Brangwin 1

Heather Brangwin
LIT6936
Dr. Lynn Casmier-Paz
19 April 2013
Transgressive Discourse: Transforming the Traumatized Womans Identity through Life Writing
Autobiographical theory states that identity is not inherited, or naturalthough much in
social organization leads us to regard identity as given and fixed (Smith and Watson 39). For
women specifically, the formation and concept of identity often fall in the category of being
fixed or dictated by others. Historically, women have lived continually within a patriarchal
paradigm, forming their identities according to the expectations of a male-dominated society.
Even today, the obstacles for women as participants in the genre of autobiography are many, as
theorist Linda Anderson notes in the following:
Womans differencerequires a different emphasis; it flies in the face of conventional
modes of representation, producing a multiplicity which cannot be captured within one
and the same, the singular I of masculine discourse. (96)
This concept of multiplicitythe idea that an individual adopts and develops various identities
is particularly evident in women whose lives are characterized by pivotal incidents or a continual
environment of oppression or trauma. Such autobiographical subjects, through the influence of
their traumatic experiences, are interpellated as one identity or another; identities which are often
contrary to what the subject herself desires, or an identity which the subject desires to reject. In
this study, I contend that the act of life writing is an act of identity transformation in which the
traumatized woman rejects her interpellationher externally imposed identity or identities
through a discourse of rebellion against the paradigms in which these interpellations occur. In
Brangwin 2

order to discuss the process by which this identity transformation occurs, I will employ three
autobiographical works by women authors whose identities were influenced by singular or
perpetual environments of trauma, namely: Harriet Jacobs Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl;
Alice Sebolds Lucky; and Dorothy Allisons Two or Three Things I Know For Sure.
The texts of Jacobs, Sebold, and Allison are the self-narrations of three women who exist
within very different historical and social contexts, yet exhibit incontestable likenesses related to
my assertion about life writing as an act of identity transformation. It is important, therefore, to
provide a foundation in which their dissimilarities are noted before a thorough analysis of their
similarities can be discussed. Jacobs autobiography is commonly and correctly referred to as a
slave narrative, given that she was born into slavery and lived as such until she escaped at the
age of twenty-two. Jacobs composed her biography in a partially pseudonymous manner: she
nominally identifies her subject self as Linda Brent rather than using her real name. The
presence of trauma is obviously implicit within the context of slavery, and indeed, Jacobs
autobiography focuses entirely on the degradation and brutality of the slaves life. Her narrative
is filled with accounts of both her own degradation and bearing witness to the brutalization of
others, as in the following: Never before, in my life, had I heard hundreds of blows fall, in
succession, on a human being. His piteous groans, and his O, pray dont, massa, rang in my ear
for months afterwards (Jacobs 143).
During her time in slavery and in hiding, Brent (Jacobs) was subject to traumatic
experiences of various kinds. She is physically struck by her master, Dr. Flint, and her body is
permanently marred and affected by the hardship of her escape and a subsequent seven-year
confinement during which her limbs were benumbed by inaction, and the cold filled them with
crampeffects which would last until her death (269). Despite Jacobs obvious intent to expose
Brangwin 3

the evils of slavery to those who would sympathize and had the power to take action, her
narrative is also unequivocally the story of her own personal traumaunique in that its nature is
interpreted and experienced by a woman (Snchez-Eppler 83). Jacobs vividly describes the
constant threat of sexual abuse from her master, Dr. Flint, writing: my master met met at every
turn, reminding me that I belonged to him, swearingthat he would compel me to submit to
him (161). In providing a narrative of the vulnerability of female slavesthe stories of children
taken from their mothers, husbands sold apart from their wives, rape, and the bearing of their
masters illegitimate children, born slaves themselvesJacobs also narrates the identity of the
female slave: one of helplessness and degradation.
Over a hundred years later, Dorothy Allison and Alice Sebold published their own
narratives which describe the helplessness and degradation of women. In Two or Three Things I
Know For Sure, Allison tells stories of a violent childhood during which she was abused and
raped by her stepfather. She shares the experience of continual threat of harm, degradation, and
fear with Harriett Jacobs, though in a very different context. Allison speaks of being habitually
beaten throughout her childhood and adolescence (38). Her narrative, however, speaks of more
than just her own personal trauma. Two or Three Things I Know For Sure is also the story of
being a woman, and specifically, being a woman in Allisons family. It is a story replete with
women whose identities are those of the beaten-down, beaten by men, and abandoned, or as
Allison says, My family has a history of death and murder, grief and denial, rage and ugliness
the women of my family most of all (24).
In contrast to these two womens lives, Alice Sebold was the product of a relatively
unremarkable middle-upper-class, highly-educated white family; a young woman who existed in
a space of safe anonymity, unmarred by any terrible history or inherited degradation as Jacobs
Brangwin 4

and Allison were. One can surmise later in the text through recollections of her pre-trauma life
these attributes and placements within society are exactly how Sebold, a young college student,
identifies herself; yet the space in which the text begins is the beginning of the unfolding of that
normal identity. Lucky is the story of Sebolds brutal experience of rape and sodomy in a
tunnel near her university, during which she is also savagely beaten by her assailant. This
isolated event, however, has just as much influence on who Sebold becomes as the environment
of continual trauma has on Jacobs and Allisons subjects.
Within each of these texts, we see a distinct presence of depersonalization; an imposing
act by the Other which communicates a belief that the subject is not identified as human in the
way the Other is a human, but an object for that Other to use or control. This is evident in Dr.
Flints repeated notion of ownership over Jacobs Linda Brentone that seems to communicate
something even beyond the owner-property relationship of slavery (Jacobs 161). With respect to
Allison and Sebolds narratives, what we now know of rape is that it is a pronouncement of
power rather than a desire for sexual pleasure: [rape is] sex as a conquest or as a surrender
about one person overpowering another (Chapleau and Oswald 66). In addition to this
depersonalization by the Other, we see a subsequent reaction on the part of these womenthe
victimsto depersonalize themselves.
Psychological scholars Guralnik and Simeon discuss this phenomenon of
depersonalization in reaction to traumatic experience. They define this concept in the following:
Depersonalization is the experience of profound estrangement and alienation from Self and
Reality[a] psychological response toproblematic experiences around subjection [which]
concludes with the function of shame and humiliation (Guralnik and Simeon 400). This
experience of shame and humiliationthe adoption of the shamed and humiliated identityis
Brangwin 5

one that we see clearly in Jacobs, Allisons, and Sebolds texts. After Dr. Flint begins sexually
harassing her, Jacobs, fearing that her fate will be the same as other slave girls, relays that the
light heart which nature had given [her] became heavy. She also relays a distinct sense of
shame and fear of judgment by her grandmother if she discloses her abuse, saying: I was very
young, and felt shamefaced about telling her such impure things, especially as I know her to be
very strict on such subjects (161). Dorothy Allison narrates her own years of shame, saying,
Let me tell you a story that is in no part fiction, the story of the female body taught to hate
itself (30).
Guralnik and Simeon state that depersonalization can hit like a clap of thunder; in a split
second all tilts toward the surreal and the trusted sense of reality evaporates (401). This level of
depersonalization is narrated most vividly in Sebolds account of the hours following her rape,
during which she is examined and questioned by police. In the text, we witness Sebolds
depersonalization in two passages. The first appears after Sebolds medical examination, when
she sees her reflection in the mirror for the first time: I saw my face in the mirror. I reached my
hand up to touch the marks and cuts. That was me. It was also an undeniable truth: No shower
would wipe the traces of the rape away (296). The second appears when Sebold sees
photographs of herself taken by police and describes them as follows: I stand shockedshock,
in this context, is meant to mean I was no longer there (352). In these passages, we see that
Sebold has disconnectedor been disconnectedfrom her former reality: the reality of the non-
victim; the college student; the daughter of upper-middle-class parents.
Julia Smith and Sidonie Watson state that autobiographical narrators come to
consciousness of who they are, of what identifications and differences they are assigned, or what
identities they might adopt through the discourses that surround them (39). Applying this
Brangwin 6

theory to the preceding paragraphs, we note that the subjects in these autobiographical narratives
have adopted multiple identities that exist within various surrounding discourses over periods of
their lives. Each of these authors subjectsparticularly Jacobs and Seboldexisted in a space
of relative navet and innocence prior to the onset of trauma within their lives: Jacobs professes
in the first chapter of her text that she never even knew she was a slave, or of any of the horrors
of what that entailed, until six happy years of happy childhood had passed away (134).
Sebolds return to her childhood home reflects a similar innocence: recollections of quirky
family memories, trips to Friendlys ice cream parlor, her obsession with Broadway and acting,
and her childhood friendships characterize her pre-rape life (675-682). In these passages, we see
that these women, at one time, identified themselves according to these experiences; or rather,
perhaps they had no reason to succinctly identify themselves in their childhood outside of the
identities of their parents and families. It is not until the disruption of the trauma that the
urgency of simultaneously establishing and rejecting identities becomes prominent within these
texts.
Continuing with Smith and Watsons theory about the effect of discourse on the
formation of identity, we see that one of the identities imposed by post-traumatic discourse is
denial. In other words, although the victim of the trauma is fully aware of their degradation or
helplessness, there is an imposition by the Other to interpellate these individuals as stable, which
in reality does nothing to empower the helpless. Rather than openly discuss or acknowledge the
confusion, loss, despair, shame, and humiliation of the victim subject and assist the subject to
resolution or healing, the Other seeks to pretend as if nothing happened and that the subject is
unaffected. Jacobs Linda Brent, despairing of her humiliation and powerlessness, and wishing
also to escape her identity as a slave, speaks to her grandmother of her longing for freedom.
Brangwin 7

Rather than support or aid her granddaughter in this pursuit, Brents grandmother instead
imposes shame upon her for considering it, saying, Stand by your own children, and suffer with
them till death. Nobody respects a mother who forsakes her children; and if you leave them, you
will never have a happy moment (Jacobs 234). In this statement, we observe that the
grandmother believes that Brents happiness and self-respect lie in retaining her slave identity;
rejecting this identity would result in the loss of both, as well as the loss of her children.
Such discourses of shame and denial are present in Allison and Sebolds texts as well.
Allison discusses the reaction of her family after she discloses that her stepfather raped her,
saying, when I told, only my mama believed methirty years later, one of my aunts could
still saysomething else must have happened. Maybe it had been different (27). Alice Sebold
experiences a similar discourse of denial when she discusses the experience of her rape with her
uncomprehending father. During this discussion, Sebolds father says that he cannot
comprehend what [Sebold] had been through, or how it could have happened without some
complicity on [Sebolds] part (919). We observe within these examples that all three women
are being hailed as somehow deserving of or complicit in their circumstances, and moreover, that
the Other or Others seek to maintain these womens position in this identity: the wearing of the
mask of resignation to circumstances, or a false stability.
The result of such interpellation, as we see in these texts, is that these women often adopt
the identities imposed upon them. To a certain extent, the primary identity adopted by Jacobs
(Brent), Allison, and Sebold is unavoidable: Jacobs cannot, in her present circumstances, escape
the slave identity which the dominant culture has imposed upon her, just as Allison and Sebold
cannot escape the identity of rape victim. However, while Jacobs identity is imposed by
sociopolitical entities, her continued acceptance of this identity, despite the hardships implicit in
Brangwin 8

escaping it, is her own prerogative. Though she speaks continually of freedom and escape, the
aforementioned words of her grandmother and the powerlessness and guilt they cloak her in
chasten her and cause her to remain in her identity of slavery (Jacobs 234).
Although Allison and Sebold cannot escape the identity of rape victimcannot, that is,
completely erase their experiencesthey can begin work to move past this identity to a new,
healed identity. However, as mentioned, it is the impositions and expectations of the Other
which prevent these women from doing so. In the chapters describing her return to her
childhood home after the rape, we see how Sebold devotes herself to fulfilling the expectations
of the Other: those that want or need her to be okay in spite of her experience. Sebold
describes how she tries to act as she would have before the rape for her familys sake, saying,
I wished to slam-dunk the fact that no one needed to worry about this tough customer and I
was busy performingI believed I was doing all this for my family (786-852). Like Jacobs
(Brent), Sebold is trapped in an identity of helplessness. Moving beyond this identity, from their
perspective and the perspective of others, seems to be a betrayal of those they care about, and
also carries with it the risk of losing their support system altogether. Even above all of this is the
prevailing judgment of society at large which, even across the century between Jacobs narrative
and that of the other two women, seeks to silence women from speaking of their victimization (I.
Anderson et al. 446)
Through these examples, I have established that several identities are imposed upon and
subsequently adopted by these women. The question of import, then, is as follows: can a woman
who has been interpellated by a dominant culture, societal norm, or an act of dominance escape
these imposed identities of the Slave, the Property, the Lesser, the Raped, the Beaten, and the
Denied? These texts substantiate that disclosure or reliance on others often does not result in
Brangwin 9

escaping these identities. Therefore, doing so becomes reliant upon the transgressive acts of the
women themselves.
Jacobs narrative of her experience as a slave and a woman is unquestionably
transgressive, both within the experiences of Linda Brent and within Jacobs act of producing
the narrative itself. Desperate to escape slavery and the sexual advances of her master, Dr. Flint,
Linda Brent commits her first act of transgression by agreeing to an intimate affair with her
white neighbor, Mr. Sands. It seems less degrading to give ones self, Linda says, than to
submit to compulsion. There is something akin to freedom in having a lover who has no control
over you (Jacobs 190). By asserting her mastery of her own body by voluntarily engaging in
a sexual relationship, Jacobs not only begins to claim the agency of someone above a slave; she
begins also to claim the identity of a free woman. Even in the space outside of the narrated I,
Linda Brent, it is noted that the narrative itself is transgressive. As Dr. Clarence Tweedy notes in
his 2011 study of Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, Jacobsfought against white definitions
of black passivity, subordination, and racial inferiority. Instead of the black body being simply
ritualistically displayed as a victim, [she] used traumatic experiences to construct
autobiographical sites of resistance (21).
Though, as previously noted, Jacobs and her autobiographical subject exist in an entirely
different time and social strata than Allison and Sebold, these womens textsthe experiences
themselves and the narration of themalso transgressed against the interpellations of the Other.
While Jacobs interpellation was multidimensional, encompassing her gender, race, and
sociopolitical distinctions of the time, Allison and Sebolds focused mainly on their right to be
unharmed women; women who had been raped and did not want to deny it or allow it to be
denied. As Tweedy states, Jacobs rejects the discourse of the dominant white culture and its
Brangwin 10

dictation of her identity of Slave, Black, Lesser, and Helpless Woman; Allison and Sebold reject
the discourse of the denying culture and its dictation of their identity as the Silenced, the
Shamed, the Damaged, and the Complicit. Allison notes the importance of rejecting such
discourse and identifications, saying, I need to be a woman who can talk about rape plainly,
without being hesitant or self-conscious, or vulnerable to what people might be saying this year
(27). Sebolds subject echoes this same need for frankness, saying, Its not the thing that
happened to me, or the assault, or the beating, or that. I think its important to call it what
it is [rape] (1058).
Within each of these texts, the narrating I tells the story of the narrated I and her
transgressions against interpellations which occur as the result of living in environments of
trauma or experiencing trauma. Smith and Watson state that [autobiographical narratives] are
sites of agentic narration where people control the interpretation of their lives and stories (54).
Though Jacobs (Brent), Allison, and Sebolds autobiographical subjects all acted to transgress
against the interpellation of others, the final and most declarative transgression and rejection of
those interpellations comes in the form of producing and publishing an act of life writing.
Psychological scholar and trauma researcher Riki Thompson states that narrative of trauma is
an avenue to expressand affirm for themselvesthat they were abused in the past, but the
past does not continue to haunt their lives forever (657). The publication of life writing is not
just, as Smith and Watson state, an act of agency by merit of the publication itself. The
disclosure of the inner workings of the mind and the experiences and acts of transgression post
trauma in such a public way is an outright and powerful rejection of the identities imposed upon
these women, both by those closest to them and society at large. By producing and publishing
Brangwin 11

these narratives, these women adopt a distinct identity of survival, empowerment, and freedom
from their trauma and the imposition of others.