Ana Sucaldito
Mrs. WilsonAP Multicultural Literature B
15 January 2013
True or False
Mankind
strives to be honest, but in the end, everyone wears a mask. In Gaston Leroux’s
The Phantom of the Opera, and Muriel
Rukeyser “The Poem as Mask,” the readiness to tear down the wall between
perception and reality determines the fate of those who remove their mask. The entire poem builds around the symbolism of mask and myths. Even the structure “The Poem as Mask” reflects this sentiment. The poem actually serves a response to a previous work of Rukeyser’s Orpheus: The Poem. Rukeyser wrote this novel, which reinterpreted Orpheus’ tale, in court masque, a form of dramatic monologue. In “The Poem of Mask,” however, she strips away this form and reveals the truth behind the novel using free verse.
Rukeyser reveals that “when she wrote of the women . . . it was a mask” (Rukeyser 1-2). The women in this piece live in the wilderness, uninhibited. Many of Rukeyser’s works deal heavily with feminism so the women’s lifestyle, “on their mountain, gold-hunting, singing” (Rukeyser 3) could be her ideal. Her placement of the women on a mountain could symbolize that Rukeyser sees their lifestyle as momentarily unavailable; a mountain she must climb.
For Rukeyser, casting off the mask allows the dream to become reality. The author strips away another mask as she reveals that “the god, fragmented . . . it was myself” (Rukeyser 4-7). Orpheus’ story served as a mask for her own—the women as her hopes and Orpheus as her reality. Yet, at the poem’s climax, she shouts “No more Masks! No more mythologies!” (Rukeyser 14). This one line stanza signals triumph and a conviction to live in reality. This conviction changes everything. Before, the women singing on a mountain was unattainable. But once Rukeyser resolves to no longer hide, “the fragments join in [her] with their own music” (Rukeyser 16). By accepting them as part of her reality, she heals herself, giving even the fragments their own voice, making the “women . . . singing” (Rukeyser 1-4) a reality.
For Erik from The Phantom of the Opera, wearing a mask is the most natural thing in the world. In fact, he has multiple. Erik disguises his mortality by acting as the Opera Ghost. The Opera Ghost gives him power, power he uses to wield fear and extortion, which gives him nearly full reign of the Opera. His disguise as “[Christine’s] Angel of Music” (Leroux 93) gives him a different power. The power to get close to Christine Daaé. Finally, his physical mask allows him to be ordinary, to reach for a life of “ordinary doors and windows and a wife” (Leroux 228).
The removal of her masks healed Rukeyser, but destroyed Erik: the difference lies in who removes the mask. Rukeyser lets her go—but Erik has his “snatch[ed] off” (Leroux 93). Christine’s horrified reaction breaks the Phantom. She doesn’t accept his reality, so neither can he. Erik loses his humanity as he fights to keep Christine in any way he can; he only regains it when Christine agrees to marry him, giving him “all the happiness the world can offer” (Leroux 253). Only then does he begin to heal again and accept himself.
Masks conceal, but they also protect. They protect the wearer from harsh reality until they are ready to accept it. In Muriel Rukeyser’s “The Poem as Mask,” the speaker removes the mask, accepting her reality, healing herself. But, like in Gaston Leroux’s The Phantom of the Opera, when the mask is removed before the wearer is ready, the wearer can be destroyed by the reality they shunned.
I like the way you connected the story and the poem together. Seeing both the comparison and the contrast was beneficial. The idea of how a mask can both protect and prohibit is a very intriguing concept. A mask is a barrier, but a barrier works both ways. It prevents hurt and discovery of inner secrets but it also prevents possible positivity and self discovery or discovery of others. The multiple dimension to a mask allows it to be quite controversial and gives way to a great symbol. You did a great job of revealing this throughout your project.
ReplyDeleteThe contrast between how the mask saves one character and yet destroys another, stood out to me. Both characters (The Phantom and the speaker in the poem) have their “masks” removed, however, as you mentioned, the way in which they were removed (willingly vs. unwillingly), was what truly caused one character to suffer from the exposure and the other to benefit from it. I liked the statement you made about Christine’s reaction to seeing the Phantom without the mask. Something I noticed was that the Phantom used his mask to conceal the reality that he knew was there and that he was resentful of; so as a defense, he hid from it. Masks in a sense, allow people to keep believing in the myth, avoiding reality and it also provides (as the Phantom shows) a sense of protection from what they fear the most.
ReplyDeleteYour analysis is great, and by the way, I based my PowerPoint format after yours, because I fell in love with it! Anyways, I really like your analysis of the poem and the connections, from blatant to extremely hidden, you have made to your novel. Along with your analysis of the poem, I have some additional things to add, simply with devices and meanings that caught my eye, after I read the poem. So first, I liked the flow of the poem, because I think the different stanzas held different meanings of the poem. The first stanza served as a mask, since it only gives us a taste of what of the poem’s central topic, almost teasing readers with an understanding that there is a bigger action that is soon to follow. In the second stanza, the mask is lifted, and the actual event takes place as the narrator describes “the rescued child” (Rukeyser 10).
ReplyDeleteWith these two different stanzas holding symbolic value, the reader is truly able to comprehend the results of holding the mask, and not being able to see the events that are in store. As you stated, the woman herself sheds masks, I agree, and think that the story reveals itself by lifting a mask as well.
I like the way you connected the story and the poem together. Seeing both the comparison and the contrast in the preparedness of the person under the mask was beneficial. The idea of how a mask can both protect and prohibit is a very intriguing concept. A mask is a barrier, but a barrier works both ways. It prevents hurt and discovery of inner secrets like the way Erik tries to escape his reality and the inevitable “horrified reaction” of Christine. The longer he hides behind this false front, the less likely he is to be hurt. But it also prevents possible positivity and self-discovery or discovery of others. Erik is unable to “accept his reality” and become truly connected with Christine because of the mask. But once they both come to grips with it they are able to see each other as they truly are.
ReplyDeleteThe multiple dimension to a mask allows it to be quite controversial and gives way to a great symbol. As you said, masks can hold multiple purposes, either “protect the wearer from harsh reality” or prevent a recognition of the self and those around them. This grayscale of the truth leads to, not only an exciting revealing when the mask is torn off, but an inner turmoil that enhances a very deep text. You did a great job of revealing this throughout your project.
In you essay, you discussed how “everyone wears a mask.” Furthermore, in your conclusion, you state that masks are to protect and conceal the wearer from a “harsh reality.” Yet, after listening to your presentation, it made me wonder, “Is the mask really hiding someone from the outside or their inside?” I honestly think that people hide from both, but basically, I came to wonder whether it was really society that people are hiding from or themselves and if it is themselves, what part of them makes them hide? I’d really like to hear your comment on this, so please respond!
ReplyDeleteAnyways, I think that people could be hiding from their inner evil. I think that all people have elements of good AND evil within them, but sometimes, I believe, that if the evil is “unstoppable” within a person, they cover up with a mask, essentially covering up their whole being. Also, if a person attaches a mask to themselves for too long, I think that soon, they will become what they have falsely created. What do you think?That being said, I’ll leave you answer with your own opinion. Do you think that innate evil has the ability to be overcome or even handled in the open without a mask? Sorry, there are a lot of questions sprinkled throughout but I found your essay very interesting and had multiple points I wanted to cover