Consider some of the themes broached by the works we’ve encountered in the first couple days of class, namely the binaries embedded in speech as a cultural act: animal/human; slavery/freedom; nature (country)/civilization (city).
How does Turgenev reckon with these binaries? In general, what is the status of speech in “Mumu”? How does the story depart from and coincide with Aristotelean attitudes and Enlightenment philosophies of language/speech, as conceived in _The Politics_ and embodied in Truffaut’s “wild boy” of Aveyron?
What is the significance of Gerasim’s muteness? How does it impact on his interactions with other characters, including the human and animal objects of his affection, Tatiana and Mumu?
How does the protagonist’s silence shape the story itself, both in terms of plot and narration? What position does it structure for the reader? How might we read his silence allegorically, given the context of serfdom in Russia?
What do you make of the surprise ending? (How) does it resolve the ethical issues posed throughout the story? What are those issues?
Mumu is a metaphor for the human spirit?
ReplyDeleteGerasim's lack of speech represents his lack of power, particularly when he was unable to stop the marriage?
Yes or no.
For the sake of practical matters, I wonder why Gerasim didn't just take Mumu with him to his village, rather than drown him.
I like the way that the mistress makes Gerasim kill Mumu himself. Quite true.
Great questions, interestingly posed.
ReplyDeleteWhat makes people think that Gerasim doesn't follow what's going on in the world around him even though he shows more intelligence than most?
ReplyDeleteThe same question applies to other deaf people, as well.