Jean-Paul Sartre, in Being and Nothingness, conceives his body as part of his identity, “I am my body … My body is a point of departure which I am and which at the same time I surpass” (qtd. in Butler 38). Judith Butler admits that the body is not fixed or stable. It moves and is in a process of “becoming”. It undergoes a certain change and “is always involved in the human quest to realize possibilities” (38). The glorification of the female body parts brings forth the image of women whose bodies are emblematic of a sense of grandeur. The assumption, that foregrounds the inefficiency of the female body, has to be eradicated. In this context, Kristeva denounces the perception or the “fate of reductive stereotyping analogous
…show more content…
Not only does she become an ‘other’, but also she feels a sense of loss in the presence of the “lover-father” which accentuates such crisis. The child does feel the love of the father and hence identifies with him:
[It] begins by the passion of the pregnant woman for herself: her destabilized “self,” a loss of identity, because divided by the intervention of the lover-father, and, through this intervention of the other, inhabited by an unknown third party—an embryo, a fetus, then a baby, a child, though for the moment an indiscernible double. (Oliver …show more content…
The body is repressed but double. The doubling equates with the two lips of the female body. Both reinforce the female celebrated sexual identity. Kristeva pays heed to the “maternal body”; returning to it foregrounds the female search for an identity. When pregnant, a woman resurrects herself through her womb. Her body is not an emblem of degradation; it becomes a source of rebirth. It now “doubles up, suffers, bleeds, catches cold, puts its teeth in, slobbers, coughs, is covered with pimples, and it laughs” (qtd. in Lemma 97). Similarly, she pins down the deliberate glorification of the female body when it is tightly linked to the pregnant mother. Giving birth to the child is equated with creating a piece of work. The voice of a woman or a woman writer can be heard only when it is attached to the mother. In fact, “like the mother her voice, her speech and writing is nurturous” (Chakraborty 2901). Following the same stream of thought, the assistant professor at Bharathidasan University, T. Priya argues
Not only does she become an ‘other’, but also she feels a sense of loss in the presence of the “lover-father” which accentuates such crisis. The child does feel the love of the father and hence identifies with him:
[It] begins by the passion of the pregnant woman for herself: her destabilized “self,” a loss of identity, because divided by the intervention of the lover-father, and, through this intervention of the other, inhabited by an unknown third party—an embryo, a fetus, then a baby, a child, though for the moment an indiscernible double. (Oliver …show more content…
The body is repressed but double. The doubling equates with the two lips of the female body. Both reinforce the female celebrated sexual identity. Kristeva pays heed to the “maternal body”; returning to it foregrounds the female search for an identity. When pregnant, a woman resurrects herself through her womb. Her body is not an emblem of degradation; it becomes a source of rebirth. It now “doubles up, suffers, bleeds, catches cold, puts its teeth in, slobbers, coughs, is covered with pimples, and it laughs” (qtd. in Lemma 97). Similarly, she pins down the deliberate glorification of the female body when it is tightly linked to the pregnant mother. Giving birth to the child is equated with creating a piece of work. The voice of a woman or a woman writer can be heard only when it is attached to the mother. In fact, “like the mother her voice, her speech and writing is nurturous” (Chakraborty 2901). Following the same stream of thought, the assistant professor at Bharathidasan University, T. Priya argues