Ghosh 1

Budhaditya Ghosh

Independent Scholar

Understanding identity, psyche and class hierarchy through ‘Imagination’:

A critical reading of Barton’s “Going Places”.

Louise Braddock states that imagination and psychology influence each other (50-51). A

subject’s psyche plays a crucial role in determining its imagination. A.R. Barton’s short story

“Going Places” stands as a compelling example of this claim. Barton’s short narrative rarely

invites criticism in the academic arena but it is a rich narrative of a teenage girl with a

troubled mind, who prefers to inhabit the realm of imagination. The argument of the paper

focuses on class, gender, and kinship bonds and the inscape of Sophie’s mind that condition

her imagination.

The theoretical framework of the paper is based on Lacan’s ‘mirror stage’ and the

concept of ‘desire’. They are used to trace the functioning of Sophie’s imaginative faculty

and her admiration and subtle attraction towards her brother. It also points out the

psychological composition of Sophie that culminates to the point that she fails to distinguish

between reality and imagination. Secondly, the paper brings forth Juliet Mitchell argument of

psychoanalysis. Mitchell asserts that psychoanalysis is a medium that looks at women beyond

scientific and cultural parameters (xv-xxxxviii). Unlike Toril Moi, who in her 2004 essay

emphatically states that psychoanalysis needs to be independent of feminist theory (32),

Mitchell asserts that there needs to be an interaction between psychoanalysis and feminism.

Furthermore, Mitchell throws light on the role of family or kinship in determining the psyche

of a feminine subject (xv-xxxxviii).

Mitchell talks about the function of the mother in the psychology of a child and its

relevance to imagination. The paper tries to relate Mitchell’s claim with Sophie’s situation in
 Ghosh 2

the short story. Finally, the paper tries to elucidate the power of imagination in the act of

creation of a body. It also interrogates the authorial role in the ending of the short story.

Lastly, it employs the significance of the terms phallus and castration with regard to Sophie’s

imagination.

Mitchell in her 1966 essay “Women: The Longest Revolution” claims that the structures

of a family can be classified under “reproduction, the socialization of children, the sexuality

of the couple - and a fourth - the overall social economy - within which the first three were all

embedded” (xviii). In the narrative, the heteronormative familial space consists of Sophie’s

father, mother and her two siblings. Sophie’s father struggles to earn the bread and butter of

the family. However, his earnings are not sufficient to sustain his family’s living. He tells

Sophie at the beginning of the story, “Huh- if you ever come into money you’ll buy us a

blessed decent house to live in, thank you very much” (Barton 51). Sophie’s mother manages

the domestic affairs and her elder brother, Geoff is an “apprentice mechanic” (51). Sophie is

a student pursues school and the youngest of them, Derek, is a child. The low income in the

family showcases the economic crisis that affects Sophie’s psyche, and as a result, her

imagination. The later part of the paper discusses the significance of space with relevance to

Sophie’s psyche.

Mitchell in her “Introduction” to Psychoanalysis and Feminism accentuates the

significance of a mother in an individual’s life. She claims that the mother is the origin of

fantasy for a child. In “Going Places”, the stooping figure of her mother and the “delicate

bow” (51) that fastens her to the domesticity of the house strangles Sophie. The overburdened

mother figure plays a vital role in Sophie’s imagination by instilling in her desire someone “a

bit sophisticated” (51). Sophie does not dream to be like her mother, she fabricates different

identities suitable for herself. Although Mitchell says that a daughter inherits the role of her
 Ghosh 3

mother, Sophie imagines going to different places like her elder brother, Geoff, which the

paper discusses later.

The story commences with a conversation between Sophie and her friend Jansie. From

the onset of the story, the narrator portrays Sophie as a teenage girl with a capricious

imagination, and Jansie as a pragmatist. In their conversation, Sophie constantly mentions

about her imaginative identities, such as, Mary Quant, to her, - friend, Jansie, who tries to

pull her back to the disenchanted reality. The narrator shows that a teenage girl who is

“earmarked for the biscuit factory” (51) never fails to dream of a position which is higher

than her social status. Since Sophie belongs from a lower class background, her imagination

ridicules the class hierarchy.

In his 1949 lecture in Zurich, Lacan formulates the concept of ‘mirror stage’ as an

important phase in an infant’s life. He states that when a child starts is between six to

eighteen months of age it begins to recognise its image in the mirror. During an infant’s

eighteenth month or afterward, it undergoes “libidinal dynamism” (Lacan 76) and the

“imago” (76) starts to break itself in the consciousness of the child. Erstwhile, the child

considers itself to be a “gestalt”. (78) After it sees its reflection in the mirror, the subject loses

the idea of wholeness and the new idea develops through language. The image that a child

sees in the mirror becomes the “I”. (76) After watching its reflection in the mirror, the child

begins to come to terms with it and later begins to accept it.

Lacan theorises that the mirror stage serves as an integral part of the process of child

development. When a child sees itself in a mirror it begins to rationalise the material world.

Furthermore, Lacan points out, a child observes its first image in the mirror before it learns

language or conforms to societal identities; hence the entire process is special for the infant.

Lacan terms this ‘I’ that the child discovers within itself as the “Ideal-I” (76). Therefore, the

“Ideal-I” (76) is an imaginary image that appears to be a real picture in the child’s psyche.
 Ghosh 4

In the short story, Barton vividly describes the space of the room in Sophie’s house “The

evening had already blackened in the windows and the small room was steamy from the stove

and cluttered with the heavy breathing man in his vest at the table and the dirty washing piled

up in the corner. Sophie felt a tightening in her throat” (51). This description details a

claustrophobic space that signifies not only her class but also the disenchanted reality that

chokes her. Lacan points out, as an infant grows up, it accepts the social determinants that

shape the subjectivity of the individual. In the case of Sophie, the mirror apparatus creates a

conflict between her “idealised-I” (76) and her real subjectivity. Her mirage image showcases

her idealised version of herself, someone “sophisticated” (Barton 51). However, she is aware

that her real identity belongs to a lower-class background, which is socially inferior and does

not synchronise with her idealised image.

Along with the class problems, the claustrophobic space also becomes a source of

Sophie’s imagination. Within the space of imagination she can dwell freely according to her

preferential identities. The boundary of the imagination is not unconfined; it helps her dwell

this space in the identities according to her preference. Hence, at the beginning of the story,

Sophie imagines herself to be a boutique owner and then she imagines herself to be an actress

and also a fashion designer. These multiple imaginative identities portray the financial lack in

her life. Sophie’s social identity does not co-ordinate with her ego and “idealised-I” (76), and

creates a rift in her mind. Through the mirror apparatus, Lacan asserts that an individual

accepts the social identities which are imaginary whereas, the real subject is the self that gets

veiled by the imaginary identities. In agreement with Lacan, Sophie’s idealised image of

becoming someone “sophisticated” (51) becomes her real identity and she tends to

disapprove of the imaginary identity that the reality offers her.

According to Lacan, desire is a continuum, as it signifies the impossibility of achieving

the want of an individual and the need of recognition from the Other/other. Lacan
 Ghosh 5

conceptualises ‘The Other’ as a form of language. Since birth, an infant subsumes language

organically. As a child grows up, he is taught language by his parents, who in return are

taught by their parents. Hence language is a pre-existing structure that a child cannot control

but follow. Lacan emphatically states that humans presume themselves to be active agents in

employing language, but actually, it is language that is an active agent and humans are

passive recipients. Thereby, Lacan says that the unconscious is structured like language,

Nobody has any authority over language. With development, the child learns to create a

difference between the Other and other. The other resembles the social subjects with whom

an individual interacts.

Geoff ventures into the unknown territories and that makes Sophie curious. She wants to

step into Geoff’s world, the urban life and the unknown territories that are beyond her reach.

Geoff and her concept of spaces act as the Other, as Lacan writes that the Other is the

language that asserts control over the subject. Geoff becomes an embodiment of language on

whom Sophie has no control. Geoff’s reserved nature exerts a dominance over Sophie which

is beyond her control. Geoff becomes the path for Sophie’s entry into the concealed lands, as

he can take her to those places full of “interesting, exotic” (52) people. Thus, Sophie’s

unfulfilled desire of going to places which she imagines to be full of adventure activates her

imagination. She imagines entering “the vast world out there waiting for her and she knows

instinctively that she would feel as at home there as in the city which had always been her

home. It expectantly awaited her arrival” (52). Therefore, Sophie’s imagination fulfils the

desires that she cannot satisfy in the real world; it also suggests that imagination acts as an

escape for Sophie from the disenchanted reality.

Sophie desires to win her “brother’s affection” (52) in order to venture out into the urban

landscape. She imagines that she rides with Geoff who “… wore new, shining black leathers

and she a yellow dress with a kind of cape that flew out behind. There was the sound of
 Ghosh 6

applause as the world rose to greet them” (52). Geoff hero-worships Danny Casey, who is a

popular Irish footballer. Since Sophie is aware of Geoff’s excessive admiration for Danny

Casey, she fabricates a story about having met Casey in the arcade. When Geoff asks her

about Casey’s appearance, she describes him from her power of imagination and the image of

Casey she sees from photographs in her brother’s room. As Geoff narrates this story to their

father, he casts a look of “disdain” (53) at Sophie but as he converses about Casey’s career in

football, Sophie says that “he is going to buy a shop” (53). This angers her father and he says

that Sophie’s “wild stories” (53) will land her in trouble. When Sophie notices that her

brother believes in her story, as he supports her in front of their father, her imagination gains

power and she narrates that Casey will meet her again next week. She invents a sequel to her

fancy story within the blink of an eye.

Sophie narrates her invented story to Geoff. In this tale, Sophie comes across Casey, they

talk and she asks for an autograph for her younger brother, Derek. However, neither of them

carries any “paper or pen” (54) and Casey asks her to meet for a second time for an

autograph. Sophie pretends that Casey is showing interest in her, in order to arrest her

brother’s attention and nourish his belief in her imaginary story. Sophie wants her brother “to

pay more attention to his appearance” (54) and care more about his fashion sense as he has “a

strong, dark face” (54). This is a clear portrayal of Sophie’s attraction or admiration for her

brother. As Lacan mentions, the desire of a subject is the desire of the Other. When Sophie

realises her brother’s desire for Danny Casey, she begins to desire Danny Casey to fulfil her

desire for her brother. In other words, if Sophie’s desire is plotted graphically, the line of

desire with subject to Sophie, if the desire is given a graphical representation, then from the

line of desire for Geoff originates another line of desire for Danny Casey to a different

direction.
 Ghosh 7

As the plot progresses- Sophie’s tale circulates in her neighbourhood and Jansie asks her

about it. Sophie is unhappy with Jansie knowing her fabricated story as she considers it to be

a “Geoff thing” (55), meant only for his ears. It needs to be taken into account that Sophie’s

imagination varies accordingly; in front of Jansie her imaginative identity is of someone

popular because Jansie is the pragmatic between the two. On the other hand, in front of

Geoff, she presents herself as a girl whom Casey desires. Sophie’s imaginative power

strengthens with her brother and friend’s belief in it. She walks “…by the canal, along a

sheltered path lighted by the glare of lamps from the wharf across water” (56). The wooden

bench under the elm tree makes the place romantic in Sophie's eyes and she sits on it. After

she sits, she imagines that Casey comes to meet her and pictures her excitement. Here, her

imaginative identity takes control of reality, and there is disharmony between her imaginative

identity and the real subject. Hence her psyche produces visions to satisfy the real subject.

Along with Geoff and Jansie, Sophie starts to assert belief in her own narrative. The

situation gets further complicated when Sophie waits for Casey’s arrival at a spot designated

for lovers and realises that her power of imagination gets defeated by reality. This triggers

Sophie’s “idealised-I” (76) to demolish the wall that separates reality and imagination.

Sophie falls into despair when she realises that she needs to answer her friend and elder

brother. More importantly, she thinks of Geoff’s reaction when he would get to know about

Danny Casey not meeting her. The failure in satisfying her desires lead to Sophie struggling

with the boundaries of reality. Henceforth, the bridge that connects imagination and reality

gets broken by Sophie’s “idealised-I” (76). Later, Sophie pictures Danny Casey standing at a

shopping mall complex and she engages in a conversation with him.

Sophie’s imagination in the episode mentioned becomes an ingredient in creation of the

body. Her imagination and desire propagate her mental faculty to create the body of Danny

Casey. It is intriguing to note that his body becomes a paradox as it is visible only to Sophie.
 Ghosh 8

To a certain degree, Sophie mirrors the role of God in The Bible, who creates his own son’s

body through the power of logos. In the verses of The Bible, God creates the man, Adam “in

his own image” (King James Version, Gen. 1.27). The word ‘image’ is suggestive of God’s

imagination and desire for the act in creating of a new man. Therefore, the only difference

between God and Sophie’s creation of a body is visibility.

Mitchell points out that Lacan symbolises the phallus as crisis. The absence of the phallus

in women marks it as the primary signifier that begins the play of language (xxvi). Earlier,

Mitchell in her work mentions that the phallus is an object of exchange. With respect to

Sophie, her financial crisis acts as a phallus and an absent object of exchange. The lack of the

phallus along with her gender makes her doubly castrated, both anatomically and

psychoanalytically. The term that the paper would like to apply is class castration. This

castration triggers her imagination and allows her to inhabit an imaginary world of her own

making.

In this story about a tussle between reality and imagination, the narrator deliberately

attempts to keep the ending very realistic. Casey scores a goal and the audience cheers for

him. There are a series of questions that the paper asks as an afterlife to a text. After returning

home, how did Sophie encounter Geoff? Did Sophie continue picturing Casey due to the

disruption in the path between imagination and reality? After the Casey episode, how did she

come across Jansie? How many “wild stories” does Sophie fabricate in order to showcase her

sophistication and over-ambitious dreams?

Descartes uses the phrase “Cogito Ergo Sum” in In Discourse on the Method. The paper

borrows the idea of the phrase and reconstructs it as “I imagine, therefore I am”. Sophie

stands to be a powerful example for this phrase. Her psyche creates identities that she cannot

achieve in the real world. The paper implies that the concept of imagination acts as an anti-

border and anti-hierarchy. ‘Imagination’ acts as an overreacher that can transcend class, caste
 Ghosh 9

and gender. Therefore, Sophie’s imaginative identities as Mary Quant, a fashion designer, or

the girl whom Casey desires to meet again, are identities that allow her to rebel against the

politics of class, space and identity even if it is in her mind. In the story, imagination becomes

a critique of the psychological debilities that Sophie undergoes.

 Ghosh 10

Work cited:

Barton, A.R.. “Going Places”. Hues: An Anthology of Short Stories, edited by Anupam

Banerjee, et al, Macmillian Publishing India, 2009, pp. 50-58.

Braddock, Louise. “Psychological Identification, Imagination And Psychoanalysis”.

Philosophical Psychology, vol 24, no. 5, 2011, pp. 639-657. Informa UK Limited,

doi:10.1080/09515089.2011.559619. Accessed 19 July 2019.

Descartes René. Descartes: Discourse on Method and the Meditations. CreateSpace, 2009.

King James Bible. Thomas Nelson, 1970.

Lacan, Jacques, and Bruce Fink. “The Mirror Stage as Formative of the / Function as

Revealed in Psychoanalytic Experience” É crits. W.W. Norton, 2007, pp. 92-98.

Mitchell, Juliet. “Introduction”. Psychoanalysis and Feminism, New York, 2000, pp. xv-

xxxxviii.

Moi, Toril. “From Femininity To Finitude: Freud, Lacan, And Feminism, Again”. Signs:

Journal Of Women In Culture And Society, vol 29, no. 3, 2004, pp. 841-878.

University Of Chicago Press, doi:10.1086/380630. Accessed 15 July 2019.

Ghosh 11