Bilingual/Bilingüe

Guest Post by Jorden House-Hay

ENGH 305:003

11 October 2012

Structure, Interpellation, and the “orders of subjectivity” and their role in interpreting the poem “Bilingual/Bilingüe”

Perhaps one of the most difficult concepts for any individual to grasp is an introspective understanding of what constitutes the self. For many, the question deserves a lifelong endeavor of personal exploration. In Rhina Espaillat’s poem “Bilingual/Bilingüe”, the narrator expresses a certain personal cohesion that is born out of being able to speak two languages. Additionally, the poem actively disputes the narrator’s father’s fear that embracing English will strain their relationship, as the writer, through structure, stresses the idea that bilingualism does not create a dichotomy of ideology that would threaten their intimacy. This being said, while the structure makes it clear that the narrator believes that his/her father has no need to worry, with the application of theorist Jacques Lancan’s ideas of the “orders of subjectivity” and the theory of the inevitable interpellation of each individual into certain societal constructs, the reader can determine that there may in fact be reason for worry that the narrator simply doesn’t (or is unable to) take into due consideration.

In order to make the case that the narrator is potentially mistaken with the profession that bilingualism will not create a rift between him/her and his/her father, first the truth of that profession must be confirmed. “Bilingual/Bilingüe” initially conforms to the narrator’s father’s wishes of a separation between English and Spanish in order to contradict his view that knowledge of both will change the narrator as a person and subsequently create a barrier between them. The narrator addresses her father’s appeal directly in the text, stating, “My father liked them separate, one there, / one here (allá y aquí)” (Espaillat line 1-2). The Spanish words integrated into the poem are separated from the English text through the use of parentheses, just as the narrator’s father requested. Further, the Spanish is “inside” and the English is “outside”, conforming even more precisely to how his/her father says, “English outside this door, Spanish inside” (Espaillat 7). Though it might appear that this structure is used out of blind obedience to the father’s will, a translation of the Spanish words allows the reader to interpret otherwise: the phrase “allá y aquí” in Spanish translates roughly to “there and here” in English; the words simply restate the English words preceding them.  This reiteration of the same concept through use of two languages constitutes the narrator’s way of saying that the only distinction between the two is that they use different mediums to express the same meaning. On a larger scale, this correlates to the theme that the narrator is the same person, with the same values and relationships, regardless of what language he/she is speaking. Thus, the structure shows that the narrator makes his/her father’s attempts to separate when he/she speaks either language seem like a fruitless endeavor because he/she is the same regardless of language.

                Just as the Spanish and English integration in the body of the poem creates the frame of the narrator’s assertion that bilingualism as no effect on his/her identity, the final stanza of the poem serves to accentuate this point. Espaillat writes in her second to last line that “[the father] stood outside mis versos, half/ in fear of words he loved but wanted not to hear” (Espaillat 17-18). This stanza is unique because the parentheses are removed from the Spanish, and also because the use of the Spanish words as reiteration of preceding English words is discontinued. The writer makes this transition in order to represent the narrator finally shedding the superficial pretense of conforming to his/her father’s desires, and also  to indisputably create the narrator’s case that Spanish and English together are part of the narrator’s cohesive self and equally important in conveying his/her message.  The use  of the words “mis versos” being integrated seamlessly into the English text, as well as the fact that the words hold their own separate meaning, serves to deliver a message of Spanish/English cohesion which is an illustration of the narrator’s idea that his/her two languages work together within the same identity. Here again, the structure of the poem is used to convey the message of the narrator’s personal unity.

                Having proved that the narrator does indeed feel that her father’s fears about language are baseless, the reader can now evaluate whether this is actually true. Though it is given that the narrator believes that he/she retains the same identity and that her heart remains “one”, the theory of interpellation, or in other words the concept that states every individual is essentially programmed from birth into specific ideologies of culture and morality, would suggest otherwise. The theory states that “the institutions of society maintain discourses (languages, logics, modes of proof, etiquettes) that function to ‘interpellate’ or recruit persons into the dominant belief system or ideology of the society” (Scholes, Comley, and Ulmer 242). In essence, the idea is that the functions of society through which one grows up being influenced by have a measurable -- or even all-encompassing -- effect on his/her identity. This notion allows the reader to competently dispute the narrator’s assertion that identity is not affected by the language he/she speaks; how could it not if the English language, when evaluated under the idea of interpellation, represents an entire “belief system or ideology” of a society that is foreign to that of his/her father? Though the narrator may firmly assert that he/she is not alienated from her father by her ability to speak English, this fundamental rule of interpellation challenges that it is impossible that he/she not to be alienated to a certain extent just by the act of learning it. Values, shared experiences, and specific cultural practices are some of the most basic foundations of an intimate relationship; therefore, if the language a person learns has the ability to inculcate values, experiences, and specific cultural practices within their identity, then a youth learning a language that his/her parents aren’t comfortably familiar with would logically deviate somewhat in ideology, and the relationship would suffer as a result.

                To be fair, an argument employing the fact that Spanish was the first language the narrator learned as evidence that it remains the primary and dominant basis of the narrator’s identity would refute the thesis that interpellation implies learning another language is an agent of separation between the narrator and his/her father.  This argument would seemingly support the narrator’s assertion exemplified by the structure that his/heart is still “one” despite learning English in addition to her native language. This refutation would appear entirely accurate if it were not for a second element of the theory of interpellation:  “an individual subject is not autonomous and self-identical, but is dependent upon and an effect of the languages into which he or she has entered” (Scholes, Comley, and Ulmer 243). This gets at the idea that identity does not exist intrinsically or objectively, but rather relies on external factors-- such as the language that the person is primarily speaking and expressing themselves with-- to create an internal definition of the self. Assuming the truth of the theory, the idea of interpellation does in fact necessarily separate the narrator’s identity from that of his/her father. Similarly to how the structure of the poem supports the narrator’s thesis, the content/language of the poem negates it; the primary language used in the poem is English, and this indicates, with application of the conditions of interpellation, that even as the narrator is speaking about how his/her father’s worries are unrealistic, the medium with which he/she is using to communicate it (English) proves contrary.  Spanish might have been the first language that helped create the identity of the narrator, but since he/she learned English as well and subsequently uses it to express ideas, he/she is unconsciously perpetuating the rift that her father so feared. As the poem itself states, though the father might have “loved” his daughter/son’s words, he “stood outside [them]” (Espaillat, 628).

                Making the case that the narrator has a false impression of his/her relationship with his/her own father might seem like a bold, and even ignorant, allegation, but the argument finds further support in the ideas of the psychoanalytic theorist Jacques Lacan.  Lacan explores the idea of “the Real”, which he defines as that which “straddles the lines between conscious and unconscious” (Murfin, and Ray 388). In his reckoning, humans can only “partially, intuitively” sense the existence of the true form of reality, and what people assume to be actual reality is just an “illusion of coherence” produced by the five senses. This perceived reality, or in Lacan’s words the “Imaginary order”, is then just an illusion that people use to define themselves as a single, unique individual, when really they are nothing more than a product of the ideologies and ideas that have been programmed into them throughout their life. If it is allowed that what the narrator of the poem “Bilingual/Bilingüe” defines as himself/herself is, in objective actuality, “a false but comforting sense of unity [of] the individual” (Murfin, and Ray 388), then it would come as no surprise that he/she could be mistaken about the effect that learning English has on who he/she is.  According to Lacan, everyone is trapped in this “Imaginary order”, and necessarily so; it would be impossible to function independently in the world without an assumed understanding of the self, and also impossible for a poem like “Bilingual/Bilingüe” (or any poem for that matter) to exist at all. Considering this, the narrator unavoidably speaks out of a perceived sense of identity, and thus an external observer who is aware of the concepts of the “orders of subjectivity” can critically and confidently evaluate the narrator’s claim’s and asses them as potentially inaccurate; in fact, the neutrality of the reader arguably enables them to do so more efficiently than the narrator himself/herself. This assessment, when viewed under the context of Lacan’s principles, is therefore neither ignorant nor bold, but one aided and reinforced by the nature of the reader’s objectivity.

                Seeing the relationship with their child progressively become strained is undoubtedly a painful experience for a parent. Unfortunately, this reality appears to be one that parents must simply learn to deal with, especially when their child is akin to the narrator of “Bilingual/Bilingüe” and speaks multiple languages. What is interesting, however, is the possibility that the as the separation occurs the child could not only be unaware of it, but also firmly believe that language has no effect on identity and a separation need not occur at all. To a reader considering the theories of interpellation and Lacan’s orders of “subjectivity”, the truth of the child’s belief seems improbable, and so it seems that the professed theme of unity in the poem that the structure embodies is most likely one born out of a false impression of reality. This idea that we are not unique in identity from the billions of other people on the planet can quite understandably be considered depressing, and yet transversely it can also serve as a tool of perspective that allows us to better objectively understand the reality of our world. Regardless of whether this interpretation is the true nature of things or just the false explanations of exceptionally smart and analytical human theorists, it would do us all some good to occasionally contemplate the idea that language could, in actuality, speaks us.

Works cited

Scholes, Robert, Nancy Comley, and Gregory Ulmer. "Identification ." Text Book: Writing through Literature. Ed. Karen S. Henry. 3rd ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2002. 242-243. Print.

Murfin, Ross, and Supryia Ray. "Subjectivity." The Bedford Glossary of Critical and Literary Terms. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 1997. 388. Print.

Kennedy, X.J, and Dana Gioia, comp. Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, Drama, and Writing. 6th ed. 2010. Print.