1. Borden expresses disdain and criticism for her work several times in this section, especially in “Rosa,” in which they attempt heal a man who attempted suicide even though he will subsequently be court-martialed and killed, “Conspiracy,” in which they “mend” soldiers and send them back to the front repeatedly until they finally die and “conspire against his right to die” by performing surgeries (80), and in “In the Operating Room,” in which surgeons ignore and dehumanize patients. How do you think Borden perceives her job, and how does she resist or conform to it?
2. In “Paraphernalia,” Borden uses the second person, speaking to an unclear “you.” Who do you think she is addressing, and to what effect? How does she perceive this “you” character?
3. In these stories, Borden often uses animal imagery. The soldier in “Rosa” is compared to an ox, beast, and dog (63-66, 69), Borden refers to a possible new race of men having hatched “like newts, slugs, larvae of water beetles” in “The City in the Desert” (74-75), a patient is called an “animal” in “In the Operating Room” (86), and in “Conspiracy,” Borden feeds a “helpless” soldier to “fatten him up,” which is language that suggests a helpless animal fattened for slaughter (81). What is the purpose of this imagery, and what effect does it have?
1. I find Borden’s perspective on her job interesting, because I feel like it’s the first time we’re seeing a thorough disdain for attempting to save a life. We’ve talked a lot about death being seen as a release for those who just cannot go on anymore, and I feel like Borden absolutely feels the same way. In “Conspiracy”, she very clearly alludes to the fact that she does not feel the nurses and doctors are doing the right thing for the man. She uses words like “experiment” to refer to what the doctors are doing to show that she believes, at times, it’s better to let a person die, as messed up as that sounds. I would say that Borden doesn’t exactly have the highest opinion of her job, and she resists it by letting the man die in “Rosa”, and I would argue by writing this book, even if it was after the fact
I agree with your analysis of Borden’s perspective on her job, she does not feel like she is making a positive impact. I find the way she writes about the soldiers interesting. The stories, particularly in this second part have a tone of guilt whenever her job is involved. Where some nurses, like Nellie, feel anger towards the politicians or the upperclass civilians at home, they do not feel they are playing a role in the “conspiracy.” They treat the soldiers with pity and like children, but seem to feel more powerless and less responsible for their fate. Borden, however, feels like a participant in the conspiracy. The passage on page 81 “He is only one among thousands. They are all the same. They all let us do with them what we like. They all smile as if they were grateful..Indeed, in their helplessness they do the best they can to help us get them ready to go back again(81)” is a strong indication for how terrible she feels about what she does everyday.
1-Borden does express distain and criticism for her work but she seems to understand the necessity of everything she must do. Borden tells us in “Rosa” – “But what was the good of arguing against army regulations? We were at war (69).” And also in “Conspiracy” – “we combat with Death, his savior. It is our business to do this (80).”
2-In “Paraphernalia” Mary Borden is expressing the difficulty a nurse (or caregiver) has at being objective. It is her way of saying that she must almost “step outside of herself” in order to give the best care to her patient. The “you” in this short segment is Mary herself.
3-This animal imagery seems to be Borden’s way of showing us how the men are dehumanized by the war. Animals are helpless against the greater power of human intellect just as the men are helpless against the greater power of the war. Also, the sick and wounded men are considered “like beasts” because they are rendered helpless by their injuries and must accept their fate like “dumb animals” that have no will of their own.
Question 3:
I read the animal imagery in the same way Bonnie did as I saw it as a way to dehumanize the soldiers. This dehumanization, of course, is caused by war itself as it causes the men to lose their souls. Another way Borden does this is in the story titled “In the Operating Room”. In this story, Borden describes the men by their injuries. Instead of just saying some new men arrived they are categorized by their injuries which furthers Borden’s purpose of illustrating how war dehumanizes men.
1) I found the story “Rosa” to be one of the most impactful out of all of Borden’s stories we have read so far (to me personally). It is very raw and it shows how Borden views her job not too high but I think she also feels an immense amount of hopelessness. I feel like she sticks out in her opinion of wanting to let the man die rather than letting him be court-martialed and killed. This is how she resists conforming to these ideas of the laws the Army has. She also comes off to me as very innocent at the beginning of this story not fully understanding at first what happened to the man. I feel like what happened in “Rosa” has really changed her as a person and her views on her job.
1. We see Borden second guess her profession several times throughout her story. Second guess as in, trying to decipher the true meaning behind what she is doing in mending these broken boys and men just to send them back to slaughter. I think letting this man die is her resisting her job. She does not see the logic in healing a man just to have him shot and made an example of for attempting suicide. She is an incredibly logical person. She conforms to the war by healing as many of the men as possible and sending them back to the front. She knows that is takes men to win a war and I think she also knows that there is still hope that they could live through the war. But healing a man to be directly killed again? That’s illogical to her. After spending so much time as a nurse she is left with little room to be emotional, logic is the only way she is staying sane.
I think the animal imagery only furthers the dehumanization process of these men along with the desensitization that the nurses and doctors go through after watching so many people die or get severely injured. Both sides of the war, support and fighters, enemy and good guys, they all are suffering and becoming machines or, in this case, animals. There is a level of savagery needed to kill another human and there is a level of inhuman indifference to treat a person in pain with zero empathy. I think the real perspectives of the war and toward the people are effectively relayed through the use of this imagery. It is truly tragic and quite unnerving when you really look at it.