Susanna Kaysen is the writer of Girl Interrupted. her memoirs that explore a biennial period that she spent as a patient in a mental establishment for immature adult females. Split into three subdivisions. head versus encephalon. the clinical definition of a marginal personality upset. and her diagnosing. her memoirs service as an statement against her clinical diagnosing. In “Mind vs. Brain” we are given a layman’s debut to psychological science. Kaysen. through the usage of assorted composing techniques. explains to the mean reader what psychological science is. Then. as a foreword to her chief statement. we are shown the different facets of a marginal personality upset and how one is diagnosed. Along with this scientific methodological analysis. Kaysen infuses her ain ideas and sentiments. And eventually. she presents us with her statement where she explores her life as a immature adult female ; how conformance and period sex functions landed her in a mental establishment.
She revisits her friends and the events that occurred over 20 old ages ago while she was a member of the establishment. Through her geographic expedition. we the reader get to cognize her better by understanding the positions and beliefs of the times and her personal battle against conformance. Battling the function of adult females in society. Kaysen exemplifies the authoritative supporter. She tells her narrative to revisit a yesteryear that she has locked off. and to educate utilizing her life and experiences as a fresh illustration. By using the literary techniques of definition. narrative. and nonliteral linguistic communication. Kaysen employs a alone authorship manner. the merger of these persuasive techniques. to entice the reader in and maintain them desiring more.
There is a broad assortment of nonliteral linguistic communication employed throughout this piece that is indispensable to the effectivity of Kaysen’s composing. The most noteworthy application of nonliteral linguistic communication employed by Kaysen is seen in her debut. the geographic expedition of the head and encephalon. “I’m you’re head. you can’t parse me into dendrites and synapses” ( 269 ) . And with this statement. Kaysen personifies the human head. Having a life external respiration personality. the reader is able to pull a image of it and see in a brighter visible radiation what she is explicating. She expands on this. explicating the interaction in the encephalon being that of two translators. one newsman and one intelligence analyst. She turns the head into a aggregation of conversations alternatively of a ball of grey affair. While this construct of grey affair is touchable. our heads can hold on the thought of invariably combating translators. She continues by supplying the reader with a theoretical account of the conversation that occurs in the human head.
Interpreter One: There’s a tiger in the corner.
Interpreter Two: No. that’s non a tiger – that’s a agency.
Interpreter One: It’s a tiger. it’s a tiger!
Interpreter Two: Don’t be pathetic. Let’s go expression at it.
( 270 )
The duologue acts as a short drama that the reader can move out in his/her head. By making this metaphor. Kaysen is able to portray to the reader what many psychological science text editions frequently fail at making ; She explains how the head works on a simple degree. She so juxtaposes this healthy theoretical account with one that is afflicted by mental unwellness. Simply. the reader learns what separates a healthy head from an sick one. This attack to patterning the encephalon is effectual because she stretches out her initial thesis on the head to cross her treatment of the head and encephalon. It is effectual because she doesn’t get down her geographic expedition by scaling the extremums of Everest. She traverses the foothills foremost. returns to boosting. and so begins her acclivity of the mountain itself. Many scientific attacks to patterning the human head Begin at the top and measure its construction through dirt composing. clime. biodiversity. and more. But. Kaysen starts at the roots and crawls easy up through the subdivisions. doing certain non to leap or jump over any necessary parts.
Following. she deals with the function of psychoanalysts in the field. She compares their work to describing on a state they have ne’er visited. This decision to her initial thesis is rather effectual in summing up the information she presented on the head and encephalon. Basically. she explains that you can ne’er truly understand what is traveling on in the head of a mental patient without being in their places and sing it for yourself. “Psychoanalysts have been composing op-ed pieces about the workings of a state they’ve ne’er traveled to. ” ( 272 ) is how Kaysen puts it. One could construe her metaphor as indicating out that they are dissemblers. but it is more accurately a suggestion she puts Forth ; you can’t understand mental unwellness to the full without really holding been a member in its society. This is possibly why Kaysen is able to depict the head with such easiness. The linguistic communication and manner employed by Susanna Kaysen in this literary work plays a profound function in converting the reader of her beliefs.
Kaysen’s usage of definition in this piece gives the reader penetration to her life and has a profound impact on her statement. Possibly the most of import definition Kaysen applies throughout this paper is that of a marginal personality upset. The intent of this whole statement is to deconstruct the clinical definition by picking off at the invalid claims it cites. and turn outing her point ; she was falsely diagnosed. Her whole statement seesaws on the failure of the clinical definition to accurately sort a mental unwellness. Clinically. a marginal personality is classified by “a permeant form of instability of self-image. interpersonal relationships. and mood” ( 272 ) . She subsequently argues against this claim of instability explicating that this is what defines adolescents. Teenagers. harmonizing to Kaysen. are unsure of who they are and what their hereafters hold.
She besides explores the construct of an unhealthy self-image further. which is cardinal to the clinical diagnosing. “I saw myself. rather right. as unfit for the educational and societal system. But. [ others ] … image of me was unstable. since it was out of kelter with world. ” ( 277 ) World. as Kaysen implies it. is attachment to the function of a immature adult female. She was different. field and simple. Nowadays we classify different as good. We equate difference with individualism and everyone strives to be alone these yearss ; we are all seeking for that one thing that separates us from the remainder of the crowd.
Another facet of the clinical definition is a chronic sense of emptiness and ennui. Kaysen comes clean and admits to this but non without supplying a defence against it. She felt “desolation. desperation. and depression. ” ( 279 ) as a direct consequence of social force per unit areas. conformance. and being different. No 1 understood her and this merely perpetuated more feelings of purdah and isolation. This method of deconstruction is effectual because it structures her statement. Her intent is to supply a defence against this clinical definition. The reader. presented with a comprehensive and in-depth definition of the upset. is able to juxtapose clinical theory with personal world and see more clearly Kaysen’s point. This method is really effectual in carrying the reader and is frequently employed in statements to confute a belief or place. It allows her to flux easy from scientific discipline to personal experience and acts as a bond between the two. thereby doing her composing a remarkable entity.
Through the usage of narrations. the reader comprehends Kaysen’s place and is able to research her life in first individual. In the 3rd subdivision. where Kaysen discusses her diagnosing and clip at the infirmary. we explore her life through a personal narration. This subdivision is rather of import because it is where she begins to draw apart the clinical definition she cited in the old subdivision. We. the reader. acquire to see first manus what was traveling on in Kaysen’s head as a adolescent. She negotiations of her uncertainnesss. incapacities. wrist-banging. devastation and depression. self-image and much more. Her treatment of wrist-banging is one of the more memorable sketchs. She describes sitting on her butterfly chair in her room and take parting in this extracurricular activity. We learn from her narrative that these activities were non a consequence of self-deprecation. but more a consequence of inner hurting and isolation because she wasn’t like everyone else and people resented her for it.
Having no 1 to associate to. and no 1 to confide in. she was left by herself to constantly inquiry who and what she was. Bing a adolescent and non holding the replies to society’s inquiries. she could non assist but be led to such activities. This peculiar narrative is obliging because it arouses emotion in the reader and creates a sense of feeling and apprehension for her and the problem she has been put through. Some faultfinders would merely chalk this up to a calculated emotional entreaty of the writer. but Kaysen has established that “all [ she ] can make is give the specifics: an annotated diagnosing. ” ( 275 ) and leave the remainder up to our reading. We can be assured that Kaysen’s purpose in uncovering this activity serves no more purpose than stating her narrative.
She besides explains her incapacities. She “was populating a life based on [ them ] . ” ( 277 ) much like many other childs. We all are bogged down by what we can’t do. It depresses us and queer our patterned advance. It wasn’t her incapacities that stopped her. it was those around her. She didn’t provide “any sensible account for these refusals. ” and possibly that is why it drew so much attending. If she had told them why so possibly they could warrant her feelings. But non making so merely perpetuated inquiries and intuition. The reader can associate to this indecision because we have all experienced a clip in our lives when we merely didn’t attention about anything. The quintessential adolescent is characterized by a chronic indecision towards life. By researching this facet. Kaysen is able to pull the reader closer to her and makes this technique an effectual scheme in her statement.
Finally. in her narrative. she explores what clinicians call premature decease and her ain experience with Daisy’s decease. She admits that she had thought of decease. but “the thought of [ it ] worked on [ her ] like a cathartic. ” ( 279 ) and she ever came to the concluding decision that it would merely do things worse. Her ability to ground gives the reader more insight towards her diagnosing. She could ground between the two translators in her head. She could divide semblance from world and these abilities strongly emphasized her statement. The usage of Kaysen’s narrative in this piece plays an built-in function in converting the reader and is effectual in its intent. Without such a persuasive scheme. Kaysen’s instance would be ill constructed. and missing in support.
While Kaysen’s alone composing format infuses new thoughts into the reader’s head. I do profess that there are several cases where these manners have restrictions and even perpetuate a province of confusion in the reader. The chief job with Kaysen’s extremely nonliteral linguistic communication is that non everyone can follow or associate to it. This prevents those who can non do a connexion with her metaphors and analogies from understanding what she so articulately writes about. This is a common barrier faced by authors: to simplify or lucubrate. While simplifying clears your thoughts to all readers. it stifles your geographic expedition and sometimes prevents you from turn outing your point. Contrastingly. lucubrating on your simple statements can take to a clutter of confused ideas with no evident connexion.
One must be wary. One must sit the thin boundary line between the two and finally it is the determination of the author which path is proper. While Kaysen seesaws on the threshold of both. in the terminal she comes through and accomplishes her intent ; to show a battalion of premises against her clinical diagnosing. Without lucubrating in topographic points. the reader would be left outside her head unable to see her innermost ideas and experiences. It is Susanna Kaysen’s ability to chat up along this boundary line. above all others. that distinguishes her authorship technique and makes it effectual in back uping her statement.
In visible radiation of this support. Kaysen is able to derive acknowledgment from the reader. Possibly most profound is the emotion that her authorship induces. go forthing the reader in a province of contemplation and inquiring. and a province of compassion for her and her trials. The most effectual tool a author has is the ability to convey about emotion in the reader. This can be considered a basic demand of all art signifiers ; to advance an emotion that pushes the topic to reflect on the narrative laid before them and their lives. All good art accomplishes this on some degree and Girl Interrupted is no exclusion.