We have explored a wide variety of texts that interpret the human experience in unique ways. Most of the texts investigate just how one’s sense of self is determined or developed, taking into consideration varying influences such as circumstance and time. In Eugene O’Neill’s play Long Day’s Journey Into Night, Mary is of the view that “life” has done certain things to us that we can not control. She believes that these almost supernatural forces drive us to our destiny in life. They make us do certain things that we do not even consciously recognize we are doing, and we are ultimately left with a sense of self that is distorted from our true selves. As a whole the CORE course texts we read this semester disagree with Mary’s perspective of life. While they recognize that there are some aspects of life (i.e. race, genes etc.) that we cannot control, the texts side with the idea that we can consciously exercise our free will and therefore control who we are as a self and what we ultimately become as a person in relation to the public.

            In this essay, I will first explain the perspective expressed by Mary in Eugene O’Neill’s Long Day’s Journey Into Night. In the Section II, I will explain why, as a whole, the texts disagree with the idea that our destiny and self of self is controlled by some force that is not our own. In Section III, I shall explain why I also disagree with Mary’s perspective on life and conclude.

            Section I: An explanation of what Mary is saying

            In Eugene O’Neill’s Long Day’s Journey Into Night, Mary, in trying to find an explanation for Jamie’s attitude, believes that “life has made him” the way he is, and “he can’t help it.” She seems to believe that Jamie himself and all of his experiences are predetermined and out of his control. For instance, she believes that many experiences have influenced Jamie’s sense of self without his being able to control or define that experience and its impact on himself. She therefore vindicates his “sneering” tendencies by providing this explanation. Many of the texts view the sense of self as independent, at least at first, from circumstance and time. In this instance, the majority of the texts would credit Jamie’s character to himself. Even though some events are unpredictable and may seem beyond our control, the way we react to them and allow them to influence our sense of self is up to us. Though Mary thinks that human will is subjugated by things that we cannot explain, the other authors beg to differ.

            Section II: Why the books, as a whole, contradict Mary’s statement.

            Many of the texts have characters that are originally lost souls, much like Mary views Jamie, as they have no idea who they are, where they come from, and what has defined them. In all instances, the authors show some type of journey or enlightenment that help us realize that we can be true to themselves if we so choose.

            This idea of freeing oneself from some type of confinement is depicted in Toni Morrison’s Song of Solomon. Milkman’s great grandfather, Solomon, liberates himself from slavery—what might be considered a predetermined force—by literally flying away from the imprisonment and back to Africa. This flight symbolizes Solomon’s breaking free from what “life has done” to him, and staying true to who he would “like to be.” The magical flight symbolizes Solomon’s denial of the “lot” he was given, and freedom to pursue his “true self” independent of slavery.

            In the same text, Milkman, initially untrue to himself and to his family, is self-centered and pursues wealth and independence. Among the consequences of Solomon’s flight, was his abandonment of his son, Milkman’s grandfather who was made an orphan. In short, the horrors of slavery also afflicted Milkman’s grandfather and father, which in turn, confused his own identity—making him angry and selfish. This identity would not have been Milkman’s if it was not for slavery’s impact on his family—something Mary (O’Neill) would contend has come between him and his true self forever. Milkman, however, is also able to exercise his free-will and “fly” towards freedom at the end of the novel. Milkman’s journey to find his families origins—to find out who he is and where he has come from—results in his discovery of his true self and abandonment of his old, restricted self.

Like how Song of Solomon shows us that we can liberate ourselves from imposed boundaries, Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex promotes the idea that an individual can transcend—going beyond ordinary limits—in order to define one’s autonomous sense of self. In other words, by practicing transcendentalism, we can free ourselves from what Shakespeare coined the “slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.” Beauvoir is principally concerned with females being confined by the obligations and expectations of femininity. The socially constructed role of womanhood should no longer suppress a woman’s immanence. In reference to Mary’s statement, some things happen to people with out their control, and if your will is not free, those things can define you unfairly.  Beauvoir claims that women have historically lost their individuality at puberty because of “the curse” and the needs of the human species to reproduce. It is not until menopause that women can return to what they would “like to be” and uncover their “true self.” Although a woman cannot change her biology, she can exit the socially constructed box that is femininity by transcending those values and demanding reciprocity from the male sex. From an existentialist vantage point, Beauvoir believes that the conditions of women’s exploitation are amenable.  Some women never realize that they have free-will over their own destiny, but Beauvoir asserts that every woman can free themselves from the “feminine mystique” thereby being completely responsible in determining an unhindered identity.

Adrienne Rich’s Poetry and Prose remind the women reading The Second Sex that there is another option for their sex. She claims that women either do not know that they have the option of being a lesbian, or that there is too much pressure preventing them from fulfilling their desires to be part of the “lesbian continuum.”  Rich believes that the pressures to be heterosexual “makes [a woman] do other things” that sacrifice her individuality and therefore freedom. She says, “Woman identification is a source of energy, a potential springhead of female power, curtailed and contained under the institution of heterosexuality” (221). Above all, Rich asks females to stop “denying [the] reality” of “women’s passion for women”—or their true identity. She believes that the freedom to choose alone will liberate “closeted” women from the “queasy strobe light of that lie” which is heterosexual relationships. The right to choose will enable women to be in touch with who they really are.

            Though seemingly contradictory, James Baldwin Giovanni’s Room shares the same idea that some things, such as sexual orientation, are predetermined but should not hinder one’s sense of self. In the novel, David can not cope with a major component of his self identity—his homosexual desires. In affect, he tries to deceive himself into believing that he is heterosexual by becoming engaged to Hella. He is fearful that “coming out of the closet” would destroy his reputation as man in the critical and conservative American society. In denying an important component of his true-self, he becomes homophobic in an effort to avoid any accusations of his sexuality, and as a result, loathes himself. David cannot abandon his inhibitions in the way Beauvoir recommends and consequently loses his “true self forever.” The book does not, however, recommend we suppress who we really are, as exampled by David’s tragic life. The book tries to make clear, especially by Jacques counseling, that the only way to love others is to first love your true self as opposed to trying to conceal and ignore it.

While David ignores his homosexual desires, Augustine tries to resist his free-will’s desire for sexual pleasure because of his religion morality in Confessions. Augustine’s will is divided between wanting pleasure and longing to be close to Goodness and God. The desire for sexual pleasure derives from what Nietzsche would call animalistic instincts as a “blonde beast.” Instead of letting his free-will take control of his life, he stays true to himself by controlling his free-will, admitting his guilt, and returning to God. From On the Genealogy of Morals by Nietzsche, we can characterize both Augustine and David as being ascetic and having a “sick will” that cannot cope with itself.   The needs of Augustine’s untamed free-will are different than that of his true self, and by controlling his wild instincts he can be in touch with what he considers his sense of self.

Mencius, like Confessions, recognizes that we are inherently good in our heart, but we can sometimes stray from goodness when we stop developing/using our heart/mind, leading to more selfish interests. Like Augustine’s idea of religious morality, asserts that there are four principle components of our heart that define us as moral humans. Mencius writes, “Whoever is devoid of the heart of compassion is not human, whoever is devoid of the heart of shame is not human, whoever is devoid of the heart of courtesy and modesty is not human, and whoever is devoid of the heart of right and wrong is not human” (Mencius 38). Accordingly, although life sometimes throws us curve balls we can not control, we stay true to ourselves and to each other if we follow our heart by utilizing our a benevolent free-will.

Antony and Cleopatra serves to prove Mencius’ point that a man consciously dislocated from his heart/mind cannot be benevolent, and will undoubtedly distort his true sense of self. This dislocation occurs when Antony’s free-will becomes distracted from his true self identity because of selfish interest, or in this case, emotion/lust for Cleopatra. Throughout the play, Antony stresses the importance of preserving his honor as king, because, as he affirms, “If I lose mine honor, I lose myself,” (III.4 22-23). To Shakespeare, his honor composes his true sense of self, and without honor, he is not even worthy of living. The factors of his complex identity are his militant strength, his manliness, and of course, his love for Cleopatra. Because Cleopatra has “robbed [him] of his sword,” his masculinity and militant strength are sacrificed therefore destroying his true sense of self (IV.14 13-14). Antony eventually realizes that he cannot make the two forces coexist as polar opposites. The first force—a force of reason—was pulling at him to fulfill his duties as a hero to the Roman Empire. The second force—a force of private interest, lust, and emotion—was nagging at him to commit himself solely to Cleopatra. Antony’s abandonment of his duties to go to Egypt with Cleopatra was solely in his own interest. Mencius would say that his “heart of shame” became too distant and unable to think because he did not use it enough. While Antony did lose touch with his true identity, he did so with conscious control, however naïve, which is in opposition of Mary’s statement.

            Section III/Conclusion: Why I also disagree with Mary’s statement

            I, too, disagree with Mary’s statement that we are fatefully subjected to inexplicable forces and circumstances that shape our sense of self. She believes that at the end of the day, we are powerless in defining our sense of self. Her idea that circumstances and experiences in life just sort of happen to us is in some ways true, but those influences cannot ultimately come between a determined will and a true sense of self. Even as there are plenty of things to distract our free-will, we can still control our natural impulses and stay close to our heart/mind. Our self identity is constantly being adjusted and reflected upon. We arrive at a sense of self by factoring in a variety of components which include both “things life has done to us” in addition to things (such as religion, morality, benevolence etc.) that we create and define. As humans, we are guided by a once benevolent free-will that helps us live and react to the circumstances of our environment. And through exploration of our own human experiences, as well as those of others, we can further sculpt what we believe to be a true sense of self.