When I shut Looking for Alaska, I sat staring blankly, frozen in an abyss of emotions and emotionless-ness. I thought about suicide—about the stranger in eighth grade who hung himself, about my mother’s own numerous attempts, about that friend in fifth grade who popped pills [unsuccessfully] before me… out of my reach. Alaska wasn’t like them. I’m convinced Alaska couldn’t be them. I now find myself satisfied that what happened—the event that this entire novel is built around—was one of those freak accidents. Alaska was strength. She was beauty. She was an androgynous masterpiece. But the strong die, too. The beautiful can choose. And the androgynous might be his or her own device. Her story was not in her death, though, nor in her life, but in her labyrinth. She was a being that moved those around her, who was the brilliance behind the plans, who others loved and admired, but who also realistically and psychologically-consistently suffered.
It is not often in literature that readers see a main male character paired with an even stronger secondary character being a female. John Green should be applauded in the way he crafts the character of Alaska, challenging gender roles. Though we have seen the emergence of strong female heroines in novels, the presence and role of female characters in male-centered pieces is dragging behind. Yet again Alaska has sought to subvert the patriarchal paradigm. Alaska is the kind of woman young women can aspire to be—to smell like sweat, wet grass, and vanilla lotion; to feel thoroughly comfortable within her body, sex, and sexuality; to know one’s individual identity. Her development is then made believable through her labyrinth—through her suffering.
I hope to think of Alaska every time I read about female characters in other stories and wonder what she would say about them: “Are you letting men objectify you as you sit there on hands and knees with that look of disinterest?” Is this character more than emotional support? Is she more than a sexual object? What work is the author allowing her to do of her own breath, strength, and beauty? Is she the kind of woman younger women would seek to be? And if she’s not, then is our literature transferring the messages that women (and alternative masculinities) need in the 21st century? If she’s not, then is our literature sending us backwards, setting us frozen—locking us away within the labyrinth?
Danielle Maxwell
Another particularly interesting thing about how Alaska is portrayed is that other characters are sacrificed for her.
ReplyDeleteIt was clear that something had to be resolved between Pudgy and Alaska because a lot of sexual tension (thanksgiving) was between them. However, I believe that the idea that Alaska represents in the book would been changed and therefor the meaning of the book would have changed if they had a "3rd Base" scene.
What Green did was find another outlet for that, Lara Buterskaya. That awkward scene between Pudgy and Lara was a vent for that tension so Alaska's character could be more mysterious in retrospect.
What Green said in his vlog (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHMPtYvZ8tM - go 2:00 in)
Which is basically that the awkward scene in question was only in the novel to draw attention to the next scene where there was an intense emotional connection through the booze and cigarettes. Which is definitely "Subverting the Patriarchal Paradigm".
- Jason McCoy
I like your comments on Alaska and definitely think she's a character who will stick out in my mind as I read other books as someone to compare.
ReplyDeleteKaylin
I agree with all that has been said regarding the strength of Alaska's character. One thing concerning Alaska's feminism, that popped into my mind during today's discussion was the question of a defense mechanism. I was wondering if any of you thought that her need to express all the feminist point of views was to make herself seem stronger and less apt to take any "abuse" from the boys.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking that by expressing herself in a strong, almost ominous fashion made her more worthy of respect in both the boys and her eyes.
It was interesting to me, that though Alaska was a strong and sexy female character with real life complexities the boys characters were totally unable to deal with anything but the surface level of Alaska. The boys over-generalize any behavior that is not in keeping with their vision of her as a flirty, sexy, mysterious woman as simply her being moody. I think that in part this serves to make the story more realistic, I think any girl can relate to boys not totally understanding what is going on and reducing them to a female stereotype.
ReplyDeleteTo me though there is more going on with this generalization. Repeated throughout the book is the notion that there is always more to people then meets the eye. Green is careful to prove that this does not only apply to a quiet introspective male like Pudge but also to a outspoken flirty female. It takes Pudge time to realize that Alaska is more than a sex object, and that realization is integral to his growth process.
Personally, I strongly disagree with the argument that Green's portrayal of Alaska subverted the patriarchal paradigm in anything more than an incredibly superficial way. I see Alaska as essentially being a one-dimensional character, and regardless of whatever external wit and independence she exhibited externally, in his exploration of there being more to Alaska than what meets the eye, Green creates a character who is still inherently emotionally vulnerable. This vulnerability can be seen through the fact that Alaska is repeatedly cast as a character who is not only highly sexually active, but also regularly cheats on her partners, which, in my opinion, constitutes an empty attempt on her part to gain a sense of superiority over these individuals.
ReplyDeleteAlaska's character is over-sexualised, which may have been a misguided attempt by Green to create her as a character independent from the societal expectations regarding female modesty and morality, and despite Pudge's eventually realising that Alaska isn't merely a sex object, the fact remains that Alaska ultimately proves to be a vulnerable character whom Pudge sees as needing to be saved.
In my personal opinion, for all her feminist ideals and facade of independence, Alaska is still a character who acts as the effective embodiment of the protagonist's ideal woman: an extremely attractive, outspoken and outgoing sexually promiscuous individual who, deep down, has ingrained emotional issues. While the existence of these issues in itself does not limit Alaska's integrity as a truly strong character, it is the perception by the male protagonist that, if given the chance, he would be able to effectively protect Alaska and deal with these issues which relegates her to the position of a character whom exists in order to potentially fulfil the desire of the protagonist to feel needed and valued as a result of his ability to take care of the issues which Alaska alone was unable to solve. It is because of this that, if anything, Alaska is a character who actually conforms quite accurately to the patriarchal paradigm.