SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi / 2008 / Cilt: 48 Sayı: 2

Hélène Cixous’ Power Concept and "Helen with the High Hand"

Hélène Cixous’un Güç Kavramı ve “Becerikli Helen”

Gökşen Aras(Atılım Üniversitesi, Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi, İngiliz Dili ve Edebiyatı Anabilim Dalı.)
Pages
65–77
Publication Date
2008-01-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The aim of this paper is to analyse the relationships between Helen and her step uncle James, and the other male characters Emanuel and Dean with respect to Cixous’ “Power” concept.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Arnold Bennett’s Helen with the High Hand 1910 has been analyzed mainly within the framework of Helen Rathbone’s power relations with three persons step uncle James, Emanuel and Dean , based on domination and submission.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this respect, it is useful to refer to Cixous’ “Power” concept in which Cixous makes a distinction between good power “Power to,” and bad power “Power Over.” to illustrate, “power to characterizes the feminine world that is constructive …” Tong, 1989: 100-1 .
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The aim of this paper is to analyse the relationships between Helen and her step uncle James, and the other male characters Emanuel and Dean with respect to Cixous’ “Power” concept.
🔬Design:Makale
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Becerikli Helen · Arnold Bennett · Cixous

Abstract

Arnold Bennett’s Helen with the High Hand 1910 has been analyzed mainly within the framework of Helen Rathbone’s power relations with three persons step uncle James, Emanuel and Dean , based on domination and submission. In this respect, it is useful to refer to Cixous’ “Power” concept in which Cixous makes a distinction between good power “Power to,” and bad power “Power Over.” to illustrate, “power to characterizes the feminine world that is constructive …” Tong, 1989: 100-1 . By contrast, “the kind of power that is the will for supremacy, the thirst for individual and narcissistic satisfaction... is always a power over others ...” Moi, 1990: 124-5 . In the novel, Helen tries to make her uncle do whatever she wants, thus, all their relationships turn into a battle of wills. The aim of this paper is to analyse the relationships between Helen and her step uncle James, and the other male characters Emanuel and Dean with respect to Cixous’ “Power” concept.

Özet

Arnold Bennett’in Becerikli Helen’i 1910 , romanın başlıca figürü olan Helen Rathbone ile hayatında olan üç kişinin - üvey amcası James, Emanuel ve Dean arasında geçen olaylar ve özellikle baskı ve boyun eğmeye dayalı güç ilişkileri çerçevesinde incelenir. Bu bağlamda, romanın Cixous’un “Güç” kavramı açısından incelenmesi yerinde olacaktır. Cixous, “Güç” kavramını “İyi Güç” ve “Kötü Güç” arasında bir ayrım yaparak açıklamıştır. Örneğin, “iyi güç, yaratıcı ve yapıcı olan kadınsı dünyayı şekillendirmektedir” Tong, 1989: 100-1 . “Bireysel ve narsistik tatmin arayan, başkalarına devamlı hükmetmek isteyen ise negatif ya da kötü güçtür” Moi, 1990: 124-5 . Helen, romanda, özellikle amcasına her istediğini yaptırmaya çalışmakta, bu nedenle tüm ilişkileri irade savaşına dönüşmektedir. Bu makalenin amacı, Helen’in üvey amcası James ve diğer erkek karakterler Emanuel ve Dean ile olan ilişkilerini Cixous’un “Güç” kavramı açısından incelemektir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Aras, G. (2008). Hélène Cixous’ Power Concept and "Helen with the High Hand". Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 48 Sayı: 2, 65–77. https://ajindex.com/articles/1608427

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. ALLEN, Walter. (1948). Arnold Bennett. London: Home &Van Thal Ltd.
  2. BENNETT, Arnold. (1913). The Human Machine. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
  3. BENNETT, Arnold. (2000). Becerikli Helen. (Çev. Sema Ege). Ankara: Filiz Matbaacılık.
  4. BENNETT, Arnold. (1920). Our Women. New York: G. H. Doran.
  5. BENNETT, Arnold. (2005). Journalism for Women. N.p.: n.p.
  6. CIXOUS, Hélène. (1989). “Laugh of the Medusa” The Critical Tradition. (Ed. David H. Richter). New York: St. Martin’s Press. 1090-1102.
  7. GUERIN, Wilfred L. (1992). A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  8. LEITCH, Vincent B. (2001). (Gen. Ed.). The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. Vol. II. New York: W.W.Norton & Company.
  9. LODGE, David. (1995). (Ed). “Hélène Cixous: Sorties.” Modern Criticism and Theory: A Reader. London and New York: Longman. 286-293.
  10. MOI, Toril. (1990). Feminist Theory and Simone de Beauvoir. U.S.A: Basil Blackwell.
  11. SQUILLACE, Robert. (1977). Modernist Modernity and Arnold Bennett. Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press London: Associated University Press.
  12. SQUIRES, Michael., Keith Cushman. (1990). (Ed.). The Challenge of D.H.Lawrence. The University of Wisconsin Press.
  13. SWINNERTON, Frank. (1961). Arnold Bennett. (Ed. Dobree Bonamy). London: Longman.
  14. TONG, Rosemaria. (1989). Feminist Thought: A Comprehensive Introduction. Boulder, Colorado.
  15. YOUNG, Kenneth. (1975). Arnold Bennett