A fetish object takes on a distinct, almost superstitious power and is often associated with sexual gratification, desire, and adoration. As explained in “Sexualization in the Media,” “Fetishism marks a cultural, psychological, and social technique of fetishizing things by making them appear larger than life, animated, or sexually desirable.” It is argued that this process has profoundly influenced Pietz states that the problem-idea of ​​the fetish “was born within and remains specific to a particular type of intercultural experience which engaged European consciousness for the first time in ongoing situations on the coast of West Africa after the 15th century”. With this in mind, fetishization within popular communication draws on these cultural associations to create associative connections for products, brands, and organizations. Fetishization, as used in The Conjuring Stories by Charles Chestutt, encompasses these concepts, but also refers to a broader cultural process of. fetishizing objects through communicative technologies; particularly in the short story Sis Becky Pickaninny, Chesnutt illustrates the essential stages of fetishization and the effect it has on a person. Say no to plagiarism. Get a custom essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't". 't Be Banned'? Get an original essayTo paraphrase Jane Bennett, it is assumed and common to think of objects as passive, stable things and of human beings as active subjects in the world. However Bennett aims to dissolve this binary between subject and object his work Vibrant Matter Through his work he discusses and shows how maggots, a dead mouse or a sample of gunshot residue can all be "actants" and how they have the ability to "animate, act, produce dramatic and subtle effects," similar to the effect a fetishized object has on a person. This meaning objects are alive thanks to their ability to make a difference in the world, to have effects, to shape the network of interrelations of which they are part. This is the same effect that Julius "lucky rabbit's foot" has in the novel. Even though Julius' story had no relevance to the real rabbit's foot, he is able to state the moral, that if Sister Becky had possessed a rabbit's foot to ward off evil, she would not have seen her husband and son sold off by her . This is a great example of Bennett's statement, because it shows how much power Julius puts into a held object. It is assumed that humans are responsible and that objects and materials are simply used, transformed or set in motion by us. By emphasizing our dense interconnections and interdependencies, Bennett challenges this idea of ​​human-centered agency in the world, and with Julius' rabbit-foot fetish the idea is put to rest. At the end of Julius' tale, Annie's health begins to improve that same day, and several weeks later John finds Uncle Julius' rabbit's foot among her things. With this Annie allowed an object to make psychological, mental and physical changes within her body. She is now convinced that an object affects her health and luck, or she has fetishized the rabbit's foot, believing it brings good luck. William Pietz in “The Problem of the Fetish, I” describes the characteristics of the fetish in his work and, similar to Bennett's belief that humans allow connections that are made with objects to turn into fetishes, manages to show how Julius may have been able to turn a rabbit's foot into a "fetish" for Annie. The first characteristic is "the recognition that the object embodies the truth", or as Julius stated that if SisHad Becky had a lucky rabbit's foot, there would have been no problem. This "proof", along with the fact that nothing bad happened to Julius while he had a rabbit's foot is something that cannot be disproved by Annie, so she must believe that the rabbit's foot is real. Annie trusts this part of the stories and the belief that rabbit's feet in general give good luck. This is further explained through Walter Benjamin's work “The Language of Things”, where he states “It is therefore at once obvious that the mental entity which communicates itself in language is not language itself but something to be distinguished from it. The mental essence of a thing consists precisely in its language: this vision, taken as a hypothesis, is the great abyss into which all linguistic theory risks falling." For Benjamin's beliefs, the mental essence of the rabbit's foot is luck, although the foot cannot communicate this itself. This "himself" is a mental entity then switched to Annie and Julius who is lucky and helps with his luck. The second characteristic is "a fixed power to repeat an original event and order." through Annie's sudden recovery of health Although Annie has progressively improved during her time in Patesville, without the rabbit's foot, her recent fetish for the object allows her to acclaim her recent recovery of the object. It is through the belief that because nothing harmful happened to Julius while he had the foot and technically the same is happening to Annie, she is able to feed into the fetish created by the rabbit foot and its origins. This is similar to the third characteristic which is “the social value of things”. As said by Bill Ellis in “Why is a Lucky Rabbit's Paw Lucky? Body parts and fetishes” The origin of the rabbit's foot and its superstitions “This belief was once considered a southern superstition, specifically of strictly African-American origin. Some characteristics also suggest a distant affinity with Voodoo, or serpent worship, a cult that seems to have originated in tropical America. It was only the rabbit's left hind leg that was considered lucky and the bearer had to rub it to activate the luck. Furthermore, the rabbit's foot was believed to be a source of protective magic as well as a bringer of good luck...” This means that the rabbit's foot superstition dates back hundreds of years and has gained social value ever since. Furthermore, although not mentioned in history, the social value of the rabbit's foot has always been good luck, similar to that of the four-leaf clover or rainbows. It can be assumed that perhaps Annie has heard about the power of the rabbit's foot before. Giulio introduction of the object. However, she may not have fallen victim to the fetishism of this object until it was introduced by Julius. This ties into the final characteristic, which is a “personal connection with the object so that the personality is inseparable from the object.” John finds the rabbit's foot two weeks later among Annie's things, proving that she has been with and held rabbits for days after her introduction to the object. Comparable to how Julius kept his foot with him, Annie is following the same. In Vibrant Matters Bennett says: “while the smallest or simplest body or part may indeed express a vital impulse, a conatus or a clinamen, an actant never truly acts on its own. Its effectiveness or action always depends on the collaboration, cooperation or interactive interference of many bodies and forces.” This means that human and non-human elements are always capable of influencing the bevy of processes of which they are a part. This can include a new phone, clothes, abelief system, a dance, or, in Annie's case, keeping a dead rabbit's foot among her things. One might argue that Annie and Julius might not fetishize the rabbit's foot, but they might like the idea of ​​the rabbit's foot. luck that can bring, or that the two fail to establish a connection with an appendage or thing. This would be the case if Julius were thinking about the rabbit's foot of Bennett's ideology. Bennett's theory is that people should rethink "objects" as (lively) "things", unlike Annie and Julius, who see it as an object of magic, energy and expected prosperity, rather an appendage of a rabbit died. Flore Chevaillier talks about it in her work, "Reading Pierre Bourdieu after William Pietz a", a fetish is usually worn on the body and is used to achieve tangible effects, such as healing, on or for the user. The fetish acts on the body and shares a phenomenological relationship with the wearer. If Annie were to internalize the rabbit's foot as a real thing, feelings of empathy and disgust would emerge about her fetish. It is from Bennett's proposal that she makes humans and objects essentially the same, so Annie and Julius would look at the rabbit's foot as if a rabbit could hold it as a good luck charm and it would be the same. This would complicate fetishization because Annie and Julius could no longer create a “personal connection with the object so that the personality is inseparable from the object. ,” thus discrediting Pietz's ultimate characteristic of a fetish. Creating a personal connection with an appendage or in Bennett's world with a real "thing" would mean that Annie or Julius would consider the rabbits' emotions as their own and even the foot of rabbits as if it could be their foot, thus disenchanting them by fetishizing rabbits foot or “thing”. Furthermore, it would complicate the belief that the rabbit's foot contains magic or can bring good luck it is a severed foot, one might hypothesize that a human foot brings good luck or that any “thing” can bring good luck Rather, Annie and Julius see the rabbit's foot as a powerful, tangible object that they can connect with, why not. it is a thing or just an idea. It is instead an object that they can use to bring good luck and/or to improve their life, as most objects do. This shows that Annie and Julius are so immersed in what is fetishized who don't realize that they are affected by it or that they are affecting something. Nothing acts alone and as Bennett continues: "Every action is always a transaction, and every act is but an initiative which gives birth to a cascade of legitimate and bastard offspring," Julius and Annie did not know they were adding to the fetish and to the power of the rabbit's foot and its "lucky powers". Nor do they realize that they are fetishizing this foot and allowing it to influence their lives and the lives of those who previously would not have believed in the rabbit foot. Pietz states that the social value of things is a characteristic of a fetish, and both Annie and Julius they feed off of this, not to mention Chesnutt as he also tells this story for others to read. John, however, doesn't feed into the rabbit foot fetish. , yet through his narrative the reader is able to see the formation of his power fetish. Because the novel is narrated through John, it is difficult to tell how much of Julius' apparent pleasure is based on John's stereotypical expectations, or how much is calculated. Julius's performance to get what he wants by exploiting John's expectations. However, through John's calculated view of the world, the reader can see exactly what Bennett's theory.