Speculating Codes
by Alex Geffard
In our first blog, we offered our first impressions of Dept. of Speculation, and explained a network of controlling values. In our second blog, we looked at the genres and forms present in the novel. In this blog, we’ll look at a couple of Intertextual Codes.
Kaja Silverman, in The Subject of Semiotics, paraphrases Roland Barthes by explaining that “a code represents a sort of bridge between texts. Its presence within one text involves a simultaneous reference to all of the other texts in which it appears, and to the cultural reality which it helps define-i.e. the particular symbolic order.” Think of the code as the connotative meaning of a word or phrase. There are many different codes, each which invoke some kind of other meaning or thought.
The two codes that I want to look at in this post are the Semic and Cultural Codes- which I found to overlap nicely.
The Semic Code, as interpreted by Rowan University Professor Andrew Kopp, “Defines characters, objects, and places through repetitively grouping a number of signifiers (“semes”: words and phrases) around a proper name….the semic code sets up relationships of power that often reinforce cultural codes.” The semic code highlights the words or phrases associated with characters, objects, and places, such as the epithet “Alexander the Great”, and hints at their meanings (Alexander was a great conqueror who took over many lands).
Naturally, Cultural Codes, as defined by Silverman, “speak the familiar ‘truths’ of the existing cultural order, repeat what has ‘always been already read, seen, done, experienced'”. This has to do with the ideas and thoughts we get after reading certain words or phrases. What appears in our minds is influenced by our culture and society. An example of this as an untrue stereotype is “the blond girl in front of me complained that she didn’t understand the math test.” When we read that the girl is blond, with think about the cultural idea that blonds are generally dumb.
In Dept. of Speculation, the Semic and Cultural codes are linked together. The words the author uses as placeholders for the characters are the semic codes, and the stereotypical positions that our culture sees these words are the cultural codes.
When the narrator changes POV from first person to third (page 95), she refers to herself as The Wife. When we see this placeholder, we think literally that she is someone’s wife. She is married to someone. She doesn’t see herself as her own person. She believes that she cannot be referred to without hinting at her connection to her spouse.
Culturally, when with think of a stereotypical wife’s role, we typically picture a 1950s nuclear family, where the wife is a stay at home mom taking care of her child and cleaning and laundry. The breadwinner of the family is the husband, and she is submissive to him. Now the narrator is not the type of woman to be like this, because she works hard for herself and is normally a very independent woman (initially, she didn’t want to be a mother). But once she is married and has a child, she starts to see herself assuming the stereotypical role, having to stay at home and take care of the child. She finds herself emotionally connected to her husband:
- “After you left for work, I would stare at the door as if it might open again.” (page 24)
The Husband is the placeholder for someone’s… husband. It implies that the husband is a “he”. He is connected to his wife, a protector and leader for his family. He is his own person, who chooses to be tied to the wife.
Culturally, we think of husbands, in the 1950s nuclear family, as the patriarch of the family. The breadwinner. He is honest and strong, confident and kind. Now, in the modern view, our thoughts are less kind. Husbands are thought of as the person in the couple who will generally cheat. Husbands are less trustworthy than wives, and are often thought to be distant from their family. There’s the stereotype that all African American husbands leave their families behind, often to sleep with younger and hotter women. The Wife in the story sees her husband more in the modern sense, sensing him to be distancing himself from her in everything they do, less trustworthy:
- “ Some nights in bed the wife can feel herself floating up towards the ceiling. Help me, she thinks, help me, but he sleeps and sleeps.” (page 108)
This novel is rich with Semic and Cultural codes that really elevate it to a more universal level. They make the story almost seem allegorical, like the characters are modern archetypes.
How Writers Read 
Very interesting view of the discourse vs. the narrative of “The Department of Speculation” Regarding the Semic Code, I feel as though this is certainly the predominating code and value to be found throughout the book. Never is the wife referred to by name beyond perhaps a fleeting page or two In the very beginning, and the fact that the wife, along with the husband, feel so forced into these roles and expectations that come along with the titles that society has bestowed upon them, and whether they have willingly or unwillingly followed along with, show definite effects on their mental and physical wellbeing throughout the novel. This is where the Proairetic Code comes into play. Simply put, the Proairetic Code implies cause and effect throughout the narrative, and a such, we can come to several conclusions using the clear implications of this code throughout the story. In the beginning, long before the main character is forced into the role of “wife” along with her “husband”, and was allowed the full freedom and naivety that comes with young adulthood, she was a much different person than she is by the end of the book. It is only because she finds herself forced into the role of an unwilling mother (with the pregnancy being unplanned) and a wife to a husband who must also abandon his former freedom and roles in society that the two characters begin to, effectively, lose themselves to the process. The act of conforming these roles, much like attempting to fit square pegs into round holes, simply doesn’t work out very well, and winds up taking a serious toll on the mental health of the wife that becomes more and more evident as the book progresses, and the marriage between the two primary characters crumbles. The cause and effect of forcing themselves into these societal roles effectively causes the wife to view herself as someone completely different than she was before, and arguably, completely lose her mind in the process. Much the same can be said for the husband, but to what degree we cannot know since our point of view comes mainly from the wife. In this instance, the example of cause and effect provided by this book serves almost as a sort of cautionary tale as to how forcing oneself into these roles can effectively make oneself lose themselves along the way.
LikeLike
Hi Alex! You touched on some really good ideas on this blog. I agree that she refers to herself as “The Wife” in order to show how detached she is from her own life. I believe that she started to refer to herself in this way because she has started acting in that role, which is something she once pitied in other women. P. 93 “The wives have requirements too, of course. What they require is this: unswerving obedience. Loyalty unto death.” She seems to mock “the wives”, something she does not identify at this point. Some other cultural codes that I found are: that the woman, or wife, is the who must give up her dreams in order to take care of the family, Men are always tend to be the cheaters, and in marriage you must always forgive.
LikeLike
I like how you relate the titles of the Wife and the Husband to there classical stereotype of the 1950’s. I think this description worked so well because it is close enough to the present that some people still believe that life should work this but also far enough that to not be this is not an abomination.
I think it is also interesting to note how many outside texts the wife brings into her story. They may seem random at first but as the narrative progresses is becomes more and more obvious that each divergence can actually give the story the wife is currently telling greater meaning. She can simultaneously tell the reader about what she’s thinking, but can also show us who she really is without actually saying it. I think this keeps some of her more radical feelings at arms length, like she’s walking a tight rope of all her roles, trying desperately to keep balanced.
LikeLike