Here's to you, Mrs. Robinson: How prohibitions subjugate acquisitive mimesis to conflictual mimesis -- Mimetic Theory and Literary Study

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1], 2 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 19:42:53 04/06/08 Sun
Author: Hwaet!
Subject: Here's to you, Mrs. Robinson: How prohibitions subjugate acquisitive mimesis to conflictual mimesis

So I just watched The Graduate for the first time, and it is full of blurred distinctions, doubles, and rivalry. I�m interested in the role that prohibitions play in generating mimetic triangles. In the brilliant hotel room scene in which Ben Braddock (Dustin Hoffman) wants to talk �first� and Mrs. Robinson (Anne Bancroft) does not, Mrs. Robinson forbids Ben ever from taking out Elaine Robinson (Katherine Ross, Mrs. Robinson�s daughter). Ben asks why, Mrs. Robinson obviously is searching for an answer as her face wears an ambivalent expression. Ben volunteers, �It�s �cause I�m not good enough for her, am I, I�m good enough for you but not for her!� and Mrs. Robinson pauses before saying, �Yes, that�s right�.� I think her ambivalence and the long camera shots, though, make pretty clear that this isn�t why she prohibits Ben from dating Elaine. It�s because Mrs. Robinson and her daughter are too similar not to be rivals� etc etc.

I think we grazed the topic of prohibitions inciting desire at the end of last class, but this is a great practical demo. What interests me is that Ben knows about Elaine all along, but it is not until he is forbidden to go near her that he wants her. When Mrs. Robinson prohibits Ben from Elaine, she effectually claims Elaine as her own. Suddenly the object of Ben�s desire (Mrs. Robinson) becomes his model for his new desire for Elaine, a desire he doesn�t have until he is prohibited. The prohibition alerts Ben to how similar he is to Mrs. Robinson in the sense that both have access to Elaine.

Prohibitions cause acquisitive and conflictual mimesis to occur simultaneously. They also determine whether mimesis is acquisitive merely, or if it is acquisitive because it is first and foremost conflictual. Without prohibitions, it is possible that Ben would have come to desire Elaine just because other people do; this is merely acquisitive. But Mrs. Robinson�s prohibition causes rivalry, i.e., conflictual mimesis, and acquisitive mimesis is a by-product of the conflictual mimesis (even though they occur simultaneously).

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]