BINARY OPPOSITION IN EMILY DICKINSON’S BECAUSE I COULD NOT STOP FOR DEATH (1890), APPOINTMENT IN SAMARRA AS RETOLD BY WILLIAM SOMMERSET MAUGHM (1933), AND JOHN DONNE’S DEATH, BE NOT PROUD (2004)

BINARY OPPOSITION IN EMILY DICKINSON’S BECAUSE I COULD NOT STOP FOR DEATH (1890), APPOINTMENT IN SAMARRA AS RETOLD BY WILLIAM SOMMERSET MAUGHM (1933), AND JOHN DONNE’S DEATH, BE NOT PROUD (2004)

Final assignment on Philology, lectured by Prof. DR. Febiola D Kurnia

Eka Sugeng Ariadi

NIM. 157835408

Abstract: Naturally, human could understand a strange phenomenon automatically by applying binary opposition system in her/his mind. This current paper aims at revealing the BO existed in Emily Dickinson’s Because I Could Not Stop For Death (1890), Appointment In Samarra as retold by William Sommerset Maughm (1933), and John Donne’s Death, Be Not Proud (2004). As the conclusion, this paper has revealed the BO in those three poems as well as the intertextuality. The discussion of the BO and intertextuality are focused on three aspects; man versus woman, superior versus inferior, and temporary versus eternity aspects.

Keywords: binary opposition, intertextuality, poems

I.    INTRODUCTION

Naturally, human could understand a strange phenomenon automatically by applying binary opposition system in him/herself mind. Among the binary terms, we can also learn about mediating terms, such as between "hot" and "cold" we learn the concept "cool”, “warm." Lévi-Strauss (1960) argues this is a natural process, due to structural characteristics of our minds. In addition, Kieran (1988) states that a very common way in which we elaborate our conceptual grasp over empirical phenomena is by first forming such binary opposites and then by mediating between them.

            Accordingly, a linguist, such as Campsall (2009) informs that according to structuralism, anything that acts to signify meaning–objects from reality, words, ideas and images – can do so only through a process akin to symbolism, i.e. the meaning will, in important ways, be culturally derived (rather like a rose can connote, at a symbolic level, ‘romance’). He explained that Levi-Strauss and Barthes went on to realize that meaning, in fact, results from a complex association of ideas about the thing itself plus other ideas that are the thing’s ‘cultural opposite’, what they called its cultural or ‘binary opposite’. Furthermore, readers have a natural system which underpinned by the indigenous culture in forming complex meaning and producing binary opposition (BO).

            Further, a later theorist, Jacques Derrida, has broaden the level of discussion by taken Barthes and Levi-Strauss’s ideas a stage further by recognizing that these ‘binary pairs’ were never equal (Campsall, 2009). He sees that within any particular culture, one ‘side’ of each binary pair tended to be valued or judged in a more privileged light. It was as if one half of each binary pair were somehow ‘culturally marked’ by a kind of ‘presence’ that made it more highly valued whereas its binary opposite was ‘marked’ by a kind of ‘absence’ that rendered it the less highly valued part of the binary pair. Derrida’s idea successfully covers the cultural loaded and ideologically minded.

            In addition, Campsall (2009) provides one example Derrida gave was the culturally important ‘masculinity/femininity’ binary. Freudian psychoanalytical theory (named after the early 20^th Century psychoanalyst, Sigmund Freud) proposed the idea that ‘man’ has historically – and stereotypically – been ‘marked’ by a positive ‘presence’, whereas the idea of ‘woman’ has been ‘marked’ by a negative ‘absence’.  Yet, this example is not merely true, it depends on the society perspectives whether certain masculine values more highly than feminine values, and we can name it as a cultural stereotype. These theories provide you with a subtle way to analyze and discuss important aspects related to the way texts of all kinds are interpreted and gain meaning. Consider these cultural binary pairs: ‘strength/weakness’, ‘wealth/poverty’, ‘male/female’, ‘hi-tech/lo-tech’, ‘old/young’ for example and you should soon detect how important the idea of binary opposition really is (Campsall, 2009).

            In this current paper, it aims at revealing the BO existed in Emily Dickinson’s Because I Could Not Stop For Death (1890), Appointment In Samarra as retold by William Sommerset Maughm (1933), and John Donne’s Death, Be Not Proud (2004). Another consideration is exploring about the intertextuality among three poems, such as; man versus woman, the superior versus inferior characters, and time differences (temporary versus eternity).

II.   DISCUSSION

BO as one way to analyze a literary work is a part of post-colonialism theory which is showing several evidences related to binary opposition, for instances: good versus bad, man versus woman, powerful versus powerless, majority versus minority, oppressor and oppressed, rich versus poor, and love versus hate. The first poem which is going to be analyzed is Emily Dickinson’s Because I Could Not Stop For Death (1890), as the step point and the main reference for the others two poems. The second is Appointment In Samarra as retold by William Sommerset Maughm (1933), and the last is John Donne’s Death, Be Not Proud (2004). There are three aspects of BO which will be explored in each poem; man versus woman, superior versus inferior, and temporary versus eternity.

a.    Emily Dickinson’s Because I Could Not Stop For Death (1890)

1.    Man versus Woman

-       Naturally, man and woman is a clear example of BO. Death in this poem is personified as a man (he) while I/me/the speaker is a woman (she). The first and the second sentences, “Because I could not stop for Death-. He kindly stopped for me-” have shown it. Thus, he refers to Death, while I/me refers to the poet, Emily.

2.    Superior versus Inferior

-       Superior means someone who has more power than the others, while inferior inversely. In this poem, Death has the superior position while I/me/the speaker/the poet is in inferior position. It is shown in the first and the second sentences, “Because I could not stop for Death-. He kindly stopped for me-.” The sentences portray that the poet could not run away from Death and pose a surrender to what will do by the Death.

3.    Temporary versus Eternity

-       Temporary means a short time while eternity means endless time. The poet applies these two opposition terms two differentiate two events, as it is clearly mentioned in these sentences “since then ‘tis Centuries and yet Feels shorter than the Day. I first surmised the Horse’ Heads Were toward Eternity-”. “‘tis Centuries… the Day” represents a temporary event opposes “Immortality … Eternity” which represents everlasting event.

b.    Appointment In Samarra as retold by William Sommerset Maughm (1933)

1.    Man versus Woman

-       In this poem, man is represented by two characters; a merchant (Master) and his servant (I/the speaker/the poet), while woman is represented by Death. Both are opposing terms which clearly emerge in the first paragraph, “There was a merchant … his servant.. I was jostled by a woman…”.

2.    Superior versus Inferior

-       The poet yields two different levels of superior and inferior cases. The first level is the Death’s superior towards the servant, and the second is the Master/Merchant’s superior towards the Death. The Death’s superior can be identified from this sentence, “She (Death) … made me a threatening gesture… and I will ride away.” And the Master’s superior can be inferred from this sentence, “Then the merchant went down … why you make a threatening gesture.”

3.    Temporary versus Eternity

-       In this poem, the BO of temporary versus eternity is not explicitly stated, yet readers can take implicitly meanings from the words “…a start of surprise... tonight in Samarra” in the last paragraph. Because the word surprise means a short time activity and it occurs temporary while tonight is longer time activity.

c.    John Donne’s Death, Be Not Proud (2004)

1.    Man versus Woman

-       In this poem, man is represented explicitly as a man (the poet, John Donne). It is stated clearly in line 4, “Die not, … thou kill me.” The object pronoun of “me” refers to the poet (Donne). Unluckily, the poet does not mention explicitly or implicitly whether the sex of the Death is male or female. It may give the readers freedom to determine that the Death is either man or woman. Therefore, in this paper, it is being regarded as a woman.

2.    Superior versus Inferior

-       It is portrait clearly that the poet has powerfully position towards the Death. Since in constructing the title of the poem, “Death, Be Not Proud”, the poet negates the power of Death towards human being. According to him, Death is a common thing and should not be proud, it is as simple as sleep. Moreover, the poet states his oppression to Death by saying “Die not, poor Death; nor yet canst thou kill me.” Therefore, the Death becomes the one who is inferior toward the poet. The only thing that will ever really die is Death itself, so in that way, it is the weakest thing of all.

3.    Temporary versus Eternity

-       “One short sleep past, …” in the last second sentence denotes a temporary event. The poet wants to say that sleep and Death is similarly the same event. Sleep is a short sleeping activity, while Death is long sleeping activity. Nice sleeping can be done after drinking drugs, opium, etc. It may also be done because of Death. Human will awake again after sleep. Thus, sleep can make people even better than Death. When we die, we will sleep for a second, and then we will wake up forever.

The Intertextuality of Three Poems

a.    Man versus Woman

-       It has been written that Emily’ poem treats a man as the Death and a woman as the Death’s ‘target’. This notion then negated in Appointment in Samarra, man as the Death’s ‘target’ while the Death is a woman. This notion is then continued by Donne. Probably, the different personification of Death in these poems is influenced by its culture and ideology of the poets’ country.

b.    Superior versus Inferior

-       In Emily’ poem, the one who take a superior side is the Death, and the inferior is the Death’s ‘target’. It is then underpinned and negated as the same time in Appointment in Samarra. It is called underpinning as shown in the relationship between the Death and the servant, the Death becomes so superior and the servant is inferior. Inversely, in the relationship between the Death and the Master. The Death becomes the inferior and the master is the superior. Donne’s poem then in line with last relationship, the Death no longer have strong privilege (superior) towards his/her ‘target’.

c.    Temporary versus Eternity

-       Among three poems which have been analyzed, all the poems have the same dimension. In Emily’ poem, the temporary event is human’s life and the life after Death is the eternity. The second poem has the same idea. The third poem is actually same with, yet Donne is likely to say that Death is as simple as sleep.

III. CONCLUSION 

As the conclusion, this paper has revealed the BO which are existed in Emily Dickinson’s Because I Could Not Stop For Death (1890), Appointment In Samarra as retold by William Sommerset Maughm (1933), and John Donne’s Death, Be Not Proud (2004). Further discussion, the intertextuality among three poems displays certain intertextuality activities, particularly in man versus woman, superior versus inferior, and temporary versus eternity aspects. The intertextuality activities are acknowledged culturally and ideologically loaded meaning.

            In this case, analyzing and discussing important aspects related to the texts of all kinds is an interesting activity, extending readers’ interpretation and gaining various meanings. However, considering cultural binary pairs: ‘strength/weakness’, ‘wealth/poverty’, ‘male/female’, ‘hi-tech/lo-tech’, ‘old/young’ will assist readers detecting how important the idea of binary opposition really is (Campsall, 2009).

REFERENCES

Campsall, S. (2009). Binary Opposition.   Retrieved from http://www.englishbiz.co.uk

Dickinson, E. (1890). Because I could not stop for death. COMMONLIT. 

Donne, J., & Adcock, F. (2004). 'Death be Not Proud': ProQuest LLC.

Kieran, E. (1988). Teaching as Storytelling: Routledge.

Lévi-Strauss, C. (1960). On manipulated sociological models. Bijdragen tot de taal-, land-en volkenkunde(1ste Afl), 45-54.

Maugham, W. S. (1933). The Appointment in Samarra. Honors Literature and Short Stories.