Sor Juana's Poetry

One common theme in Sor Juana's poetry is the helplessness of women against man's senseless insecurities and general contradictory nature. For example, she writes in Poem 164 of a lover who has called into question her fidelity. He has no proof, only "foolish shadows" and "empty evidence," yet he is convinced that she has been unfaithful. Her words are an ineffective defense, so she wishes he "might look straight into [her] heart." It doesn't matter to him that his accusations have destroyed her, undoing her heart and passing it through his hands; his only concern is his honor and the damage she *may* have done to it.

This theme is seen again in the longer, satirical poem titled Poem 92. She charges that nothing a woman can do can shield her from the cruelty of man. She provides numerous examples of how no response can truly please man, as he is an impossible creature. My favorite stanza asks who is really at fault with the extreme example of prostitution:

"But who has carried greater blame
in a passion gone astray:
she who sins for need of payment,
or he who pays for his enjoyment?"

She charges that, though certainly still not innocent, a prostitute will sell her services out of need, while her customer buys them for mere pleasure. Man takes pleasure in the fall of woman and actively forces it, then blames her for falling.

In Poem 174 she continues to attack the fickle nature of man by complaining of how he stops loving a woman after her beauty has faded, then blames her for her beauty having faded. Woman, however, continues to love man as a person, not as a body.

I think Sor Juana is afforded a lot more breathing room in her poetry than in her literature. To begin with, her poetry is not addressed to anyone in particular, so she has greater freedom to write as she will. Her letters, on the other hand, are directly addressed to a (semi)actual person, so she can not be too bold in her accusations. In her poetry, she does not have to work under the constant restrictions or putting on the guise that she is writing to another nun who is backhandedly praising her, so she can say clearly what she intends. However, I find her letter writing to be more captivating, as it is interesting to watch her make such powerful arguments while remaining disguised.

Sor Juana Day I

Sor Juana's introduction to her response letter sets the tone as somewhat sarcastic, as she practically insults "Filotea" by praising her. She walks a fine line between humility and superiority, or rather uses humility to establish superiority. For example, she explains that she initially was hesitant to respond, not for the same reason that Albertus Magnus could not respond to Thomas Aquinas, who could think of no response worthy of his master out of modesty, but "rather because, in truth, I am unable to say anything worthy of you." If she can say nothing worthy out of modesty, which would put Filotea above her, it means she can say nothing because the opposite is true: Filotea's charge is beneath her. However, she later justifies herself by explaining that, as the Lady has already granted her so much favor in both publishing her work and writing this letter to her, she can expect nothing less of Filotea than to excuse any folly she may commit in writing this response. Basically, she has set it up so that the letter intended to shut her up excuses her from any wrong in continuing to speak.

Filotea's main charge against Sor Juana is that she has applied her wit not to studying God, but rather to the study of Earthly things. In response to this, Sor Juana argues that in studying these Earthly things, she does not neglect the study of God, but rather supports it by giving it a greater context. For example, "Without the science of Architecture, how understand the mighty Temple of Solomon - where God Himself was the Draftsman who set forth His arrangement and plan." She then lists many more examples of how we need a deep understanding of Earthly arts and sciences to truly understand, to the best of our limited ability, the magnificence and the glory of God. She says of the Bible, "In sum, we see how this Book contains all books, and this Science includes all sciences..." (55)

On page 59 she declares, "my lack of profit in it is the fault of my ineptitude and the weakness of my mind, not the fault of variety." This is in relation to her studying a wide array of topics instead of merely focusing on the Bible itself. However, I believe she is saying it to maintain modesty rather than to actually claim that she has not profited from her studies. She is effectually playing dumb to demonstrate how intelligent she is, without being so bold as to actually say so.

Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown

When considering the subject matter of Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown, it may seem inappropriate that the director has adopted such a comedic tone. To treat issues such as heartbreak and terrorism so lightly could be interpreted as childish or immature. However, in adopting this tone, the director has given the film a greater degree of believability. Laughter is often the most effective method to cope with a horrible situation. I often find myself laughing at my own misfortune, especially when it is tinted with irony. Through maintaining this comedic tone, the director has made the film more accessible to his audience, who can relate to the dark humor of the horrific reality of everyday life. Life is absurd - all we can do is hope for the best and laugh off the worst.

I thought the final scene was a perfect ending to the story. I turned a few heads in the library laughing at her apparent nonchalance in walking back into her apartment to find drugged police officers, her friend Candela laying with Ivan's son Carlos, a drugged telephone repair man, and Carlos' fiancee just awaking from her drug-induced stupor. Of course, this almost is normal after stopping Ivan's insane ex-lover from shooting him at the airport in the previous scene. This scene embodies many of the themes of the film. Infidelity is almost expected, as Carlos lays with Candela while his drugged fiancee sleeps on the balcony. Pepa seems to have no problem watching the son of the man who cheated on her cheat on his fiancee, and even acts friendly towards the jilted fiancee as she awakes.

I found most of the female characters interesting for their own quirks, but the most interesting was the feminist lawyer. In her office setting, we see her as professional and rational. She refuses to help Candela because her persecution is not related to her sex, but to the fact that she did willingly and knowingly quarter terrorists. She did not stand for arbitrary and spiteful advancement of women, but rather equality. At this point, she appears to be a person worthy of respect. However, she is later made a mockery of at the Airport as she waits in line with Ivan to go to Stockholm. As Pepa and Ivan speak, she demands that the lawyer "go away" and leave the two of them. Ivan remains silent as the lawyer looks to him for a reaction, implying he also wants her to leave them alone. His traveling partner is revealed to be little more than that, as he clearly prefers to speak with the ex-lover he still pines for, asking her to get a drink with him. She is reduced from being a strong, feminist woman to a object of the adulterous and chauvinistic Ivan as she reluctantly, but without protest, leaves him to his ex-lover. Then she gladly accepts his return after he is denied by Pepa.

The Disenchantments of Love

In the 5th story, the character of dona Ines is virtually powerless. She is completely at the will of those around here. Any action she attempts to take is ignored, thwarted, or otherwise fruitless. She is first victimized by don Diego who serenades and attempts to court her despite her status as a married woman. She is further victimized by the scheming neighbor and her recruited harlot. She does have status, however, as the Mayor comes to her aid in witnessing her confrontation with don Diego after the incident in the church, and then exiling the vile neighbor for her wrong doings. She then falls prey to the Moor's magic, but is exculpated as the Mayor and officers of the peace discover the magic and its effect on her. Still, she is victim of the wrath of her brother, sister in law, and husband, who refuse to accept her innocence over the insult to their collective honor.

I interpret this as a protest that a woman has no standing or chance at respect, no matter how good or pure she is, if she is surrounded by those who are of lesser character or seek to blemish her for their own gain or merely her loss. This good woman has done absolutely nothing wrong, yet is condemned to six years in hellish confinement by those who are supposed to be her protectors and providers. Essentially, woman is powerless. But I fail to see how this is a good case for women. At the end, it is proclaimed that "the most abominable vice there can be... is the failure to value, honor, and praise women, the good ones because they are good and the bad ones for the sake of the good ones." In the stories we have been provided, most women are indeed morally devoid and corrupt. Yet we are supposed to praise them all because of the few good ones we have been provided? In the 5th story alone, we have the neighbor, the harlot, and the sister in law all plotting in one way or another the demise of dona Ines, for their own gain, or in the case of the latter, simply because it is her nature. If not for their evil doing, dona Ines would not be a victim but would have lived happily as a noble and faithful wife of her husband. Don Diego is by no means innocent, but the treacherous neighbor served as enabler of his fantasy, and as a conspirator is just as guilty as he in defaming her. If one judges by intent and not consequence, her actions are indeed far worse. He only wanted to love her, she wished to ruin her and deceive him in the process, all for financial gain and a simple exercise in wickedness.

If De Zayas wishes that we do not judge all women as evil on account of the actions of evil women, she has not given us much of a chance to do so with the characters she has provided. The 4th story is equally as hopeless, as don Jaime is victimized both by the random will of his Lady Suitor and the deceit of his slave. He is an inexcusably horrible person, as he didn't even give his wife and cousin a chance to defend themselves before putting blind faith into the words of a slave, but it is a woman's lie that put him in this rage in the first place. The "bad" women in this book have acted just as terribly as the men it seeks to put on trial, yet we are supposed to praise them simply for being women while chastising all men?