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Patricia Chu, a scholar of English literature, noted that the influences of the older genetic dissertations are highlighted by the shift from first person to third person in the middle of the passage where Cal researches hermaphroditism.[Chu 2009, p. 280] For instance, Cal asks the questions "How did Calliope feel about her crocus?"[Eugenides 2002, p. 330] and "What was Cal's official position on penises?"[Eugenides 2002, p. 452][Shostak 2008, p. 408] When Cal discusses Callie, he uses the comedic device of adopting the third person to dissociate himself from her.[Shostak 2008, p. 408][Taberner 2007, p. 173]
First, what does "influences of the older genetic dissertations are highlighted by the shift" mean? Without access to either Chu's or Shostak's paper, I have to ask why are Eugenides's book and Shostak's paper used to give examples for something Chu raised about? Does Chu not give any example? Does Shostak refer to Chu? If she does, how are those two phrases highlights of "the influences of older genetic dissertations"? Jappalang ( talk) 01:21, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Eugenides makes Cal's biological formation the source of narrative plenitude when described from the perspective of the new genomics. This is hard to describe in the space of a short essay, but having two genders, being seemingly limited by biology, becomes rather an explosion of narrative voice.
Like Tiresias, I was first one thing and then the other. I've been ridiculed by class mates, guinea-pigged by doctors, palpated by specialists, and researched by the March of Dimes. A red-headed girl from Grosse Pointe fell in love with me, not knowing what I was. (Her brother liked me, too.) An army tank led me into urban battle once; a swimming pool turned me into myth; I've left my body in order to occupy others—and all this happened before I turned sixteen. (3)
The momentum and lift in this passage contrast sharply to Callie's discovery that the term monster is listed as a synonym in the dictionary when she researches her condition through the more circumscribed narratives of dictionary and medical practice. Here, in the space available to me, I cannot do justice to the poignancy of that passage (430–32), nor to how the switch from first person to third person in the midst of it underscores the effects of older genetic discourses. It is as much the flat narrative and defensive self-humanization generated by absolute eugenics that she/he flees as it is surgical intervention.
There are some performative effects of Eugenides' choice of narrrative voice, as well. We can accept Eugenides writing (and Cal narrating) the experience of the "female" Callie during her childhood and early adolescence, just as we can accept the imaginative leap of any skillful writer into the experience of a character of the opposite sex. Certainly the adult Cal is the best expert on Callie, despite his temporal and (alleged) gendered distance from her. But the first-person "male" Cal narrating the third-person "female" Callie's experience reifies the male-female bipolarity that Middlesex overtly tries to oppose, and that Eugenides asserts extratextually, as when he tells Foer, "Gender is a continuum and everyone falls in a different spot" (80). If that is the case, no language exists to represent the spots on the continuum between the poles—another example of practicality disrupting theory. When, for example, Eugenides has Cal move the narrative forward with questions—"How did Calliope feel about her crocus?" (330), or "What was Cal's official position on penises?” (452)—the comic device of referring to him/herself in the third person reminds the reader of the estrangement of the narrator's subjectivity from the narrated object.
To shift the focus to representation, and the interaction of themes and form, we need only compare Mitgift with Jeffrey Eugenides' Middlesex, also about a hermaphrodite. Eugenides uses a first-person narrative for his protagonist, who is brought up as a girl (Calliope) but whose male genitalia develop at puberty and who then adopts a male persona (Cal), though refuses medical intervention. The non-gender-marked first-person pronoun gives a continuity of perspective even through a radical shift in self which calls into question both sex and gender (though occasionally Cal uses the third person to refer to Calliope, to emphasize the distance, or an external viewpoint) ...
"When Cal discusses Callie, he uses the comedic device of adopting the third person to dissociate himself from her" was sourced to Taberner since March 2010. I added Shostak and her quotations of Middlesex as examples in July 2010. Shostak's paper does not refer to Chu's. You caught an error in my positioning of the sources when I added Shostak. The sentence beginning "For instance" belongs after "When Cal discusses Callie..." I have corrected this error and thank you for catching it.
I included citations from Eugenides' book so the reader would know which pages in Middlesex the quotes come from. For each quote, I included citations both from the novel and the secondary review per Awadewit's suggestion. Cunard ( talk) 10:19, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Aside from relocating 2-3 paragraphs to the later sub-section of Verbosity and tone (renamed from Criticisms), I made the above changes. A few reasonings and comments as follows:
That is it for now. Jappalang ( talk) 12:24, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
I think the comments at the FAC were correct in part that most of what was Verbosity and tone was presented as more critical in nature than analytical. I rephrased the subsection to hopefully avoid this. I also found that it would be hard to justify separating "tone" into a sub-section as it is invariably style. Again I restructured the section, moving the part of first and third-person narratives into Narrative modes. I shifted certain statements (Mendelsohn, Kakutani) into Themes as they seem to better fit in there (Criticisms seem to be the other likely spot, but it would be hard to fit piecemeal statements there). The following were left out as they do not seem to fit well into Style or seemingly too short for Criticisms:
I think I will be moving on to the Themes section after this. Jappalang ( talk) 02:50, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
In his statements, Cal both implicitly and explicitly alludes to Tiresias. I base both types of illusions on Collado-Rodríguez's interpretations about Cal and Tiresias. Cal does compare himself to Tiresias several times. Perhaps "repeatedly" is not the best wording. "Cal compares himself to Tiresias several times" would have probably worked better. However, the current wording is fine as is. Cunard ( talk) 09:01, 3 November 2011 (UTC)"The narrator openly declares that, like the mythical Tiresias, she/he knows both sexes (1), and it comes as no surprise that, like the seer, Cal is gifted with narrative omniscience."
Being like Tiresias, Cal is entitled not only to prescience but also to the use of the grandiose tone of that mythological figure: "I alone, from the private box of my primordial egg, saw what was going on" (206).
"The narrator's capacity to see the past and Tiresias's capacity to see the future further recall the literary reference of T. S. Eliot's poem The Waste Land, where the narrator also confesses, by the middle of the poem, that she/he is the mythological blind seer, stressing her/his paradoxical cognitive (in)capacity."
After reviewing the novel through Google Books, I agree with your correction. The source is incorrect, though, so I don't know we can reconcile that: Should this sentence be removed? Cunard ( talk) 09:01, 3 November 2011 (UTC)Cal Stephanides, the narrator and protagonist of Middlesex, is a third-generation Greek American whose cultural heritage provides ample opportunities for the author to playfully evoke the mythological meanings of the figure of the hermaphrodite. Self-reflexive allusions to classical mythology abound in this ebulliently metafictional novel. Cal is conceived following her parents' return from a theatrical production of The Minotaur, studies Ovid's Metamorphoses at school and is cast as Tiresias in a student production of Antigone.
I think this section is more suited to Themes than Style; i.e. I think it fits in better with "what sort of common elements are evidenced in the content" than with "what kind of flavor does this writing have". I think "Eugenides frequently references Greek classical myths in Middlesex" is likely the best we can do to shape this section to fit into Style. However, that would force an exclusion of the "Chimera", and the Odyseuss and Oedipus angles; they are external analysis, not of his writing but content similarities (which better fits Theme). That said, it is a bit difficult figuring where it goes, since the sub-section is talking about the allusions ("these elements are in the book"), not that a particular myth is a major part of the story. If this is about how the writing mirrors the ancient Greek texts ("Character XXX's thoughts are expressed in lines of stanzas that evoke images of the Illiad"), then I think it would be obvious on its stay here. I understand that this sub-section was previously in Themes and moved to Style on Awadewit's suggestion in May 2010. Perhaps it can be rephrased to suit a Style analysis but at the moment it seems more Themes to me (and affected my way of presenting it as such), or perhaps I am totally off base with this...? Jappalang ( talk) 09:36, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Jappalang, you have restructured and rewritten this article. You are as much a writer of this article as I, if not more so. When you have finished reworking the article, and if you consider the article ready for another FA nomination, would you be willing to conominate it? Cunard ( talk) 01:36, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
To give the direct link to the abstract more prominence, I've added a |deadurl=no to those templates. See Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Dead url parameter for citations for information about what it does. Cunard ( talk) 20:57, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
I believe there is a heavy reliance on Eugenides' own remarks here (interviews are primary sources), so some are being weeded. Jappalang ( talk) 02:12, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
I have no access to Sobczak, A. J., but it seems that of the five sources for this subsection, only Wainwright specifically talks about rebirth. Of particular note, the sentence of Jimmy Zizmo's rebirth is not supported by Hanna's "a bootlegger who reinvents himself as a Muslim minister, Farrad Mohammad" ("reinvent" does not mean "rebirth" and she does not seem to state it as such). Are there any more sources that supports such a theme? If not, I think it could be better to integrate Wainwright into Nature versus nurture or Gender identity. Jappalang ( talk) 03:19, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Sobczak, A. J. states:
I agree that "rebirth" does not mean "reinvention" or "transformation". Perhaps this section can be retitled to be "Reinvention" or "Transformation" to better reflect the sources? Cunard ( talk) 10:01, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Cal's grandparents are more firmly attached to the idea of life as inevitable tragedy. Shortly before fleeing their tiny Greek village during the Turkish invasion of 1922, they realize that although they are brother and sister, they love each other as man and woman. Thus is rooted another theme of the book, that of transformation — Cal's from female to male identification and his grandparents' reinvention of themselves as husband and wife rather than brother and sister. The latter choice sets Cal’s story in motion, for it is through his grandparents’ mating that a rare recessive gene is passed to Cal's father.
I am getting a bit confused by edits to "intersex" such as this and this. As far as I understand it, "intersex" is a mass noun only; it is not a singular nor an adjective. I asked Moni3 ( talk · contribs) about the rules for using the term ( User talk:Moni3#Intersex grammar), and she asked if there were any authoritative sources that point the use of intersex other than what Oxford has prescribed. What are the grammatical sources for adjective and plurals? Jappalang ( talk) 01:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
I do not think so. First off, "respect" plays no part here. We are talking about the proper use of the English language (grammar), which would be key for FA's "
professional standard" prose.
WP:NPOV prescribes detachment from the subject and objective casting (treatment) in terms of content and language. To further clarify the doubts I am having:
From Oxford Dictionaries,
In English, the typical structure is "adjective noun", e.g. a red car. You cannot use an adjective as a noun; hence, "he is a disabled" is grammatically incorrect. A count noun would require an article ("a", "an"). "Intersex" is not an adjective; it is a mass noun. The examples given above for "gay" are correct, but that is because "gay" is a noun and adjective (the same as male, female, homosexual, but not intersex). "He/she is an intersex individual" is proper per the dictionary, as is "intersex person"; but using it as a pure adjective ("he is intersex") seems decidedly against grammatical convention.
Jappalang (
talk) 00:59, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
I have asked Tony1 ( talk · contribs) to take a look at this. Cunard ( talk) 04:26, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Hey, so as to let you know, I am not giving up on this article. I am trying to gather and read up on the sources, which is taking up time. I am growing a bit concerned that the article might be having too much stuff and is too reliant on non-scholarly text. Just my thoughts at the moment (might change with time and further reading). Jappalang ( talk) 02:10, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cunard. I apologize for saying this, but I am no longer able to continue work on Middlesex. I have decided to cease contributing to the WMF projects. In short, I no longer have the enthusiasm I once had; before taking this decision, I find myself constantly questioning why am I spending a substantial time (even while taking short wikibreaks) thinking of ways to improve articles and searching and validating "free" images when that time can be spent with my family or to advance my career. I again apologize; I arrived at this state of mind halfway through the work on Middlesex. I offer a synopsis of what my proposals in mollification.
Indeed, I do think relying on newspaper articles for thematic studies is not a good choice. Questions could be raised on why 30 pages of Shostak (and 22 pages of Cohen) are only used once while journalists are cited more than that. I also have an issue with presenting Thea Hillman's opinions in the article as salient points (i.e. more than a slight weightage). Hillman is a writer, not a critic or scholar. Furthermore, Hillman is also an intersex. I dare say Hillman's opinion towards the portrayal of intersex in the novel is less than objective. The novel's portrayals of intersex has been assessed by scholarly text that unforunately seem not to have been used here. Hillman's opinion could have been used but not to the degree that it is offered as a heavy counter-weight against mainstream views.
{{
cite journal}}
: |chapter=
ignored (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: |chapter=
ignored (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
I had certain candidates for images as well, subjected to space concerns:
That said, my personal belief is that currently the article has too much content in Themes. I had plans to go through and rewrite the section. Critical reception is also getting a bit large and acquires a quote farm-feel when the contents are mainly "he said .... she opined ... he thought". I was thinking of looking for common themes among the opinions and grouping them into a third-person presentation, as well as assessing whether an opinion was insignificant (held by only one or two). Even minor viewpoints (held by a minority compared to a common view) may have to be excluded or reduced, depending on how much have already been written. Jappalang ( talk) 12:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Why is Robert Zecker's analysis so prominent in the subsection on race relations? His analysis of the story wasn't exactly impartial, and the fact that it's so focused on gives the section a biased feel. The section should be edited to give his analysis less importance, and bring in other analyses of race relations in the novel. That would make the section more balanced and neutral. Right now, it reads not like a look at race relations in the novel, but a look at Zecker's opinion on race relations in the novel. 2601:0:B101:30D0:A4CC:5582:A071:245C ( talk) 03:55, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
![]() | Middlesex (novel) has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I have deleted this message because I don't think it is true. I added fiction as the genre, which I *think* was the only missing field, because it is not in a series and was not translated from another language into english. If I'm missing something please tell me. Tartan 20:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Note to self: http://www.powells.com/biblio/1-9780312422158-1, http://www.indiebound.org/book/9780312427733, and http://www.bookbrowse.com/reviews/index.cfm?book_number=1318 contain snippets/links to a number of reviews. Cunard ( talk) 07:47, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
http://www.welt.de/print-welt/article271526/Den_Goettern_sei_Dank.html ( http://www.webcitation.org/625B7EUlp) – list of omens Eugenides experienced while and after he wrote Middlesex. Cunard ( talk) 10:21, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Following a request from Cunard ( talk), I have done a copy edit of this article. There are still a few issues which I have not had time to review, so if anyone has time and wish to help, please do. For FA articles, only the first mention of a word or term should be wikified. There are some words that are wikified more than once, and sometimes, they are not wikified on its first mention, but further down. This needs to be corrected. I also do not have the time now to go through the peer review. I will try to do that tomorrow. Cheers. -- S Masters ( talk) 17:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I will be conducting this review. I've done an initial read-through and so far, it's in excellent shape. The article has obviously benefited from some thorough copy edits and reads very well. Perhaps more importantly, it appears to be well sourced and covers all the broad aspects of the article. I am going to go through the available sources in a second look through, but in the meantime, here are some initially comments, almost all of which will be easy to address. Please respond to each item line-by-line and I'll strike them as we go... — Hun ter Ka hn 05:55, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Lead:
Background and publication
Plot
Autobiographical elements
Style
Themes
Reception
Honors and adaptation
Misc
I'll place this on hold for now. I expect to come back with some more comments after I do a thorough look through the sources, but I'd encourage you to make changes based on my above comments in the meantime. Thanks! — Hun ter Ka hn 05:55, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Here, as requested, are some comments on what I believe is a first-class article. I have not read the book yet, so some of my comments may seem nitpicky and naïve. They may help, however, in the final polishing stages before what I assume will be a FAC nomination.
I've reworded the sentence to make the connection clearer. Cunard ( talk) 06:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I've rephrased that paragraph. Is it better? Cunard ( talk) 06:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I hope you find these comments helpful. I will watch this article's progress with much interest. Brianboulton ( talk) 21:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I think that the article is in generally excellent shape. Please let me know when you send it FAC. Brianboulton ( talk) 10:08, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
In general, there is a lot of good material here, but I think there are some organizational kinks to work out and perhaps some sourcing. I would suggest obtaining a copyeditor after you work on these larger issues, someone who can go over each and every sentence before FAC.
The section title is "Background and publication", and I can't think of any other publication information to include there. Cunard ( talk) 07:31, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
Citations 63 and 66 are to pages in the novel, while citation 65 is to a book by Angela Pattatucci Aragon. Aragon's analysis of the novel's themes included the quotes from the novel (citations 63 and 66). I prefer using quotes from the novel to quotes from the secondary source because the prose of the novel is generally clearer and better written. The wording of the secondary source is less able to convey the emotion and atmosphere of each scene. Is there another way I can make it clearer that the examples/quotes are pulled from the secondary source? Cunard ( talk) 02:15, 17 May 2010 (UTC)While his female classmates are turned off by the blood in The Iliad, Cal is "thrilled to [read about] the stabbings and beheadings, the gouging out of eyes, the juicy eviscerations".[65] Cal ponders his gender identity and how males and females associate with each other,[63] reflecting, "Did I see through the male tricks because I was destined to scheme that way myself? Or do girls see through the tricks, too, and just pretend not to notice?"[66]
I hope this is helpful! Awadewit ( talk) 21:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
Chu, Patricia E. "D(NA) Coding the Ethnic: Jeffrey Eugenides's Middlesex." Novel: A Forum on Fiction 42.2 (2009): 278-283. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Dalling, Graham. "Enfield in the Time of Charles Lamb." Charles Lamb Bulletin 34.(1981): 25-34. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Breger, Claudia. "Gen-erativkrafte: Poesie und Wissenschaft in Jeffrey Eugenides' Middlesex." Engineering Life: Narrationen vom Menschen in Biomedizin, Kultur und Literatur. 201-217. Berlin, Germany: Kulturverlag Kadmos, 2008. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Koch-Rein, Anne. "Intersexuality-In the 'I' of the Norm? Queer Field Notes from Eugenides' Middlesex." Quer durch die Geisteswissenschaften: Perspektiven der Queer Theory. 238-252. Berlin, Germany: Querverlag, 2005. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Davros, Michael G. "Loss and Transformation on the Road in Jeffrey Eugenides's Middlesex and Don DeLillo's Underworld." The Image of the Road in Literature, Media, and Society. 148-153. Pueblo, CO: Society for the Interdisciplinary Study of Social Imagery, Colorado State University-Pueblo, 2005. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Kehlmann, Daniel. "Narrative Heat." PEN America: A Journal for Writers and Readers 9.(2008): 88-96. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Collado-Rodriguez, Francisco. "Of Self and Country: U.S. Politics, Cultural Hybridity, and Ambivalent Identity in Jeffrey Eugenides's Middlesex." International Fiction Review 33.1-2 (2006): 71-83. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Sifuentes, Zachary. "Strange Anatomy, Strange Sexuality: The Queer Body in Jeffrey Eugenides' Middlesex." Straight Writ Queer: Non-Normative Expressions of Heterosexuality in Literature. 145-157. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2006. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Consonni, Stefania. "'Stuck in the Middle with Eu': Genetica e letteratura in Middlesex." Nuova Corrente: Rivista di Letteratura 54.139 (2007): 145-171. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Ciocoi-Pop, Ana-Blanca. "Suicide as Affirmation and Gender as a Conscious Choice: The Deconstruction of Identity in Jeffrey Eugenides' Major Novels." American, British, and Canadian Studies 10.(2008): 80-90. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Eugenides, Jeffrey. "The Omens." Brick 73.(2004): 127-129. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Shostak, Debra. "'Theory Uncompromised by Practicality': Hybridity in Jeffrey Eugenides' Middlesex." Contemporary Literature 49.3 (2008): 383-412. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Sielke, Sabine. "Translation and Transdisciplinarity: Mapping Contact Zones between Literary and Scientific Practice." Cultures of Translation. 149-173. Newcastle upon Tyne, England: Cambridge Scholars, 2008. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Sykes, John D., Jr. "Two Natures: Chalcedon and Coming-of-Age in O'Connor's 'A Temple of the Holy Ghost'." Flannery O'Connor Review 5.(2007): 89-98. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Womack, Kenneth, and Amy Mallory-Kani. "'Why Don't You Just Leave It Up to Nature?': An Adaptionist Reading of the Novels of Jeffrey Eugenides." Mosaic: A Journal for the Interdisciplinary Study of Literature 40.3 (2007): 157-173. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
Lee, Merton. "Why Jeffrey Eugenides' Middlesex Is So Inoffensive." Critique: Studies in Contemporary Fiction 51.1 (2010): 32-46. MLA International Bibliography. EBSCO. Web. 25 May 2010.
The article uses "hermaphrodite" multiple times. People with 5-alpha-reductase deficiency are not, in fact, hermaphrodites in any medical sense: they do not have both male and female gonadal tissue. They are male with a deficiency of an enzyme in the testosterone pathway, and so have testes and, post-puberty, a phallus. As a technical term, "hermaphrodite" refers to a vanishingly small percentage of people. As a social term, it is considered offensive, and the term "intersex" is to be preferred. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.41.10.132 ( talk) 21:50, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
From an interview with Jonathan Safran Foer ( link):The idea was to write a fictional book about a hermaphrodite, and I wanted it to be medically accurate - to be a story of a real hermaphrodite, rather than a fanciful creature like Tiresias or Orlando who could shift in a paragraph; to avail myself of the mythological connections without making the character a myth.
While "intersex" is the term preferred by some, the wording of the author's statements in interviews indicates that "hermaphrodite" is the more suitable term for the book. Cunard ( talk) 01:41, 12 July 2011 (UTC)The book, like its hermaphroditic narrator, was meant to be a hybrid. Part third-person epic, part first-person coming-of-age tale.
"I wanted to write about hermaphroditism," Mr. Eugenides said. "But hermaphroditism led to classicism, classicism led to Hellenism, Hellenism to my Uncle Pete. I didn't set out to write a Greek-American novel. I used the history because it served my story."
Mr. Eugenides first contemplated hermaphroditism about 20 years ago when he read a memoir by Alexina Barbin, a 19th-century French hermaphrodite. But he became frustrated that "it was written by a convent schoolgirl, and it seemed to be written by a convent schoolgirl -- very melodramatic, evasive about the anatomical details," he said, adding, "She was unable to describe her emotions." He decided "to write the story that I wasn't getting from the memoir."
Mr. Eugenides's research into hermaphroditism, sexology and the establishment of sexual identity amounted to what Cal and his parents go through. Mr. Eugenides consulted experts and read widely, but he has never met a hermaphrodite.
As someone who provided a lengthy review of the article a year or so ago I have been asked to comment on the hermaphrodie/intersexual issue. I am not familiar with the usags or nuances associated with these terms, but I have read the above debate. The first point that occurred to me was: has anyone publicly taken Mr Eugenides to task for inappropriate use of the term "hermaphrodite"? If so, that would be a useful hook for raising the issue within the article, avoiding the issue of Wikpedia "making the call". Otherwise, if the term has offensive connotations it might be advisable to use the strategy suggested by Etoile in the above discussion. For example, if I were writing an article on an Evelyn Waugh novel I would not use the terms that Waugh habitually employs to describe non-Europeans, unless this was in the voice of one of his characters. Brianboulton ( talk) 11:33, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
I have friends who are intersex and as someone who identifies as neither fully male or female and who is a friend and ally to intersex people, I am wondering why you weren't more sensitive to terminology. Why are you using the word "hermaphrodite" in your book—a word choice that is either terribly ignorant or unforgivably callous. I admired the book so much for the humanity it gave to the central character and I was so disappointed to have it dashed by this thoughtless use of the word "hermaphrodite." Can you please explain why you chose this?
I alluded to this concern in a previous answer, but let me address it directly here. First of all, Reece, I appreciate the issue about terminology you raise. I've had conversations with intersex people about this very subject and, as you can see from this very sentence, I do try to use the term "intersex" when referring to actual, living persons. Middlesex, however, grows out of Greek mythology. The story of Hermaphroditus, the beautiful son of Hermes and Aphrodite, is one I retell, in modern guise, in two different sections of the book. The nymph Salmacis fell in love with Hermaphroditus when he took a swim in her designated pool one day. He rebuffed her advances, but she clung to him, pleading with the gods to keep the two of them from ever parting. Her prayers were answered. Hermaphroditus and Salmacis were physically fused into one being.
Why am I going into all this? Because when I use the term "hermaphrodite," I'm referring not to a person or a group of people but to a literary character. Hermaphroditus had many children: Tiresias obviously, but also Virginia Woolf's Orlando. Hermaphroditic figures appear in the mythology and folklore of just about every culture that exists. As a writer, I use the term "hermaphrodite" when speaking about such characters.
But you're right. When speaking about real people, I should—and I do my best to—use the term "intersex." One of the first source materials I consulted when I began writing Middlesex was the journal Hermaphrodites with Attitude published by The Intersex Society of North America. The writers in the journal have co-opted the term "hermaphrodite" in the way gay men and women have reclaimed the word "queer." Is it surprising, then, that my narrator, who is intersex, might use the term at times? It's paradoxical: Cal can say "hermaphodite" but I can't. Or shouldn't.
I don't know if this will satisfy you, Reece, but I hope it gives you some idea of my thinking on the subject and testifies to the fact that I have thought about it. As a writer of English, I resist any depredations to its marvelous vocabulary. I could never support a moratorium on the use of the word "hermaphrodite." I do entirely agree with you, however, that people should be aware that the proper term to apply today, when talking about human beings, is intersex. This distinction is getting ever more widely known, I think. Your question speeds that process along, and I thank you for it. I do appreciate the fact that you admired the "humanity" of my book and might add in my defense that anyone who reads Middlesex will undoubtedly respect the humanity of its narrator and central figure. Which is the main thing, after all.
Thank you, Riggr Mortis ( talk · contribs), for your superb copyediting of the article's prose. In reply to your edit summary, I originally had a link to the disambiguation page Olympus. It was changed to Mount Olympus ("Fix links to disambiguation page"), then Mount Nif ("fix link; most likely candidate in Asia Minor, given the description"), and finally Uludağ ("fixing again; found more detail in referenced sources that identified the mountain"). I've asked R'n'B ( talk · contribs) to comment here. Cunard ( talk) 21:39, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Coming back and re-reading this article (as well as comments at its FAC), thoughts ran into my head. Instead of listing them, I am going to be bold and implement them for discussion. I use To Kill a Mockingbird as a model; I am not endorsing this article as an FA—there are issues with it—but I think it serves quite well as one, structure-wise.
On the first parts of the article about Middlesex, separating "Publication" into its own section seems pretty distracting to me, particularly when it is just a presentation of facts and figures, not behind-the-scenes information. As such, I condensed it and brought the Spanish acquisition into the main text instead.
Focusing back on the parts behind Eugenides conception of the novel, the source for "elusive historical figure" never stated who was the figure; hence, we should not state Barbin to be the figure either. The sentences about Euginedes's attempt to establish a narrative voice cut too close to the source, so I quoted them instead. Finally, even though the bit about his marriage and housing in MacDowell are in the footnotes, it still seems irrelevant to novel and best removed. The changes have been enacted as such. Jappalang ( talk) 06:51, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
For the footnote about his marriage, I agree that I included much information better fit in Eugenides' article. However, I believe
is sufficiently relevant to the novel that it can be retained in a footnote with everything else excised. Cunard ( talk) 07:12, 18 October 2011 (UTC)"At MacDowell Colony, Eugenides' studio was a "master bedroom of a large white wooden farmhouse". His room was ornamented with a large fireplace and a Persian rug. Eugenides enjoyed the place, writing, "It was like having a country house suddenly, like going from being a starving artist to a landowner." Eugenides met Karen Yamauchi, who would become his wife, at the colony's community dinner."
The content about Yamauchi is also background information. I initially had it in the "Autobiographical elements" section, but 75.2.209.226 ( talk · contribs) removed it, writing that it was "wordy, awkward, and redundant to Background section". I think the information about Eugenides' meeting Yamauchi at the colony flows better as a footnote in the "Conception, research, and publication" section since the section discusses the colony. (The Eugenides-Yamauchi's relationship in parallel to Cal-Julie is already discussed in the "Autobiographical elements" section.) Cunard ( talk) 07:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
I think Fictional settings and Plot summary are too closely linked. The Fictional settings is "trying too hard" in my view to establish links between our world and that of Middlesex, resulting in the sore thumb of Bithynios. The village is likely fictional (if the place is real, Eugenides's writing of its history could be offensive if not based on actual records), but without mention in a reliable source, we cannot claim as such. Mixed with historical events, the village's authenticity raises questions. The Plot summary tries to leave out the details found in settings but cannot seem to work as effectively as if they were included. The chronology is jumbled in the first part, probably becuase of an intent to clarify Cal/Callie's status.
I think trying to squeeze in little bits of analysis into the Plot (e.g. entendre) does not work here, and would be better worked into other sections (Themes, Styles). Jappalang ( talk) 08:18, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Where did you find the information about "Cal's opinion of the events in hindsight and of his life after his father's funeral prefaces each chapter"? I don't know remember whether Eugenides prefaced every chapter with Cal's opinion, though I haven't read the book in over a year. It might be more accurately rephrased as "Cal weaves his opinion of the events in hindsight and of his life after his father's funeral throughout the book." Cunard ( talk) 08:38, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Change 3 The Autobiographical elements section seemed a bit disorganized to me. I set up three paragraphs: Eugenides's introduction, Eugenides vs Cal, and his family vs Cal's. There were some repetitous elements, the most obvious to me was the author's quotes. Some stuff also strikes me as not quite fitting in with the "autobiography" theme. The deterioration of Zebra Room did not seem pertinent ("And in a way my upbringing is just like a slow time-lapse film of everything falling apart on that street, because we would have to go down it almost every day." does not seem to be describing Cal's life). I think the omens bit plays no part in the story of "his" life. The one paragraph dedicated to it seems a bit too overwhelming for something that did not make it into the book nor affected its writing. Jappalang ( talk) 01:17, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
I agree the discussion about Eugenides' omens doesn't fit well anywhere here, so I'll move it to Eugenides' own article. Cunard ( talk) 09:08, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Patricia Chu, a scholar of English literature, noted that the influences of the older genetic dissertations are highlighted by the shift from first person to third person in the middle of the passage where Cal researches hermaphroditism.[Chu 2009, p. 280] For instance, Cal asks the questions "How did Calliope feel about her crocus?"[Eugenides 2002, p. 330] and "What was Cal's official position on penises?"[Eugenides 2002, p. 452][Shostak 2008, p. 408] When Cal discusses Callie, he uses the comedic device of adopting the third person to dissociate himself from her.[Shostak 2008, p. 408][Taberner 2007, p. 173]
First, what does "influences of the older genetic dissertations are highlighted by the shift" mean? Without access to either Chu's or Shostak's paper, I have to ask why are Eugenides's book and Shostak's paper used to give examples for something Chu raised about? Does Chu not give any example? Does Shostak refer to Chu? If she does, how are those two phrases highlights of "the influences of older genetic dissertations"? Jappalang ( talk) 01:21, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Eugenides makes Cal's biological formation the source of narrative plenitude when described from the perspective of the new genomics. This is hard to describe in the space of a short essay, but having two genders, being seemingly limited by biology, becomes rather an explosion of narrative voice.
Like Tiresias, I was first one thing and then the other. I've been ridiculed by class mates, guinea-pigged by doctors, palpated by specialists, and researched by the March of Dimes. A red-headed girl from Grosse Pointe fell in love with me, not knowing what I was. (Her brother liked me, too.) An army tank led me into urban battle once; a swimming pool turned me into myth; I've left my body in order to occupy others—and all this happened before I turned sixteen. (3)
The momentum and lift in this passage contrast sharply to Callie's discovery that the term monster is listed as a synonym in the dictionary when she researches her condition through the more circumscribed narratives of dictionary and medical practice. Here, in the space available to me, I cannot do justice to the poignancy of that passage (430–32), nor to how the switch from first person to third person in the midst of it underscores the effects of older genetic discourses. It is as much the flat narrative and defensive self-humanization generated by absolute eugenics that she/he flees as it is surgical intervention.
There are some performative effects of Eugenides' choice of narrrative voice, as well. We can accept Eugenides writing (and Cal narrating) the experience of the "female" Callie during her childhood and early adolescence, just as we can accept the imaginative leap of any skillful writer into the experience of a character of the opposite sex. Certainly the adult Cal is the best expert on Callie, despite his temporal and (alleged) gendered distance from her. But the first-person "male" Cal narrating the third-person "female" Callie's experience reifies the male-female bipolarity that Middlesex overtly tries to oppose, and that Eugenides asserts extratextually, as when he tells Foer, "Gender is a continuum and everyone falls in a different spot" (80). If that is the case, no language exists to represent the spots on the continuum between the poles—another example of practicality disrupting theory. When, for example, Eugenides has Cal move the narrative forward with questions—"How did Calliope feel about her crocus?" (330), or "What was Cal's official position on penises?” (452)—the comic device of referring to him/herself in the third person reminds the reader of the estrangement of the narrator's subjectivity from the narrated object.
To shift the focus to representation, and the interaction of themes and form, we need only compare Mitgift with Jeffrey Eugenides' Middlesex, also about a hermaphrodite. Eugenides uses a first-person narrative for his protagonist, who is brought up as a girl (Calliope) but whose male genitalia develop at puberty and who then adopts a male persona (Cal), though refuses medical intervention. The non-gender-marked first-person pronoun gives a continuity of perspective even through a radical shift in self which calls into question both sex and gender (though occasionally Cal uses the third person to refer to Calliope, to emphasize the distance, or an external viewpoint) ...
"When Cal discusses Callie, he uses the comedic device of adopting the third person to dissociate himself from her" was sourced to Taberner since March 2010. I added Shostak and her quotations of Middlesex as examples in July 2010. Shostak's paper does not refer to Chu's. You caught an error in my positioning of the sources when I added Shostak. The sentence beginning "For instance" belongs after "When Cal discusses Callie..." I have corrected this error and thank you for catching it.
I included citations from Eugenides' book so the reader would know which pages in Middlesex the quotes come from. For each quote, I included citations both from the novel and the secondary review per Awadewit's suggestion. Cunard ( talk) 10:19, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
Aside from relocating 2-3 paragraphs to the later sub-section of Verbosity and tone (renamed from Criticisms), I made the above changes. A few reasonings and comments as follows:
That is it for now. Jappalang ( talk) 12:24, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
I think the comments at the FAC were correct in part that most of what was Verbosity and tone was presented as more critical in nature than analytical. I rephrased the subsection to hopefully avoid this. I also found that it would be hard to justify separating "tone" into a sub-section as it is invariably style. Again I restructured the section, moving the part of first and third-person narratives into Narrative modes. I shifted certain statements (Mendelsohn, Kakutani) into Themes as they seem to better fit in there (Criticisms seem to be the other likely spot, but it would be hard to fit piecemeal statements there). The following were left out as they do not seem to fit well into Style or seemingly too short for Criticisms:
I think I will be moving on to the Themes section after this. Jappalang ( talk) 02:50, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
In his statements, Cal both implicitly and explicitly alludes to Tiresias. I base both types of illusions on Collado-Rodríguez's interpretations about Cal and Tiresias. Cal does compare himself to Tiresias several times. Perhaps "repeatedly" is not the best wording. "Cal compares himself to Tiresias several times" would have probably worked better. However, the current wording is fine as is. Cunard ( talk) 09:01, 3 November 2011 (UTC)"The narrator openly declares that, like the mythical Tiresias, she/he knows both sexes (1), and it comes as no surprise that, like the seer, Cal is gifted with narrative omniscience."
Being like Tiresias, Cal is entitled not only to prescience but also to the use of the grandiose tone of that mythological figure: "I alone, from the private box of my primordial egg, saw what was going on" (206).
"The narrator's capacity to see the past and Tiresias's capacity to see the future further recall the literary reference of T. S. Eliot's poem The Waste Land, where the narrator also confesses, by the middle of the poem, that she/he is the mythological blind seer, stressing her/his paradoxical cognitive (in)capacity."
After reviewing the novel through Google Books, I agree with your correction. The source is incorrect, though, so I don't know we can reconcile that: Should this sentence be removed? Cunard ( talk) 09:01, 3 November 2011 (UTC)Cal Stephanides, the narrator and protagonist of Middlesex, is a third-generation Greek American whose cultural heritage provides ample opportunities for the author to playfully evoke the mythological meanings of the figure of the hermaphrodite. Self-reflexive allusions to classical mythology abound in this ebulliently metafictional novel. Cal is conceived following her parents' return from a theatrical production of The Minotaur, studies Ovid's Metamorphoses at school and is cast as Tiresias in a student production of Antigone.
I think this section is more suited to Themes than Style; i.e. I think it fits in better with "what sort of common elements are evidenced in the content" than with "what kind of flavor does this writing have". I think "Eugenides frequently references Greek classical myths in Middlesex" is likely the best we can do to shape this section to fit into Style. However, that would force an exclusion of the "Chimera", and the Odyseuss and Oedipus angles; they are external analysis, not of his writing but content similarities (which better fits Theme). That said, it is a bit difficult figuring where it goes, since the sub-section is talking about the allusions ("these elements are in the book"), not that a particular myth is a major part of the story. If this is about how the writing mirrors the ancient Greek texts ("Character XXX's thoughts are expressed in lines of stanzas that evoke images of the Illiad"), then I think it would be obvious on its stay here. I understand that this sub-section was previously in Themes and moved to Style on Awadewit's suggestion in May 2010. Perhaps it can be rephrased to suit a Style analysis but at the moment it seems more Themes to me (and affected my way of presenting it as such), or perhaps I am totally off base with this...? Jappalang ( talk) 09:36, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Jappalang, you have restructured and rewritten this article. You are as much a writer of this article as I, if not more so. When you have finished reworking the article, and if you consider the article ready for another FA nomination, would you be willing to conominate it? Cunard ( talk) 01:36, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
To give the direct link to the abstract more prominence, I've added a |deadurl=no to those templates. See Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Dead url parameter for citations for information about what it does. Cunard ( talk) 20:57, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
I believe there is a heavy reliance on Eugenides' own remarks here (interviews are primary sources), so some are being weeded. Jappalang ( talk) 02:12, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
I have no access to Sobczak, A. J., but it seems that of the five sources for this subsection, only Wainwright specifically talks about rebirth. Of particular note, the sentence of Jimmy Zizmo's rebirth is not supported by Hanna's "a bootlegger who reinvents himself as a Muslim minister, Farrad Mohammad" ("reinvent" does not mean "rebirth" and she does not seem to state it as such). Are there any more sources that supports such a theme? If not, I think it could be better to integrate Wainwright into Nature versus nurture or Gender identity. Jappalang ( talk) 03:19, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Sobczak, A. J. states:
I agree that "rebirth" does not mean "reinvention" or "transformation". Perhaps this section can be retitled to be "Reinvention" or "Transformation" to better reflect the sources? Cunard ( talk) 10:01, 21 November 2011 (UTC)Cal's grandparents are more firmly attached to the idea of life as inevitable tragedy. Shortly before fleeing their tiny Greek village during the Turkish invasion of 1922, they realize that although they are brother and sister, they love each other as man and woman. Thus is rooted another theme of the book, that of transformation — Cal's from female to male identification and his grandparents' reinvention of themselves as husband and wife rather than brother and sister. The latter choice sets Cal’s story in motion, for it is through his grandparents’ mating that a rare recessive gene is passed to Cal's father.
I am getting a bit confused by edits to "intersex" such as this and this. As far as I understand it, "intersex" is a mass noun only; it is not a singular nor an adjective. I asked Moni3 ( talk · contribs) about the rules for using the term ( User talk:Moni3#Intersex grammar), and she asked if there were any authoritative sources that point the use of intersex other than what Oxford has prescribed. What are the grammatical sources for adjective and plurals? Jappalang ( talk) 01:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
I do not think so. First off, "respect" plays no part here. We are talking about the proper use of the English language (grammar), which would be key for FA's "
professional standard" prose.
WP:NPOV prescribes detachment from the subject and objective casting (treatment) in terms of content and language. To further clarify the doubts I am having:
From Oxford Dictionaries,
In English, the typical structure is "adjective noun", e.g. a red car. You cannot use an adjective as a noun; hence, "he is a disabled" is grammatically incorrect. A count noun would require an article ("a", "an"). "Intersex" is not an adjective; it is a mass noun. The examples given above for "gay" are correct, but that is because "gay" is a noun and adjective (the same as male, female, homosexual, but not intersex). "He/she is an intersex individual" is proper per the dictionary, as is "intersex person"; but using it as a pure adjective ("he is intersex") seems decidedly against grammatical convention.
Jappalang (
talk) 00:59, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
I have asked Tony1 ( talk · contribs) to take a look at this. Cunard ( talk) 04:26, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Hey, so as to let you know, I am not giving up on this article. I am trying to gather and read up on the sources, which is taking up time. I am growing a bit concerned that the article might be having too much stuff and is too reliant on non-scholarly text. Just my thoughts at the moment (might change with time and further reading). Jappalang ( talk) 02:10, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi Cunard. I apologize for saying this, but I am no longer able to continue work on Middlesex. I have decided to cease contributing to the WMF projects. In short, I no longer have the enthusiasm I once had; before taking this decision, I find myself constantly questioning why am I spending a substantial time (even while taking short wikibreaks) thinking of ways to improve articles and searching and validating "free" images when that time can be spent with my family or to advance my career. I again apologize; I arrived at this state of mind halfway through the work on Middlesex. I offer a synopsis of what my proposals in mollification.
Indeed, I do think relying on newspaper articles for thematic studies is not a good choice. Questions could be raised on why 30 pages of Shostak (and 22 pages of Cohen) are only used once while journalists are cited more than that. I also have an issue with presenting Thea Hillman's opinions in the article as salient points (i.e. more than a slight weightage). Hillman is a writer, not a critic or scholar. Furthermore, Hillman is also an intersex. I dare say Hillman's opinion towards the portrayal of intersex in the novel is less than objective. The novel's portrayals of intersex has been assessed by scholarly text that unforunately seem not to have been used here. Hillman's opinion could have been used but not to the degree that it is offered as a heavy counter-weight against mainstream views.
{{
cite journal}}
: |chapter=
ignored (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
{{
cite journal}}
: |chapter=
ignored (
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
I had certain candidates for images as well, subjected to space concerns:
That said, my personal belief is that currently the article has too much content in Themes. I had plans to go through and rewrite the section. Critical reception is also getting a bit large and acquires a quote farm-feel when the contents are mainly "he said .... she opined ... he thought". I was thinking of looking for common themes among the opinions and grouping them into a third-person presentation, as well as assessing whether an opinion was insignificant (held by only one or two). Even minor viewpoints (held by a minority compared to a common view) may have to be excluded or reduced, depending on how much have already been written. Jappalang ( talk) 12:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
Why is Robert Zecker's analysis so prominent in the subsection on race relations? His analysis of the story wasn't exactly impartial, and the fact that it's so focused on gives the section a biased feel. The section should be edited to give his analysis less importance, and bring in other analyses of race relations in the novel. That would make the section more balanced and neutral. Right now, it reads not like a look at race relations in the novel, but a look at Zecker's opinion on race relations in the novel. 2601:0:B101:30D0:A4CC:5582:A071:245C ( talk) 03:55, 28 December 2014 (UTC)