'Hello, I'm an Ellen Jamesian.'


First of all I think I should mention that I have not (yet) seen the film - I only read the book by John Irving (which is really great, by the way). Anyway, my question is both about the book and the film. The Ellen Jamesians, women who mutilate themselves by cutting out their tongues out of sympathy with the raped girl Ellen James, are portrayed very ironically in the novel. However, I have read some criticism about this and someone wrote that Garp just doesn't understand the motivations of these women: basically, he says they are stupid for mutilating themselves, but this critic said that Garp just couldn't grasp what a powerful sign it was to cut out your tonge as an illustration of womens' oppression. However, I think it is important to mention that Ellen James herself also condemns the Ellen Jamesians.
I would like to know what you think about this. Do you think Garp is right in condemning what these women do, or do you think these woman do the right thing to make their point?
Personally, I agree with Garp, but please don't let that bother you. If you have a different view on this I would very much like to hear it and discuss it. It would also be interesting if someone knows if the book and the film treat this issue in a different way.


Werd' ich zum Augenblicke sagen: Verweile doch, du bist so schön!

reply

[deleted]


I am a woman and I would NEVER mutilate myself to protest ... well, ANYTHING. How does this help at all? If I were Ellen James, I would also be horrified at this "women's club"!

reply

I also have only read the book, but I've heard that the film was excellent.

I agree with you. What happened to Ellen was a terrible thing and was done against her will. It is in a sense detracting from women's power to imitate the crime. It takes AWAY strength, in my opinion. That is, these women should be using their voices to speak out rather than alienating themselves from the rest of world. I can see how it might make sense to them, but this is a highly ineffective way to make a point about anything. They will most likely be dismissed as crazy people, rather than taken seriously.

Also it's very interesting to note how Ellen actually feels about it. I think this should be the most important factor. She is angry at the fact that she has become a pawn. She hates that she can't talk. So it makes her even angrier that other women have voluntarily done such a thing to themselves. I believe the "Ellen Jamesians" were misguided extremists who felt lonely and needed to band together in an obvious and irreversible way. We see the devastating effects of this choice directly in the demise of Pooh Percy.

reply

[deleted]

i totally agree!

reply

You mean these people actually exist? I thought it was part of the movie! It's a very sick thing to do. My God, no wonder Ellen James herself condemns what they do. No sane person would deliberately mutilate their own body no matter how much they empathise with a cause. It's horrible that any woman should go through what happened to Ellen, but if you're so outraged by it that you want to do something, how about volunteering at a rape crisis centre or campaigning for tougher punishments for convicted rapists. How the frigging hell is cutting out your own tongue going to help anything?!

I'm astounded!

reply

No madame_jay. The Ellen James society is a real band (now defunct), that named themselves after the idea from the book/movie. Other than that, there is no such group or person as described in the book/movie. More or less, this thread is a discussion of the moral values the characters in TWATG seem to have in regards to this part of the story. Kinda like a book club that gets together and reads a few chapters of a book and disects what they have read to gain a differnt perspective.

reply

I understand the statement that the members of the Ellen James Society are trying to make, but it seems that what they do would be affected by the fact that Ellen herself did not approve. You would think knowing she did not approve that they would at least re-think what they are doing and possibly consider some other form of protest. As for Garp's criticism of the group, I really don't think it's any of Garp's business; however, I think Garp feels it is his business because the women are involved with his mother, but on the most basic level, I don't think it is any of Garp's business. He ended up making his statement by writing the book called "Ellen", which, if memory serves in the movie, his publisher refused to publish, but beyond writing the book, Garp really had no right to bother these women.

reply

"You would think knowing she did not approve that they would at least re-think what they are doing and possibly consider some other form of protest."

I know this is obvious, but losing a tongue is pretty much irreversible...

But yes, I would hope that hearing her view would make them caution others from doing the same to themselves. I actually believe it's a disservice to Ellen James, since it only makes her feel more guilty and powerless than she already is.

And while I'm writing about it, I might as well say this too- Even if we didn't find out Ellen's stance, I still believe it's wrong and very ineffective. They aren't doing anything to help Ellen or themselves by cutting off their tongues. As someone else mentioned, there are other, much more active ways of trying to raise awareness.

reply

I don't know if someone has already addressed this. (i haven't read the book YET).
In the movie Garp and his mother are having a conversation and she shows him the letter and picture that Ellen sent her asking for her help in getting the Ellen Jamesian Group to stop hurting themselves.
He asks his mother to help and she says that she does when she speaks to the women at the house but it is really up to them.

I believe that is where he gets the idea to write the book having the same feelings about it. I understand the protest but not the self mutilation. I would never understand someone doing this if the Person it happend to begs for them to stop.

reply

[deleted]

I think it's important to appreciate that Garp, in the book, forever resents and is disgusted by the actions of the Ellen Jamesians, but that he eventually learns a greater sense of compassion to the fact that their actions are an expression of their damaged souls. One plot development from the book that was cut from the film *spoiler* was that the real Ellen James came to live with Garp and his family. As a result, he takes it even more personally than he already had. But he does regret taking such an angry stance and in fact writes a letter apologizing. As for Pooh, she was just nutty.
I think Irving wants us to agree with Garp, but share Jenny's sympathy for these poor souls.

To the person who thinks there are real Ellen Jamesians: No! The whole thing is fictional, satire of extremists.

reply

Thank you for filling me in on the elements from the book that were eliminated from the film. Obviously, I did not read the book.

reply