Self-pity as a Dominant Emotion in Sor Juana's Reply to Sor Filotea de la Cruz - Article Example

Self-pity as a dominant emotion in Sor Juanas Reply to Sor Filotea de la Cruz Sor Juana Ines De La Cruz lived betweenthe years 1648 and 1695. She was known for her prowess in poetry becoming a great colonial Latin American Poet. She has been recognized for her works as an epitome of baroque Spanish literature and the first feminist writer in the new in the contemporary world. Most of Sor Juana’s works were written in a feminist perspective covering secular and religious topics. . Some of her works include This Sex Which Is Not One, Empeños De Una Casa (The Trials of a Household), Primero Sueño (first dream), Carta Atenagórica and Respuesta a Sor Filotea (response to Sor Filotea). In her response to Sor Filotea De La Cruz, Sor Juana brings out the dominant emotion, pity that reveals her feeling about the states of affairs in the society at that point in time. Sor Juana Ines de la Cruz wrote Respuesta a Sor Filotea (response to Sor Filotea) in Spain. This was a reply to Sor Filotea De La Cruz (Cruz and Rappaport 314). Throughout the reply, we find heavy groveling to the feet of the bishop with apologies that include explanations of the pains that De La Cruz goes through at that time. Sor Juana wrote the reply at a time when her society favored men to women. Women were seen as incompetent and an inferior group in the society. They were given subordinate roles and were supposed to be submissive to men. Sor Juana was motivated by the betrayal of women in the society. She wrote with the intention of inspiring women not to succumb to the unfair treatments they were subjected to by the society (Cruz and Rappaport 314). One major aspect that Sor Juana used to push her idea forth was irony. Throughout the reply, she has used irony as her most important tool. Perhaps it was influenced by the place of a woman in the society. For example she states that, “…The first and to me the most insuperable is the question of how to respond to your immensely learned, prudent, devout, and loving letter” (De la Cruz 39). She uses this to show her feelings towards the dreadful deed that the bishop had done. She uses this ironical statement to show that despite the fact that the society thinks of women as stupid and incompetent people, they are intelligent and knowledgeable. Sor Juana decided to show her intelligence though a polite manner often apologizing and taking the submissive role just as a woman was supposed to behave (Cruz and Rappaport 314). Women were not allowed to talk. They were to do what men told them to do. De La Cruz says, “…I. . . was sorely tempted to take refuge in silence. But as silence is a negative thing, though it explains a great deal through the very stress of not explaining, we must assign some meaning to it that we may understand what the silence…” (De la Cruz 8). In the reply, Sor Juana tells the reader about the ways in which the society was determined to ensure that women remained helpless. The society did this by ensuring that it bound and suppressed them by maintaining a male dominant environment. The society discouraged women from attending school because they were supposed to sit at home, do home chores and take care of children. In her reply, Sor Juana shows that she had the desire to learn but the society could not support her because she was a woman. She says that, “no teacher besides books themselves.” (De la Cruz 53) She had to study books on her own without the help of teachers. On the other hand boys of her age went to school and were taught be teachers. It is because of her intelligence and hard work that she managed to pursue her goals. Sor Juana shows the reader the struggle she passed through teaching herself several subjects that she lists throughout the text. (De la Cruz 53). The society did not allow women to be educated or put their ideas in writing. The society did not find anything useful that women would write. Her reply clearly shows the society’s position on the right of women to study and their courage to affirm their scholarly prowess. The church that was supposed to be non-partisan did not help much to ensure that women had better lives. Her letter shows that the Catholic Church expected women to adhere to its strict doctrines. In fact, during the early 1690s, the Catholic Church criticized and condemned sensual women. The doctrine advocated for male domination in the society. Men were the only people allowed to be church leaders. The church advocated for subordination of women creating household chores mandate for them. It stated that household chores were a set of workout activities or gymnastics that was important for women. She narrates the hardship that she had to pass though as a woman to gain or get though certain hardships. For instance she says, “I made myself a rule that if by the time it [her hair] had grown back to the same length…I would cut my hair off again to punish my dull-wittedness.” (De la Cruz 51). As a woman, she had to set targets and achieve them for her own good. Nobody cared to know whether she met targets or not because the society perceived women as weak human beings. The society expected women to maintain a feminine look that would impress men and attract them to women (Merrim 94). Women were supposed to be beautiful at all times so that men could find them attractive. She says that, “…Your cheeks are Aprils lecture halls, with classic lessons to impart to May…recipes for making jasmine snowy, formulas for redness in the rose…” (De la Cruz 20). The society put women in a position that highlighted them as objects of glorification to men. Therefore, women were supposed to have long and beautiful braids or dreadlocks. Sor Juana broke the societal norm when she cut her hair short. She was seen as a rebel and masculine. She stirred up emotions within people in the society for breaking the norms acceptable for women in the society. She was categorized as a socially unacceptable woman (Merrim 94). In assertion of De La Cruz’s point of view, Luce Irigaray in her book titled This Sex Which Is Not One states that, “Female sexuality has always been conceptualized on the basis of masculine parameters…. in the development of a sexually “normal” woman, seems rather too clearly required by the practice of male sexuality” (Irigaray 23). She agrees with De La Cruz that women were subordinate members of the society unlike men. In her sexist text, Irigaray states that, “…brutal separation of the two lips by a violating penis” (Irigaray 24). She shows how men controlled women’s lives and robbed them of their true identities. De La Cruz pointed out that, “…By chance, am I something more than a poor nun, the slightest creature on earth…” (De la Cruz 41). She expresses her pity on the unfair and subordinate position that the society had put women. The self-justification and depiction in the reply is daring and shows this representation of her choices as a purpose that she intended to make public. For instance, she states that she was willing to put on boys clothes so that she could go to school and learn Latin language (De la Cruz 6). In rebellion of the societal placement of women, she jokingly writes on her thoughts on how Aristotle would write if he entered the kitchen. In conclusion, Sor Juana Ines de la Cruz reply to Sor Filotea De La Cruz shows self-pity and her pity for the place of the woman in her society. Her reply talks of the injustices that women passed though. Women had no say in important issues. They were given subordinate roles in the society, such as handling household chores and taking care of children. Women were not allowed to go to school. They were considered incompetent. Those who managed to learn did so through difficulties teaching themselves. They took the risk of being seen as social misfits and deviants. Despite the fact that De La Cruz shows self-pity she manages to show the reader that she was intelligent and knowledgeable though the use of irony. She shows the reader that women were not as stupid and incompetent as the society thought they were. Sor Juanas Reply to Sor Filotea de la Cruz is an excellent piece that shows a feminist point of view of the society that highlights the hardships that women passed through during the sixteenth century. Works cited Cruz, Sister Juana Inés de la and Pamela Kirk Rappaport. Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz: selected writings. 2005: Paulist Press, New Jersey. De la Cruz, Sor Juana Ines. The Answer/La respuesta. Ed. and trans. Electa Arenal and Amanda Powell. New York, NY: Feminist Press. 1994. Irigaray, Luce. “This Sex Which Is Not One.” New York: Cornell University Press. 1985. 23- 33. Merrim, Stephanie. Feminist perspectives on Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz. Michigan: Wayne State University Press, 1999. Read More