Mona Lisa irony
Sunday afternoon I settled into the couch with a blanket to watch mindless movies and nap. I was trying to recover from the 24 Hour Theater experiment, my lack of sleep and the crash of my adrenaline.
I began watching Mona Lisa Smile, a movie set in 1954 where Julia Roberts becomes an instructor at Wellesley College. She encounters brilliant young women whose only aspirations are to become wives and mothers. She challenges them to shun the conventions of their day, to eschew the culture of their time and to dream of more meaningful lives for themselves. She wants them to find more purpose in life than cooking, cleaning and caring for husband and children.
The movie is a women's liberation version of Dead Poets' Society. But one student challenged the instructor's "subversive" teachings by saying something like, "You wanted me to have a choice. I choose to be a wife and mother. " She accused Julia's character of demeaning the choice of women to stay home. The student said that not all stay-at-home wives and mothers are dumb, nor do they lose their intellect for making that choice, and she demanded respect for her choice.
The irony is this: I was only into the first 20 minutes of the film when Tom came home from work. He said he was starving. I immediately jumped up, made him a snack and started dinner. He sat on the couch and asked if he could change the channel to the football game. "Of course!" I replied. Afterall, he had worked all day and I had been resting.
Was I disappointed to miss the rest of the movie? Sure. But I knew I could watch it later that night. Could Tom make his own food? Sure. But I derive great pleasure from cooking for him, serving him, making his home a comforting refuge.
It was funny. Here I was... a working woman in 2004 readily giving up the illusion of power in favor of a 1954 spirit of servanthood that was being derided. The movie makes it clear that women should aspire to something more. And women have made great progress in the last 50 years. I wouldn't have had the career I enjoyed, otherwise. But in some ways, I agree with the student. Simply having a new choice doesn't make the former options less valid or worthy.
I have witnessed some in my generation who pursue career to the detriment of their marriages and families. Is it really "progress" of humankind to become increasingly self-centered? Is it admirable to be more concerned about personal fulfillment and less concerned about the needs of others? What is a more meaningful purpose to life, for a man or a woman, than demonstrating sacrificial and selfless love to those around you?
I've failed plenty of times. But I hope I made a step in the right direction on Sunday afternoon.
By the way... the movie was pretty good. Formulaic, but good.
I began watching Mona Lisa Smile, a movie set in 1954 where Julia Roberts becomes an instructor at Wellesley College. She encounters brilliant young women whose only aspirations are to become wives and mothers. She challenges them to shun the conventions of their day, to eschew the culture of their time and to dream of more meaningful lives for themselves. She wants them to find more purpose in life than cooking, cleaning and caring for husband and children.
The movie is a women's liberation version of Dead Poets' Society. But one student challenged the instructor's "subversive" teachings by saying something like, "You wanted me to have a choice. I choose to be a wife and mother. " She accused Julia's character of demeaning the choice of women to stay home. The student said that not all stay-at-home wives and mothers are dumb, nor do they lose their intellect for making that choice, and she demanded respect for her choice.
The irony is this: I was only into the first 20 minutes of the film when Tom came home from work. He said he was starving. I immediately jumped up, made him a snack and started dinner. He sat on the couch and asked if he could change the channel to the football game. "Of course!" I replied. Afterall, he had worked all day and I had been resting.
Was I disappointed to miss the rest of the movie? Sure. But I knew I could watch it later that night. Could Tom make his own food? Sure. But I derive great pleasure from cooking for him, serving him, making his home a comforting refuge.
It was funny. Here I was... a working woman in 2004 readily giving up the illusion of power in favor of a 1954 spirit of servanthood that was being derided. The movie makes it clear that women should aspire to something more. And women have made great progress in the last 50 years. I wouldn't have had the career I enjoyed, otherwise. But in some ways, I agree with the student. Simply having a new choice doesn't make the former options less valid or worthy.
I have witnessed some in my generation who pursue career to the detriment of their marriages and families. Is it really "progress" of humankind to become increasingly self-centered? Is it admirable to be more concerned about personal fulfillment and less concerned about the needs of others? What is a more meaningful purpose to life, for a man or a woman, than demonstrating sacrificial and selfless love to those around you?
I've failed plenty of times. But I hope I made a step in the right direction on Sunday afternoon.
By the way... the movie was pretty good. Formulaic, but good.
posted by ThreeGraces @ 8:39 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home