<snip>It's interesting that "feline" is usually used to
describe a
*female* character, while canine imagery is more often
applied to men
(ignoring "bitch" which has lost its original she-dog meaning
by now).
</snip>
Quite true, Ted. We humans tend to see feline as "female"
(maybe
because of the 'fe' prefix). Hence the term, cat fight used
for any
argument, violence included or not, between two women. Which
is in
itself interesting to me, as having raised many cats (I grew
up on a
farm), it was the male cat which was more agressive... the
tom cat being
the one to defend its territory from other invading toms
*and* in the
eating of its own offspring... which is something I have
never
understood. The female is only agressive (unless she is
Siamese, of
course) when there is a threat to her young. Why, then, do
we
stereotype in this fashion-- feline=female?
Getting back to the discussion of literature, I said once
that I am new
to this genre of writing and I am. The one thing I have
notice which
seems to hold the *few* (I stress few, although I hope to
read more as
time goes on) books I have read in common is the description
of people
in terms of animals. Cora and Frank are one example, yes.
Another
would be Carmen Sternwood from Chandler's "The Big Sleep."
She is
described as having sharp, pointing teeth-- not unlike those
of a cat, I
suppose, as well as having other animalistic qualities.
Carmen, those
who've read the book would know, had a history of mental
illness. I'm
wondering if there isn't something about these noir types of
books which
plays upon the animal imagery. Perhaps they fit together
because
animals are still a mystery to us in some ways, as are the
depths of the
human psyche?
Debbie Chilson
dlchilson@hotmail.com
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
#
# To unsubscribe, say "unsubscribe rara-avis" to
majordomo@icomm.ca.
# The web pages for the list are at http://www.vex.net/~buff/rara-avis/.