Billy Collins poem, I go back to the House for a Book looks at the art of decision making, and learning to just live life. Collins poem focuses on how people should learn to simplify their everyday lives and just go with the flow.
Collins writes, "But there is no catching him, no way to slow him down and put us back in sync, unless one day he decides to go back to the house for something"(39). Once you make a decision you have to stick with it, don't regret it or fret over it. What is done is done, and through this poem, Collins is trying to point out that you have to except the choices you make. If you don't, you could drive yourself crazy with "what ifs." Collins "I" character can not catch up with his ghost since he went back for the book, just like we can not take back a previous decision.
Also, the decision you make may make you better off in the long run. Even though the ghost figure is "three minutes ahead"(39), the "I" character, which we can assume is Collins, is better skilled in the love poems of Ovid. Ovid was a roman poet who wrote on the topics of love, abandoned woman, and mythological transformations. Collins proves to the reader that even though he gave some time in going back to the house, he was able to gain insight from the book he went back to grab. This emphasizes the point of expecting the decisions made, and not fretting over those lost.
What is interesting, is that Collins chooses to use the word fateful in describing his decision. Collin writes, "I who went back to the house that fateful winter morning and got the book"(40). The use of the word fateful simply ties into the idea of decisions changing the course of live. Even small, maybe insignificant choices alter the path the person is taking.
Through I go back to the House for a Book, Collins tries to display that life is quick, slow down and enjoy it. You will always be faced with decisions, and once you have made your choice stick with it. Do not bother yourself with regret or questioning, now that the decision is made and that is all that you can do about it.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Poetry Extended journal
I have never tried to write poetry before, in fact I have barely read poetry. I was very nervous in class when Ms. Mork told us we would have to write our own poem. But I took a shot at it, and it wasn't that bad. I decided to take a line out of Mary Oliver's poem, August. I tried to think of those perfect summer days, the days were you simple enjoy being outside as the backbone of my poem.
Summer Days
"When the blackberries hang swollen in the woods, in the brambles nobody owns"
(Oliver)
I lay sprawled out on the soft green grass,
watching the leaves of a giant oak
sway in the breeze.
The sun hangs lazy in the sky,
while white cotton candy clouds drift slowly across the mellow blue scene.
I close my eyes and hear
the soft chirps of tiny birds, jumping from tree to tree.
I lay sprawled out on the soft green grass,
with eyes closed, dozing into a light sleep.
Feeling perfectly content with the world.
Summer Days
"When the blackberries hang swollen in the woods, in the brambles nobody owns"
(Oliver)
I lay sprawled out on the soft green grass,
watching the leaves of a giant oak
sway in the breeze.
The sun hangs lazy in the sky,
while white cotton candy clouds drift slowly across the mellow blue scene.
I close my eyes and hear
the soft chirps of tiny birds, jumping from tree to tree.
I lay sprawled out on the soft green grass,
with eyes closed, dozing into a light sleep.
Feeling perfectly content with the world.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Plaingsong Extended Journal
I chose to research what plainsong actually was or meant. It is very prevalent throughout Haruf's novel, Plainsong. Haruf starts the novel off by saying, "Plainsong-the unisonous vocal music used in the Christian church form the earliest times;any simple and unadorned melody or air." This is important, because the essence of the novel is the simplistic, gentle lifestyle that the characters lead. Plainsong can also be described as, "A liturgical chant that is monophonic and has no measure, such as Gregorian chants." The quick reference for Musical styles defines plainsong as, "6th century single line vocal melody, still used in Roman Catholic ceremonies." Although there are many definitions out there, the common thread in all of them it is very simple and lacks structure. This theme ties in with Haruf's Plainsong. All of his characters, along with his writing style, are very simple and ordinary. After they begin to form a community, it is like different voices coming together to simply form a strong loving bond.
Poetry Reader Response
I have never been big into poetry, so reading Picnic, Lighting by Billy Collins as well as, American Primitive by Mary Oliver was a new experience for me as a reader. I was surprised to see how different the two poets were from each other. I found favorites in both books, as well as poems I could not quite understand.
Billy Collins was by far my favorite, I did not care for Mary Oliver. I felt that Collins poems seemed to flow more smoothly. They also read more like a story and I felt I could connect more with what Collins wrote about. I also liked for some poems the title blended right into the next verse. His poems seemed more dreamy, and focused on nature and the world. One of my favorites, was his last poem Aristotle, how it is written with focus on beginning, middle, and end was neat. I also loved when Collins wrote in What I Learned Today, "No matter what the size the aquarium of one's learning, another colored pebble can always be dropped in"(17). Collins poems dealt with life, and different journeys. Collins smooth writing style drew me in and helped me stay connected with the poem.
Mary Oliver, on the other hand, was much harder to read. Her writing was very short, and to the point. She seemed to use only what she need in her poems and kept the writing very staccato. Oliver's poems seemed more gloomy and dreary at times. Although, short lines of her poems often stuck out to me. I loved in Lighting when she wrote, "the landscape bulging forth like a quick lesson in creation, then thudding away"(7). My favorite poem would have to be the University hospital, Boston. It is both sad and beautiful at the same time, with a love story as its center. One of my favorite lines, taken from In Blackwater Woods, Oliver writes, "To live in this world you must be able to do three things: to love what is mortal; to hold it against your bones knowing your own life depends on it and, when the time comes to let it go, to let it go"(83). The poem is tragic, but it covers loving and leaving, and moving on.
Both books were, for the most part enjoyable reads. I am looking forward to discussing them in class, my knowledge about poetry is slim. I am looking forward to hearing others interpretations or meaning in the poems that I have missed.
Billy Collins was by far my favorite, I did not care for Mary Oliver. I felt that Collins poems seemed to flow more smoothly. They also read more like a story and I felt I could connect more with what Collins wrote about. I also liked for some poems the title blended right into the next verse. His poems seemed more dreamy, and focused on nature and the world. One of my favorites, was his last poem Aristotle, how it is written with focus on beginning, middle, and end was neat. I also loved when Collins wrote in What I Learned Today, "No matter what the size the aquarium of one's learning, another colored pebble can always be dropped in"(17). Collins poems dealt with life, and different journeys. Collins smooth writing style drew me in and helped me stay connected with the poem.
Mary Oliver, on the other hand, was much harder to read. Her writing was very short, and to the point. She seemed to use only what she need in her poems and kept the writing very staccato. Oliver's poems seemed more gloomy and dreary at times. Although, short lines of her poems often stuck out to me. I loved in Lighting when she wrote, "the landscape bulging forth like a quick lesson in creation, then thudding away"(7). My favorite poem would have to be the University hospital, Boston. It is both sad and beautiful at the same time, with a love story as its center. One of my favorite lines, taken from In Blackwater Woods, Oliver writes, "To live in this world you must be able to do three things: to love what is mortal; to hold it against your bones knowing your own life depends on it and, when the time comes to let it go, to let it go"(83). The poem is tragic, but it covers loving and leaving, and moving on.
Both books were, for the most part enjoyable reads. I am looking forward to discussing them in class, my knowledge about poetry is slim. I am looking forward to hearing others interpretations or meaning in the poems that I have missed.
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Persepolis Close Analysis
Losing one's innocence, is a common theme in many novels and movies. This theme is present in both Tim O'Brien's, The Things They Carried, and Marjane Satrapi's, "Persepolis." Both novels main characters who struggle with the lose of innocence are female. Mary Ann and Marjane are faced with situations that do not arise in normal childhood. Because of these incidents, each is changed and forced to grow up a little too fast.
Mary Jane is flown over to the Vietnam, during the Vietnam war to be with her boyfriend. When she arrives there, she is seen as a typical American girl. She is bubbly, and comes off as ditsy and completely unaware of what is going on around her. Mary Ann is described as, "she was seventeen years old, fresh out of Cleveland Heights Senior High. She had long white legs and blue eyes and a complexion like strawberry ice cream. Very friendly, too"(93). But after a couple weeks in Vietnam and being shown the true essence of war, Mary Ann grew curious and began to explore her surroundings. In time she completely lost that young girl trance, and frankly lost her innocence. She turned almost wild, and joined the Greenies, who were in charge of the extreme missions.
Marjane was very similar to Mary Jane but also very different. Marjane also grew up in a time of turmoil and war, the Islamic Revolution. Marjane rebels against the Shah's rules for women. She faced her lose of innocence when her friends apartment building is bombed and her friend is killed. Marjane describes the experiences, "No scream in the world could have relieved my suffering and my anger"(142). Also at the end of the novel, Marjane is shipped to Australia to escape the danger that living in Iran has brought. She turns back to see her parents, and she is forced to suddenly grow up in that one moment.
Both of these characters are viewed as strong femine roles in the novels they are present in. But that strength comes with a price, a end to being naive, a loss of childhood fun and innocence. Through terrible events these characters are forced to grow up way to fast and lose a part of themselves.
Mary Jane is flown over to the Vietnam, during the Vietnam war to be with her boyfriend. When she arrives there, she is seen as a typical American girl. She is bubbly, and comes off as ditsy and completely unaware of what is going on around her. Mary Ann is described as, "she was seventeen years old, fresh out of Cleveland Heights Senior High. She had long white legs and blue eyes and a complexion like strawberry ice cream. Very friendly, too"(93). But after a couple weeks in Vietnam and being shown the true essence of war, Mary Ann grew curious and began to explore her surroundings. In time she completely lost that young girl trance, and frankly lost her innocence. She turned almost wild, and joined the Greenies, who were in charge of the extreme missions.
Marjane was very similar to Mary Jane but also very different. Marjane also grew up in a time of turmoil and war, the Islamic Revolution. Marjane rebels against the Shah's rules for women. She faced her lose of innocence when her friends apartment building is bombed and her friend is killed. Marjane describes the experiences, "No scream in the world could have relieved my suffering and my anger"(142). Also at the end of the novel, Marjane is shipped to Australia to escape the danger that living in Iran has brought. She turns back to see her parents, and she is forced to suddenly grow up in that one moment.
Both of these characters are viewed as strong femine roles in the novels they are present in. But that strength comes with a price, a end to being naive, a loss of childhood fun and innocence. Through terrible events these characters are forced to grow up way to fast and lose a part of themselves.
Choice Book Reader Response
Plainsong, by Kent Haruf is a delicate, simple novel that reveals around life in the small town of Holt, Colorado. Although, this novel is not one of my favorites it is well written and offers a glimpse of life in a small town. Each new chapter is a different character story, and Haruf does an excellent job of connecting each one. This book focuses on loneliness, friendship, and hope.
The most heartwarming story in this novel involves the McPherons. These two brothers who never married, and simply stayed together and worked their farm are full of compassion and warmth. Raymond and Harold bring not only a kindness to the novel, but also a distinct sense of humor, that is followed by a complete lack of knowledge of teenage girls. Haruf writes"They wondered privately if all seventeen-year-old girl disappeared after eating supper"(132). After time passes, though, they begin to really care for the girl, the McPherons take it upon themselves to help this young girl out and protect her from harms way, whether that involves buying her a crib, harassing the doctor, or kicking out Dwayne.
On the opposite end, Ike and Bobby's story was the most heartbreaking. These boys are only nine and ten, yet their mother leaves them because she is mentally unstable. Their father is never around and when he is he often seems distant. Haruf writes, "...they were alone much of the time"(291).Everyone they grow close to seems to become ill or die. The two boys find strength in each other and learn to weather whatever comes, together.
This novel uses very simply language, the author uses much detail to describe the setting and place;but overall it was hard to adjust to the delicate use of language. Each new setting is described fully and clearly offers the reader a picture of the small town of Holt. Whether it be main street, a neighborhood, or the farms that lay on the outskirts of town, everything is well described and intriguing.
One thing I did notice that started to annoy me towards the end, is the author never uses quotation marks for dialogue. Sometimes the dialogue is in the middle of a paragraph, or sometimes it has its own paragraph,but no matter what Haruf never use quotations. At times, this makes it very difficult to distinguish when someone is talking and whom is talking.
Although this novel was some what slow in plot development, the characters help to pull the reader in and feel more attached to the novel. Along with wonderful set descriptions, Plainsong, is a straightforward novel depicting life in a small town.
The most heartwarming story in this novel involves the McPherons. These two brothers who never married, and simply stayed together and worked their farm are full of compassion and warmth. Raymond and Harold bring not only a kindness to the novel, but also a distinct sense of humor, that is followed by a complete lack of knowledge of teenage girls. Haruf writes"They wondered privately if all seventeen-year-old girl disappeared after eating supper"(132). After time passes, though, they begin to really care for the girl, the McPherons take it upon themselves to help this young girl out and protect her from harms way, whether that involves buying her a crib, harassing the doctor, or kicking out Dwayne.
On the opposite end, Ike and Bobby's story was the most heartbreaking. These boys are only nine and ten, yet their mother leaves them because she is mentally unstable. Their father is never around and when he is he often seems distant. Haruf writes, "...they were alone much of the time"(291).Everyone they grow close to seems to become ill or die. The two boys find strength in each other and learn to weather whatever comes, together.
This novel uses very simply language, the author uses much detail to describe the setting and place;but overall it was hard to adjust to the delicate use of language. Each new setting is described fully and clearly offers the reader a picture of the small town of Holt. Whether it be main street, a neighborhood, or the farms that lay on the outskirts of town, everything is well described and intriguing.
One thing I did notice that started to annoy me towards the end, is the author never uses quotation marks for dialogue. Sometimes the dialogue is in the middle of a paragraph, or sometimes it has its own paragraph,but no matter what Haruf never use quotations. At times, this makes it very difficult to distinguish when someone is talking and whom is talking.
Although this novel was some what slow in plot development, the characters help to pull the reader in and feel more attached to the novel. Along with wonderful set descriptions, Plainsong, is a straightforward novel depicting life in a small town.
Persepolis Extended Journal
I am making a poster with information about Persepolis, the movie and the author's role in the movie. I will present it in class on tuesday.
Monday, April 23, 2007
Persepolis Reader Response
I have never read a graphic novel before, and was surprised to find out that I really enjoy it. Persepolis, by Marjane Satrapi, is a story that brings together different pieces of the author's childhood. The novel takes place during the Islamic Revolution in Iran, between the years of 1979 and 1983. From Satrapi's story, the reader gets a glimpse of what growing up was like in a time of confusion and revolt. Although I thought this was an excellent book, which opened my eyes to a new genre, at times I felt that I was unable to connect with the text because I am not very familiar with the Middle East and its history.
One thing that caught my attention was the information given dealing with the social classes. In Iran it was forbidden to marry outside your social class. When Satrapi's maid falls in love with the neighbors son, she doesn't see anything wrong with it. Although, after Satrapi's father finds out he tries to explain to her "that their love was impossible"(37), in their country people must "stay within [their] own social class"(37). I know that social classes are present wherever you go, yet this novel sheds light on the extreme split between classes in some cultures, it opened my eyes to how divided a nation can be. After thinking about this, Satrapi states, "The reason for my shame and for the revolution is the same: The difference between social classes."(33). Through this quote, the author reveals how social classes can split a nation.
Another thing that I found interesting was the depiction of some of the characters unrealistic views of the revolution. While walking down the street Satrapi's family had a conversation with their neighbors about the revolution. The neighbor pointed to his wife's cheek and stated, "a bullet almost hit my wife's cheek, liberty is priceless"(44). When in contrast she always had that marking, she only wanted to feel like part of the action. It is interesting because when things seem to be progressing or doing well, everyone wants to say they had some part in it. It also shows how easy people are pressures or persuaded to believe a certain thing, or take a certain stance.
This novel brought up many difficult issues, and the Islamic Revolution is not something to be taken lightly, yet Satrapi does a great job of weaving humor in just the right places, which keep the flow light and easy to follow. Whether is is with her illustrations or simple dialogue, I would find myself laughing as I went along with parts of her story. When Satrapi's uncle shows a picture of his family, she questions why the woman's face is crossed out. Her uncle replies, "Russians aren't like us..."(59), leaving Satrapi to question, "What? Don't they have heads"(59)? Simple humor like this can be found throughout the novel, and helped to keep the readers attention.
The graphics in this novel helped to enhance both the dialogues meaning and emotions. Many pictures stuck out and helped me, as a reader, to better understand the text. The veil is an important topic through the entire novel. There is a strain on the women who are forced to wear the veil, this is greatly enhanced by the the graphic on page 6, where it shows the two sides of Satrapi, and how she feels torn between wearing the veil or not wearing it. After Satrapi's uncle Anoosh is executed, she feels lost and confused. The illistration of her floating in space on page 71, amplified the emotions the character was feeling at the time.
Overall I was very impressed with this novel, and it has encouarged me to read other graphic novels. Between the dialgoue and graphics, Satrapi portrays a powerful story of childhood, change, and growing up in a nation that is torn and battered.
Some questions...
I looked up Persepolis in the dictionary, and it states that is an ancient city of Persia. Why is this book titled Persepolis? What is the meaning behind it?
I was a little confused when Satrapi mentions her grandfather, and him being a prince and then a communist?
One thing that caught my attention was the information given dealing with the social classes. In Iran it was forbidden to marry outside your social class. When Satrapi's maid falls in love with the neighbors son, she doesn't see anything wrong with it. Although, after Satrapi's father finds out he tries to explain to her "that their love was impossible"(37), in their country people must "stay within [their] own social class"(37). I know that social classes are present wherever you go, yet this novel sheds light on the extreme split between classes in some cultures, it opened my eyes to how divided a nation can be. After thinking about this, Satrapi states, "The reason for my shame and for the revolution is the same: The difference between social classes."(33). Through this quote, the author reveals how social classes can split a nation.
Another thing that I found interesting was the depiction of some of the characters unrealistic views of the revolution. While walking down the street Satrapi's family had a conversation with their neighbors about the revolution. The neighbor pointed to his wife's cheek and stated, "a bullet almost hit my wife's cheek, liberty is priceless"(44). When in contrast she always had that marking, she only wanted to feel like part of the action. It is interesting because when things seem to be progressing or doing well, everyone wants to say they had some part in it. It also shows how easy people are pressures or persuaded to believe a certain thing, or take a certain stance.
This novel brought up many difficult issues, and the Islamic Revolution is not something to be taken lightly, yet Satrapi does a great job of weaving humor in just the right places, which keep the flow light and easy to follow. Whether is is with her illustrations or simple dialogue, I would find myself laughing as I went along with parts of her story. When Satrapi's uncle shows a picture of his family, she questions why the woman's face is crossed out. Her uncle replies, "Russians aren't like us..."(59), leaving Satrapi to question, "What? Don't they have heads"(59)? Simple humor like this can be found throughout the novel, and helped to keep the readers attention.
The graphics in this novel helped to enhance both the dialogues meaning and emotions. Many pictures stuck out and helped me, as a reader, to better understand the text. The veil is an important topic through the entire novel. There is a strain on the women who are forced to wear the veil, this is greatly enhanced by the the graphic on page 6, where it shows the two sides of Satrapi, and how she feels torn between wearing the veil or not wearing it. After Satrapi's uncle Anoosh is executed, she feels lost and confused. The illistration of her floating in space on page 71, amplified the emotions the character was feeling at the time.
Overall I was very impressed with this novel, and it has encouarged me to read other graphic novels. Between the dialgoue and graphics, Satrapi portrays a powerful story of childhood, change, and growing up in a nation that is torn and battered.
Some questions...
I looked up Persepolis in the dictionary, and it states that is an ancient city of Persia. Why is this book titled Persepolis? What is the meaning behind it?
I was a little confused when Satrapi mentions her grandfather, and him being a prince and then a communist?
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Sula Close Anaylsis
Perception
"Don't judge a book by its cover", a clique most people have grown up hearing. Yet it is human nature to judge anything and everything that is slightly different from ourselves . A perception is not truth, it is simply how one person views the world. In Toni Morrison's novel, Sula, Morrison reveals that there is a fine line between perception and truth. The main character Sula has a birthmark over her eye that is perceived differently from different characters in the novel. Some characters see it as a rose or tadpole, marking Sula with beauty and friendship. Others see it as a sign of evil, a mark of the devil.
For Jude, Sula's birthmark reminds him of a snake. Morrison writes, "[Sula] not exactly plain, but not fine either, with a copperhead over her eye"(103). Jude perceives the birthmark to represent a snake, which in turn represents temptation. The snake has been portrayed as evil, sly, and tricky. In the story of Adam and Eve, it was a snake who tempted Eve to take the apple that got them thrown out of paradise. Throughout literature the snake has represented the darker side of human behavior and emotions. Sula caught Jude's attention, she wasn't gorgeous but there was something almost sly about her that drew him in. In the end Jude betrays Nel and sleeps with Sula. He gives into temptation, he gives into the perception of the snake.
The townspeople living in the Bottom held a much harsher judgement against Sula. They believed her birthmark represented Hannah's ashes, a mark of evil. Morrison writes, "[the birthmark] was not a stemmed rose, or a snake, it was Hannah's ashes marking her from the very beginning"(114). The people of the Bottom perceived Sula as a wild, untamed, evil being. Morrison states, "She came to their church suppers without underwear...they believed that she was laughing at their God...she would lay their husbands once and no more"(115). Based off of her actions, the way Sula carried herself with a freedom they were jealous of caused them to cast her off as an outsider. She was someone not wanted in their community, with a mark of evil above her eye.
"Yeh, so how come [Shadrack] tip his hat to Sula? How come he don't cuss at her?""Two devils."(117). The townspeople think that Sula and Shadrack are one in the same. They are considered outsiders, devils. Yet to Shadrack, Sula's birthmark is not a sign of evil or temptation but simply a sign of friendship. Shadrack recalls, "She had a tadpole over her eye (that is how he knew she was a friend-she had the mark of the fish he loved)"(156). Shadrack saw Sula in a completely different light than that of Jude or the townspeople. Sula's mark was a mark of friendship, companionship. The one accidental visit from Sula changed Shadrack's life.
Nel and Sula were best friends and nearly inseparable. Sula knew and understood Nel perhaps better then Nel did. Nel's perception of Sula was as a companion, a friend that would last forever. Which explains why Sula's birthmark takes the shape of a rose in Nel's mind. A rose is a sign of beauty and love. Morrison writes, "The birthmark over her eye was getting darker and looked more and more like a stem and rose"(74). For Nel, Sula represented passion, love, laughter and happiness. Although roses also have thorns. Sula sleeps with Nel's husband, which truly hurts Nel. She learns towards the end of the novel that it is part of Sula, part of her passion. She was to take the good with the bad, the rose with the thorns.
"How you know...about who was good. How you know it was you...I mean maybe it wasn't you. Maybe it was me"(146). When Sula becomes ill Nel goes to visit her after three years of not talking, Morrison takes perception and twists it around. Nel is perceived as the good one, Sula the wild child or evil one. But how do you know that is true. When asking what if I was the good one Sula is pushing Nel to look past the perceptions surrounding them. This causes Nel to take a look inside herself at her own judgments and perceptions. Sula looks at herself not as evil but free. Everything she does is for her own pleasure. She never loses her identity or gives into society's perception of the perfect wife. Which may mean she is the good one for never giving into something that would weaken her sense of self.
Perception is simply a judgment of ones character from past experiences. Perceptions are not always true and differ from person to person. Through Sula, Morrison shows how judging someone can be damaging not only to the other person but yourself as well.
"Don't judge a book by its cover", a clique most people have grown up hearing. Yet it is human nature to judge anything and everything that is slightly different from ourselves . A perception is not truth, it is simply how one person views the world. In Toni Morrison's novel, Sula, Morrison reveals that there is a fine line between perception and truth. The main character Sula has a birthmark over her eye that is perceived differently from different characters in the novel. Some characters see it as a rose or tadpole, marking Sula with beauty and friendship. Others see it as a sign of evil, a mark of the devil.
For Jude, Sula's birthmark reminds him of a snake. Morrison writes, "[Sula] not exactly plain, but not fine either, with a copperhead over her eye"(103). Jude perceives the birthmark to represent a snake, which in turn represents temptation. The snake has been portrayed as evil, sly, and tricky. In the story of Adam and Eve, it was a snake who tempted Eve to take the apple that got them thrown out of paradise. Throughout literature the snake has represented the darker side of human behavior and emotions. Sula caught Jude's attention, she wasn't gorgeous but there was something almost sly about her that drew him in. In the end Jude betrays Nel and sleeps with Sula. He gives into temptation, he gives into the perception of the snake.
The townspeople living in the Bottom held a much harsher judgement against Sula. They believed her birthmark represented Hannah's ashes, a mark of evil. Morrison writes, "[the birthmark] was not a stemmed rose, or a snake, it was Hannah's ashes marking her from the very beginning"(114). The people of the Bottom perceived Sula as a wild, untamed, evil being. Morrison states, "She came to their church suppers without underwear...they believed that she was laughing at their God...she would lay their husbands once and no more"(115). Based off of her actions, the way Sula carried herself with a freedom they were jealous of caused them to cast her off as an outsider. She was someone not wanted in their community, with a mark of evil above her eye.
"Yeh, so how come [Shadrack] tip his hat to Sula? How come he don't cuss at her?""Two devils."(117). The townspeople think that Sula and Shadrack are one in the same. They are considered outsiders, devils. Yet to Shadrack, Sula's birthmark is not a sign of evil or temptation but simply a sign of friendship. Shadrack recalls, "She had a tadpole over her eye (that is how he knew she was a friend-she had the mark of the fish he loved)"(156). Shadrack saw Sula in a completely different light than that of Jude or the townspeople. Sula's mark was a mark of friendship, companionship. The one accidental visit from Sula changed Shadrack's life.
Nel and Sula were best friends and nearly inseparable. Sula knew and understood Nel perhaps better then Nel did. Nel's perception of Sula was as a companion, a friend that would last forever. Which explains why Sula's birthmark takes the shape of a rose in Nel's mind. A rose is a sign of beauty and love. Morrison writes, "The birthmark over her eye was getting darker and looked more and more like a stem and rose"(74). For Nel, Sula represented passion, love, laughter and happiness. Although roses also have thorns. Sula sleeps with Nel's husband, which truly hurts Nel. She learns towards the end of the novel that it is part of Sula, part of her passion. She was to take the good with the bad, the rose with the thorns.
"How you know...about who was good. How you know it was you...I mean maybe it wasn't you. Maybe it was me"(146). When Sula becomes ill Nel goes to visit her after three years of not talking, Morrison takes perception and twists it around. Nel is perceived as the good one, Sula the wild child or evil one. But how do you know that is true. When asking what if I was the good one Sula is pushing Nel to look past the perceptions surrounding them. This causes Nel to take a look inside herself at her own judgments and perceptions. Sula looks at herself not as evil but free. Everything she does is for her own pleasure. She never loses her identity or gives into society's perception of the perfect wife. Which may mean she is the good one for never giving into something that would weaken her sense of self.
Perception is simply a judgment of ones character from past experiences. Perceptions are not always true and differ from person to person. Through Sula, Morrison shows how judging someone can be damaging not only to the other person but yourself as well.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
The Yellow Wallpaper Reader Response
(This entry was posted on my first blog account, but it would not allow me to log in, I created a new account and this is a repost of the my reader response for The Yellow Wallpaper)
I have read The Yellow Wallpaper before and each time I find it more and more interesting. The first thoughts that come to mind are, this book is very creepy and hard to follow. But the more I read it, the more things I begin to notice. The Yellow Wallpaper is a good book that I think gets overlooked.
One of the first things I picked up on is the narrator is never given a name. We know a lot about her and the bool is her personal journal but she is never given a name. I think the author did this on purpose. By not giving the narrrator a name it means she could be anyone. She could be any woman anywhere in teh world, facing these same conditions. Since the author wrote this novel with a strong feminist tone teh anrrator takes on teh role of all women who are suffereing from teh unfair gender laws of that time period.
From teh beginning of the book we can see that hte narrator loves to write, on page 19 she mentions how she must write, but is told she can not for it is bad for her health. The narrator states, "John hates me to write a word"(13). Writing seems to be a form of escape, an outlet for the narrator. She says, "I did write for a while in spite of the; but it does exhaust me a good deal-habing to be so sly about it, or else meet with heavy opposition"(10). Writing allowed her to make sense, in her mind at least, of the confusing world she was livein in. JOhn did not like her writing because to him it was a threat. He has to control her, and as a woman her thoughts were not important. Writing gave the narrator a smal sense of control or power. It allowed her to express ehrself and her thoughts, which John was uncomfortable wiht.
I did not care for John throughout the novel. It seemed in teh beginning he was a loving, caring husband who only wanted the best for his wife but the more you read teh more you realize he treats her with little respect. She is like a pet or a child to him, not a wife or an equal. He is very controlling and never takes teh time to actually listen to her even when it comes to her own illness. The narrator writes, "John doesn't know how much I really suffer"(14). He calls her pet names like "little goose" or "little girl" which are very degrading and make the narrator seem childlike. The narrator also states in the beginning how John laughs at her but that is what you expect in marraige. Which doesn;t seem like an equal marriage at all. The narratoor mentions how she believes she needs social engaements and work to get better but is todl by John thats not right. Everything the narrator does ahs to be controleld by John. The narrator thinks that is why she doesnt get better.
The wallpaper brings two different themes to the book. First just by reading it, the descriptions give you a creepy feeling. The narrator offers distant detail of what the wallpaper looks like. She talks about the color and how hideous it is, how the patterjets off in to sucidal turns. Slowly she becomes obseesed wiht the paper. Trying to follow the patterns through the sharp dips and turns. Slowly she begins to see a woman take shape behind the wallpaper, and eventually becomes completely engrossed by the paper. The narrator states, "That is why I watch it always"(26). Besides just offering a creepy storyling, the wallpaper serves as sybolism for women and they way they ere treated. The woman behind the bars, wanting to get out represented the women of that time period. Men were barring them they in, they had less rights and were not treated as equals. Women were trapped, like the figures in the wallpaper. They were expected to be perfect house wifes, to cook and clean and take care of the children. They trapped in a world ruled by men.
I think The Yellow Wallpaper is seen more as a book dealing with the psychological breakdown of the narrator. Which in itself is a unique story, but I believe the book was also written to show the exteme poles between the genders. The author wrote this story to reprent a large majority of women in general. Throughout this book the male characters make all the decisions and over see everything. Slowly the narrator begins to go completely insane under the complete control of John, who doesn't ever listen to a thing she has to say. What she needed was to be treated as a human, to be able to read and write, go outside and work. Instead she was couped up and told to do nothing which drove her to insantity.
The books ending is very different. It is extremely sad to see the narrator at her worst point. Yet the ending was inevitable, we watched her break down slowly throughout the novel but it was still hard to read. I think this is a great book that has to be read more then once to get a better understanding of the text. Reading the Afterword also helped me to understand the book better.
A couple questions:
Was the house John takes the narrator to really a summer house or was it some kind of mental hospital>
Does the narrator not remember ripping off the wallpaper? She talks about how the children and made such a mess and it was really her.
I have read The Yellow Wallpaper before and each time I find it more and more interesting. The first thoughts that come to mind are, this book is very creepy and hard to follow. But the more I read it, the more things I begin to notice. The Yellow Wallpaper is a good book that I think gets overlooked.
One of the first things I picked up on is the narrator is never given a name. We know a lot about her and the bool is her personal journal but she is never given a name. I think the author did this on purpose. By not giving the narrrator a name it means she could be anyone. She could be any woman anywhere in teh world, facing these same conditions. Since the author wrote this novel with a strong feminist tone teh anrrator takes on teh role of all women who are suffereing from teh unfair gender laws of that time period.
From teh beginning of the book we can see that hte narrator loves to write, on page 19 she mentions how she must write, but is told she can not for it is bad for her health. The narrator states, "John hates me to write a word"(13). Writing seems to be a form of escape, an outlet for the narrator. She says, "I did write for a while in spite of the; but it does exhaust me a good deal-habing to be so sly about it, or else meet with heavy opposition"(10). Writing allowed her to make sense, in her mind at least, of the confusing world she was livein in. JOhn did not like her writing because to him it was a threat. He has to control her, and as a woman her thoughts were not important. Writing gave the narrator a smal sense of control or power. It allowed her to express ehrself and her thoughts, which John was uncomfortable wiht.
I did not care for John throughout the novel. It seemed in teh beginning he was a loving, caring husband who only wanted the best for his wife but the more you read teh more you realize he treats her with little respect. She is like a pet or a child to him, not a wife or an equal. He is very controlling and never takes teh time to actually listen to her even when it comes to her own illness. The narrator writes, "John doesn't know how much I really suffer"(14). He calls her pet names like "little goose" or "little girl" which are very degrading and make the narrator seem childlike. The narrator also states in the beginning how John laughs at her but that is what you expect in marraige. Which doesn;t seem like an equal marriage at all. The narratoor mentions how she believes she needs social engaements and work to get better but is todl by John thats not right. Everything the narrator does ahs to be controleld by John. The narrator thinks that is why she doesnt get better.
The wallpaper brings two different themes to the book. First just by reading it, the descriptions give you a creepy feeling. The narrator offers distant detail of what the wallpaper looks like. She talks about the color and how hideous it is, how the patterjets off in to sucidal turns. Slowly she becomes obseesed wiht the paper. Trying to follow the patterns through the sharp dips and turns. Slowly she begins to see a woman take shape behind the wallpaper, and eventually becomes completely engrossed by the paper. The narrator states, "That is why I watch it always"(26). Besides just offering a creepy storyling, the wallpaper serves as sybolism for women and they way they ere treated. The woman behind the bars, wanting to get out represented the women of that time period. Men were barring them they in, they had less rights and were not treated as equals. Women were trapped, like the figures in the wallpaper. They were expected to be perfect house wifes, to cook and clean and take care of the children. They trapped in a world ruled by men.
I think The Yellow Wallpaper is seen more as a book dealing with the psychological breakdown of the narrator. Which in itself is a unique story, but I believe the book was also written to show the exteme poles between the genders. The author wrote this story to reprent a large majority of women in general. Throughout this book the male characters make all the decisions and over see everything. Slowly the narrator begins to go completely insane under the complete control of John, who doesn't ever listen to a thing she has to say. What she needed was to be treated as a human, to be able to read and write, go outside and work. Instead she was couped up and told to do nothing which drove her to insantity.
The books ending is very different. It is extremely sad to see the narrator at her worst point. Yet the ending was inevitable, we watched her break down slowly throughout the novel but it was still hard to read. I think this is a great book that has to be read more then once to get a better understanding of the text. Reading the Afterword also helped me to understand the book better.
A couple questions:
Was the house John takes the narrator to really a summer house or was it some kind of mental hospital>
Does the narrator not remember ripping off the wallpaper? She talks about how the children and made such a mess and it was really her.
Sula Extended journal
For my extend journal I chose to draw a picture incorporating what we discussed in class about Sula and Nel being one in the same. The picture is a face with one side shaded a dark brown with curly hair, the other side is a lighter brown with straight hair. The dark side of the face is representing Sula, the id, and perhaps evil. The lighter side represents Nel, the ego and good. Around the border of the paper are quotes describing the two characters. They could be the same person yet they could also be very close friends. It deals with the struggle that each person, such as Nel and Sula, face within themselves deciding to either stay true to their identity or give into society and become the person they are expected to be. Sula represents the darker side of a person's personality, she is the ultimate id. Morrison writes, "[Sula] lived out her days exporing her own thoughts and emotions...feeling no obligation to please anybody"(118). She represents the restless side in every human. Nel on the other hand, is portrayed as the "good" one. Morrison states, "Nel seemed stronger and more consistent that Sula"(53). But Nel's character is the one who loses herself and her identity in the end.
Monday, March 5, 2007
Close Analysis Journal-Green Grass, Running Water
Stereotypes
The world is filled with all types of different people and humans are far from perfect. Which leads people to judge each other, put up barriers, and develop stereotypes. Simply because we can not adjust to someone who is different from ourselves. A stereotype by definition is to categorize individuals or groups according to an oversimplified standardized image or idea. In Thomas King's novel, Green Grass, Running Water, King tackles the typical cowboy and Indian, gender, and religion stereotypes that are encountered in everyday life. Through King's novel he opens the reader's eyes to how crippling stereotypes can be.
Throughout the novel Lionel, Eli, Alberta and others try to overcome their cultural stereotypes. Growing up in America, as Native Americans, meant growing up with cowboys being the heroes and Indians being the villains. King takes the fictional character of the Lone Ranger and gives his identity to First Women. The Lone Ranger is a famous American cowboy who gallops around the West on his horse Silver, fighting off Indians and saving the day. He wears a black mask to hide his true identity. He also has an Indian sidekick, named Tonto. The Lone Ranger, along with other famous cowboys such as John Wayne, are viewed as heroes in white culture. King takes this persona of the white, male hero and reverses it to a Native American women. King writes, "[First Women] takes some black cloth...cuts some holes in that black cloth. She puts that cloth around her head. Look, look, all the rangers say... it's the Lone Ranger"(75). The live rangers see the black mask and think that First Women is the Lone Ranger and let her walk away. Instead of giving First Women the identity of the sidekick, King gave her the white male role. He reverses the the common cowboy and Indian stereotype with the character of First Women.
Furthermore King tackles the stereotype involving the genders. In society women are expected to be the romantic ones, the ones who want commitment. The female sex is more prone, or it is assumed to want to get married and have a family. Men are commonly viewed as fearing commitment. They seem to avoid settling down until later in life or not at all. Women take on the persona of being more delicate. Alberta is the complete opposite. She is a strong, independent women who fears commitment. Alberta is dating two men, neither of whom she truly loves. She wants a child but no husband. Alberta's character flips the typical gender role. She is the one who is doesn't want to settle down. Alberta is the one who doesn't want a husband. She says, "Men wanted to be married. More then sex...men wanted marriage"(46). Alberta contradicts the gender stereotype by claiming it is men who want marriage. King uses Alberta to switch the gender roles. Casting men in the commitment role, and women, or at least Alberta, as wanting her freedom.
Finally King focus on the stereotypes of religion. Christianity is the main target in the novel. Christians are know for pushing their religion on others, yet they are quick to judge other religious views. Christians seem to pass judgment on other religions as being silly or unreasonable. But King shows the flaws in Christianity and their own stories throughout the book. He takes famous bible stories such as Noah and the ark and Jesus walking on water and gives the character's a rude, arrogant tone. Noah was told by God to build an ark and take two of each animal to fill the ark. God created a flood that killed everything expect what was on the arc. To Christians Noah is a hero, a true servant of God. But in the novel Noah turns out to be a different sort of man. Noah says "Lemme see your breasts...I like women with big breasts. I hope God remembered that"(160). King is simply showing how Christian stories are not perfect as Christians like to believe. King took characters that were were revered or respected in the Christian faith and reversed them to be vulgar and insulting.
Throughout Green Grass, Running Water, King takes common stereotypes and sheds light to how unfair they can truly be. By taking an Indian women and giving her a white cowboy name, King portrays the cultural biases held against one another. Through Alberta, women become the independent sex wanting their freedom. Along with the stereotypes facing religion we are forced to take a deeper look at the stories of our faith. Forcing different religions and people to wonder do you have a right to judge. King forces his readers to think do we judge to quickly? Also what we asssume is not always correct.
Sunday, March 4, 2007
GGRW Journal Three
After reading Green Grass Running Water, I was very interested in the four Indian elders and the significance of their names. I did research on who the Lone Ranger, Hawkeye, Robinson Crusoe, and Ishmael were and why King picked these names for his own characters. For my research I used http://www.wikipedia.org/ and http://www.ask.com/ for information on the characters. I spent about an hour and a half gathering and organizing all the information.
The Lone Ranger was a popular Texas Ranger from the Old West. He wore a black mask to hide his identity, leaving characters to wonder "Who is that masked man?" The Lone Ranger was famous for galloping around the Old West righting injustices and being a hero. He had a Native American sidekick named Tonto.
Hawkeye was an American Pioneer, who was originally know as Nathaniel "Natty" Bumppo. He was adopted by a Native American family and given the name Hawkeye. Hawkeye is said to symbolize rugged individualism and the pioneer spirit.
Robinson Crusoe was an English castaway who was shipwrecked on a remote island for twenty-eight years. During those years he read the Bible and became religious, thanking God for his fate. Crusoe discovered savages and native cannibals on the island. He became friends with a savage who he named Friday. Crusoe taught him English and converted him to Christianity.
Ishmael according to the Bible was Abraham's eldest son, who was born by Sarah's handmaiden Hagar. After Sarah gave birth to Isaac, Hagar and Ishmael were sent away, Ishmael married and had twelve sons. But in Moby Dick, Ishmael was the narrator, a sailor on the Pequod. His role was to observe the conflicts around him. Ishmael became close friends with the harpooner Queeque. Queeque is portrayed as a savage.
After researching these characters I found that each one dealt with the typical Indian stereotypes. The Lone Ranger, Hawkeye, Robinson Crusoe, and Ishmael are all white males who "improved" their Indian companions. The Lone Ranger took Tonto under his wing. Robinson Crusoe taught Friday English and converted him to Christianity. Ishmael became close friends and learned to deeply care for his uncivilized friend Queeque. King took the names of these white heros and gave them to his four Indian women who were out to save the world.
The Lone Ranger was a popular Texas Ranger from the Old West. He wore a black mask to hide his identity, leaving characters to wonder "Who is that masked man?" The Lone Ranger was famous for galloping around the Old West righting injustices and being a hero. He had a Native American sidekick named Tonto.
Hawkeye was an American Pioneer, who was originally know as Nathaniel "Natty" Bumppo. He was adopted by a Native American family and given the name Hawkeye. Hawkeye is said to symbolize rugged individualism and the pioneer spirit.
Robinson Crusoe was an English castaway who was shipwrecked on a remote island for twenty-eight years. During those years he read the Bible and became religious, thanking God for his fate. Crusoe discovered savages and native cannibals on the island. He became friends with a savage who he named Friday. Crusoe taught him English and converted him to Christianity.
Ishmael according to the Bible was Abraham's eldest son, who was born by Sarah's handmaiden Hagar. After Sarah gave birth to Isaac, Hagar and Ishmael were sent away, Ishmael married and had twelve sons. But in Moby Dick, Ishmael was the narrator, a sailor on the Pequod. His role was to observe the conflicts around him. Ishmael became close friends with the harpooner Queeque. Queeque is portrayed as a savage.
After researching these characters I found that each one dealt with the typical Indian stereotypes. The Lone Ranger, Hawkeye, Robinson Crusoe, and Ishmael are all white males who "improved" their Indian companions. The Lone Ranger took Tonto under his wing. Robinson Crusoe taught Friday English and converted him to Christianity. Ishmael became close friends and learned to deeply care for his uncivilized friend Queeque. King took the names of these white heros and gave them to his four Indian women who were out to save the world.
Sula Reader Response
After reading Sula by Toni Morrison I felt like I was left wondering. I don't know what I was supposed to get out of this book or what the author was trying to portray. I did enjoy the vast array of characters, and it offered a view of black culture. But the book seemed to deal mainly with sex, which was different then what I was used to.
Shadrack is an interesting character who brings his own twist to the book. The way he views death or fears death is striking. Because of Shadrack's terror of unexpected death he invents National Suicide day. It took place January third, Shadrack would "[walk] through the Bottom down Carpenter's Road with a cowbell and a hangman's rope calling the people together. Telling them that this was their only chance to kill themselves or each other"(14). I found it intriguing why Shadrack had created National Suicide Day. If you devoted one day a year to death and its unexpectedness, the rest of the year you could go without fear of it. It seems to make sense, in a far out way.I think that Shadrack's character was highly misunderstood. The community viewed him as crazy and slightly scary but I think he was only trying to find his place in the world. His interaction with Sula is viewed differetly from the two parties. Sula found him to be scary, and his response of "always"(62) worried her. But Shadrack viewed her as his only vistor, a friend of some sort with the word "always" as a sort of welcome.
While reading I noticed Sula's mark above her eye is mentioned several times. The mark seems to get darker as Sula gets older. At first the birthmark looks like "a stem and rose"(74). Which is also the image on the front cover of the book. Sula's mark reminds Shadrack of a tadpole. After Sula returns home Jude calls the birthmark a rattlesnake. Finally the towns people say that Sula's birthmark was "not a stemmed rose, or a snake, it was Hannah's ashes marking her from the very beginning"(114). I was wondering what the importance of Sula's birthmark was, or if it was simply a destination of her character. Something that made Sula stand out. A mark of evil in the eyes of the community.
I found the Peace women to be strange characters. They are all very independent women, none of whom have serious relationships throughout the book. These women, Eva, Hannah, and Sula avoid commitment and float from man to man. Social expectations and morals seem to have little effect on these three women. I was shocked when Sula slept with Jude. Sula and Nel were the best of friends. They were inseparable and understood each other the way no one else did. Yet when Sula returns home she sleeps with Nel's husband. Sula didn't even see why it was a big deal. She grew up in a house where sleeping with different men was a way of life. So she did not think this was any different. I still couldn't believe she would do that, especially to her best friend.
I am confused about the part where Eva burns Plum, her own son. I know she taught he was in pain and she was worried about her baby, but why would she burn him. I am looking forward to discussing Eva more in class, there seems to be many angles to her character and I am looking forward to discussing it more.
I feel there may be more to this book then I understood. I want to explore the characters more and their actions. I am looking forward to discussing this book in class.
Shadrack is an interesting character who brings his own twist to the book. The way he views death or fears death is striking. Because of Shadrack's terror of unexpected death he invents National Suicide day. It took place January third, Shadrack would "[walk] through the Bottom down Carpenter's Road with a cowbell and a hangman's rope calling the people together. Telling them that this was their only chance to kill themselves or each other"(14). I found it intriguing why Shadrack had created National Suicide Day. If you devoted one day a year to death and its unexpectedness, the rest of the year you could go without fear of it. It seems to make sense, in a far out way.I think that Shadrack's character was highly misunderstood. The community viewed him as crazy and slightly scary but I think he was only trying to find his place in the world. His interaction with Sula is viewed differetly from the two parties. Sula found him to be scary, and his response of "always"(62) worried her. But Shadrack viewed her as his only vistor, a friend of some sort with the word "always" as a sort of welcome.
While reading I noticed Sula's mark above her eye is mentioned several times. The mark seems to get darker as Sula gets older. At first the birthmark looks like "a stem and rose"(74). Which is also the image on the front cover of the book. Sula's mark reminds Shadrack of a tadpole. After Sula returns home Jude calls the birthmark a rattlesnake. Finally the towns people say that Sula's birthmark was "not a stemmed rose, or a snake, it was Hannah's ashes marking her from the very beginning"(114). I was wondering what the importance of Sula's birthmark was, or if it was simply a destination of her character. Something that made Sula stand out. A mark of evil in the eyes of the community.
I found the Peace women to be strange characters. They are all very independent women, none of whom have serious relationships throughout the book. These women, Eva, Hannah, and Sula avoid commitment and float from man to man. Social expectations and morals seem to have little effect on these three women. I was shocked when Sula slept with Jude. Sula and Nel were the best of friends. They were inseparable and understood each other the way no one else did. Yet when Sula returns home she sleeps with Nel's husband. Sula didn't even see why it was a big deal. She grew up in a house where sleeping with different men was a way of life. So she did not think this was any different. I still couldn't believe she would do that, especially to her best friend.
I am confused about the part where Eva burns Plum, her own son. I know she taught he was in pain and she was worried about her baby, but why would she burn him. I am looking forward to discussing Eva more in class, there seems to be many angles to her character and I am looking forward to discussing it more.
I feel there may be more to this book then I understood. I want to explore the characters more and their actions. I am looking forward to discussing this book in class.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Green Grass, Running Water Reader Response
Green Grass, Running Water by Thomas King is an interesting book to read. I will admit I had trouble following many parts of the book, and some of the puns went right over my head. King's writing style is different then other books I have read in the past. This novel is filled with different themes, stereotypes and symbolism.
I found the four Indians to be the most intriguing characters throughout the book. The Lone Ranger, Hawkeye, Robinson Crusoe, and Ishmael are all famous fictional white men. Which is ironic because the four Indians are women and well, Indians. They are on a quest "to fix up the world"(133), and seem to have been doing so for a long time. Each has their own story of the beginning of the world, yet they all seem to be related. Which may also represent their own personal stories. The Lone Ranger, Hawkeye, Robinson Crusoe and Ishmael along with Coyote, who is a unique character himself, seem to be narrators, along with active characters in this novel. I am looking forward to discussing these characters and their purpose in the novel more in depth during discussion.
Each character seems to have their own story line, yet all the stories seem to be connected. Lionel is in love with Alberta, who is also dating Charlie, his cousin. Eli's cabin is standing in the way of a major dam project. Latisha runs a restaurant called the Dead Dog Cafe. Norma seems to be the boss figure for all of the characters. Babo is friends with the four elders and works at the hospital they escape from. Dr. Hovaugh is convinced that Lone Ranger, Hawkeye, Robinson Crusoe and Ishmael are responsible for terrible events from the past. And Coyote likes to cause mischief and run through everyone's story.
Along with each character having their own story, they seem to have their own theme as well. For Lionel his theme seems to be mistakes. We learn that he was three major mistakes but his life in general seems to be a mistake. Lionel is unhappy with his life and what he has become. He is forty, sells televisions for a living, has no college education, and is in love with a women who is dating his cousin. Alberta's theme has to do with decisions and commitment. She seems to struggle with this issue throughout the whole book. Her dream is to have a child but no husband. She is dating two men at the same time, neither I believe she is truly in love with. Eli is struggling with the return home. He left the reservation and saw the world, tried to be a white man as Norma states. Then came home and is trying to fit into the world he left.
King writes about many different cultural groups and the way they feel about one another. He mentions the discrimination between whites and the Indians. Westerns seem to play a key role in the novel, depicting the typical opinion of whites and Indians. Americans and Canadians, which I found engaging because I never thought there was a strain between the two countries. King pokes fun at the genders through Alberta's story. Finally he seems to strongly mock Christianity. He weaves parts of Bible stories in his own stories but changes the characters to be rude and selfish. King writes,"That good women makes a garden and she lives there with Ahdamn"(40). Ahdamn is symbolic of Adam and the Garden of Eden. Some of his opinions or mockery of the Christian faith crossed my personal line and made it harder to read.
I was wondering why there was so many references to water in the book. Each story of the beginning states "In the beginning, there was nothing. Just water"(1). When the character's cars go missing there is nothing but a puddle of water. Finally at the end when the dam bursts, which is also the event that brought everyone together.
I was also confused about the character "I". Is this supposed to be a narrator, or is it representing the reader?
All the Indian characters have white first names, why? (Charlie, Eli, Lionel. Norma. Alberta, Harley, Bernice...)
How much of a part does Coyote play in fixing the world, or messing it up? I says, "You are one silly Coyote...no wonder this world is a mess"(262).
King definitely made an impression on me, and I am looking forward to discussing this novel in class to gain a better understanding of the text. I have a lot of questions and I really would like to hear others interpretations of the book.
I found the four Indians to be the most intriguing characters throughout the book. The Lone Ranger, Hawkeye, Robinson Crusoe, and Ishmael are all famous fictional white men. Which is ironic because the four Indians are women and well, Indians. They are on a quest "to fix up the world"(133), and seem to have been doing so for a long time. Each has their own story of the beginning of the world, yet they all seem to be related. Which may also represent their own personal stories. The Lone Ranger, Hawkeye, Robinson Crusoe and Ishmael along with Coyote, who is a unique character himself, seem to be narrators, along with active characters in this novel. I am looking forward to discussing these characters and their purpose in the novel more in depth during discussion.
Each character seems to have their own story line, yet all the stories seem to be connected. Lionel is in love with Alberta, who is also dating Charlie, his cousin. Eli's cabin is standing in the way of a major dam project. Latisha runs a restaurant called the Dead Dog Cafe. Norma seems to be the boss figure for all of the characters. Babo is friends with the four elders and works at the hospital they escape from. Dr. Hovaugh is convinced that Lone Ranger, Hawkeye, Robinson Crusoe and Ishmael are responsible for terrible events from the past. And Coyote likes to cause mischief and run through everyone's story.
Along with each character having their own story, they seem to have their own theme as well. For Lionel his theme seems to be mistakes. We learn that he was three major mistakes but his life in general seems to be a mistake. Lionel is unhappy with his life and what he has become. He is forty, sells televisions for a living, has no college education, and is in love with a women who is dating his cousin. Alberta's theme has to do with decisions and commitment. She seems to struggle with this issue throughout the whole book. Her dream is to have a child but no husband. She is dating two men at the same time, neither I believe she is truly in love with. Eli is struggling with the return home. He left the reservation and saw the world, tried to be a white man as Norma states. Then came home and is trying to fit into the world he left.
King writes about many different cultural groups and the way they feel about one another. He mentions the discrimination between whites and the Indians. Westerns seem to play a key role in the novel, depicting the typical opinion of whites and Indians. Americans and Canadians, which I found engaging because I never thought there was a strain between the two countries. King pokes fun at the genders through Alberta's story. Finally he seems to strongly mock Christianity. He weaves parts of Bible stories in his own stories but changes the characters to be rude and selfish. King writes,"That good women makes a garden and she lives there with Ahdamn"(40). Ahdamn is symbolic of Adam and the Garden of Eden. Some of his opinions or mockery of the Christian faith crossed my personal line and made it harder to read.
I was wondering why there was so many references to water in the book. Each story of the beginning states "In the beginning, there was nothing. Just water"(1). When the character's cars go missing there is nothing but a puddle of water. Finally at the end when the dam bursts, which is also the event that brought everyone together.
I was also confused about the character "I". Is this supposed to be a narrator, or is it representing the reader?
All the Indian characters have white first names, why? (Charlie, Eli, Lionel. Norma. Alberta, Harley, Bernice...)
How much of a part does Coyote play in fixing the world, or messing it up? I says, "You are one silly Coyote...no wonder this world is a mess"(262).
King definitely made an impression on me, and I am looking forward to discussing this novel in class to gain a better understanding of the text. I have a lot of questions and I really would like to hear others interpretations of the book.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
The Things They Carried Critical Analysis
A Safe Harbor
It was the summer of 1968, at the young age of twenty-one Tim O'Brien received a draft notice to fight in a war he did not even support. Tim was thrown into a sea of chaos, he was too good to go to war but could he face his family if he ran away, chickened out? He was only a boy, a boy with hopes and dreams. He knew nothing about guns or killing. Yet could he run aways and leave his country and family behind forever? Tim writes, "It was a kind of schizophrenia. A moral split. I couldn't make up my mind"(44). He needed to escape to a neutral place that allowed him to be alone and decide his own fate. Elroy Berdahl and the Tip Top Lodge offered just that. As shown in Tim O'Brien's novel, The Things They Carried, Elroy offered Tim a safe harbor, a place to collect his thoughts, he never pushed him any which way in the decision. Elroy was ultimately a passive bystander at the crossroads of a young man's life.
Before arriving at the Tip Top Lodge Tim O'Brien is an emotional wreck. When he recieves his draft notice his world begins to unravel. A million thoughts fly through his head. He is a smart, young adult who was student body president, has a full ride to Harvard grad school and enjoys playing golf. He is not a soldier, he doesn't even understand the war. Why should he have to fight in a war he doesn't belive in. Tim recalls, "The only certainty that summer was moreal confusion"(40). His life turns into a downward spiral, and his mind is constantly racing on what his future holds. Tim begins to feel as if he were paralyzed. He states, "All around me the options seemed to be narrowing...the whole world squeezing in tight"(43). Tim was torn between choosing to follow his concise and run, or listen to everyone around him and fight. He did not want to die, he did not want to kill or destroy. Yet Tim could not stand to lose the respect of his family and his hometown. He imagined the "people sitting around a table down at the old Gobbler Cafe...zeroing in on the young O'Brien kid, how the damned sissy had taken off for Canada"(45). Until one day something changes inside Tim. Something "[broke] open in my chest...a physical rupture"(46). All the pressure finally hit Tim with full force, and he made a run for it. A run to find answers, a run to make a decision.
Tim's run takes him closer and closer to Canada. He is still uncertain of his decision and winds up in norther Minnesota. He drives to theTip Top Lodge owned by Elroy Berdahl. Right off the bat Tim states, "[Elroy] is the hero of my life...he offered exactly what I needed, without questions, without any words at all"(48). Elroy saw a lost young boy who was in trouble and needed help. He was simply there as "a silent, watchful presence"(48). Tim needed someone simply to be there, not to say anything or influence him in any way, simply to be there. Tim already heard so many "voices" pulling him towards the war or towards Canada, he simply needed to be with someone but in silence. Elroy and Tim spent six days together yet in all those hours Elroy never questions Tim. He is simply a bystander offering a place to stay and food to eat while Tim figures out his options. Tim suspected that Elroy knew he was running from the war, yet Elroy never mentioned anything about it to Tim. Tim needed time and space to truly listen to his own heart and decide for himself, without the pressures of others if he would go to Vietnam or not.
Tim comes to his decision while sitting in a fishing boat on the Rainy River with Elroy. At first Tim did not know where they were going, until Elroy cut the motor clsoe to the Canadain shore. This was it, Tim had arrived at the final threshold, the point of no return. Still Elroy doesn't look or say anything to Tim. Elroy cut the motor and they sat and waited in silence. Tim says, "I think he meant to bring me up against the realities...to take me to the edge and to stand a kind of vigil as I chose a life for myself"(56). He sits there for a long time looking from Elroy to Canada then down at his hands. He has to make a decision and he has to make it now. It is now or never. Elroy sits quietly at the front of the boat fiddling with his fishing rod. Tim breaks down into tears, loud sobbing and Elroy sits and waits it out. Elroy is "simply there, like the river and the late-summer sun"(60). Tim decided on that river, through the flow of tears, and Elroy's silent presence that he would go to war. He would fight and maybe die but he would go to Vietnam.
Tim came to his decision completely on his own. Elroy simply made it real, his presence served as a bystander or witness for Tim. O'Brien needed to escape from the pressures of society and the people around him. He needed to have a place to be alone and sort through the million thoughts swimming through his head. Tim found that place, a small resort in northern Minnesota. Elroy was simply the presence that made his decision real. That small comfort to help him through his crisis and finally decide on a decision.
The Things They Carried Journal 3
I made a poster covering information on the medics in Vietnam, like Rat Kiley, and will present it in class.
Bibliography
Ordaz, Rigo. "Medics to the Rescue!" 2003
http://www.ichiban1.org/html/stories_43.htm
Dennison, John D. "Medics" 1998
http://www.1stcavmedic.com/medic_history.htm
Yablonks, Phillip Marc. "Doctors in the Vietnam War: The Ultimate Training Ground"
http://www.historynet.com/wars_conflicts/vietnam_war/3027571.html
Process:
This journal was harder then I expected. I wanted to research the stability of Vietnam War medics, such as Rat Kiley from The Things They Carried. But I was having trouble bringing up any information on the subject. I tried many different search engines such as Google Scholar, Ask Jeeves, and Yahoo. Along with websites such as the History Net, but the only available information was more a form of dedication to the medics and overall information. I was still able to fing interesting and insightful information, which reinforces that I believe Rat was one of the strongest characters in The Things They Carried. I wish I could have found more information on the mental health of the medics during and after the war. It would be intriguing to see how many medics did break down like Rat Kiley. My poster deals more with overall information on the medics, along with a few pictures.
Bibliography
Ordaz, Rigo. "Medics to the Rescue!" 2003
http://www.ichiban1.org/html/stories_43.htm
Dennison, John D. "Medics" 1998
http://www.1stcavmedic.com/medic_history.htm
Yablonks, Phillip Marc. "Doctors in the Vietnam War: The Ultimate Training Ground"
http://www.historynet.com/wars_conflicts/vietnam_war/3027571.html
Process:
This journal was harder then I expected. I wanted to research the stability of Vietnam War medics, such as Rat Kiley from The Things They Carried. But I was having trouble bringing up any information on the subject. I tried many different search engines such as Google Scholar, Ask Jeeves, and Yahoo. Along with websites such as the History Net, but the only available information was more a form of dedication to the medics and overall information. I was still able to fing interesting and insightful information, which reinforces that I believe Rat was one of the strongest characters in The Things They Carried. I wish I could have found more information on the mental health of the medics during and after the war. It would be intriguing to see how many medics did break down like Rat Kiley. My poster deals more with overall information on the medics, along with a few pictures.
Sunday, February 11, 2007
The Yellow Wallpaper Debate-Revised
An important character in "The Yellow Wallpaper" by Charlotte Perkins Gilman is John. He is the narrator's husband and can be blamed for her breakdown throughout the novel. John is not a good husband at all and symbolizes the majority of men during the 1980s. He has no respect for his wife and treats her like a child, or a pet instead of a human being. Early on in the book the narrator states, "John laughs at me, of course, but one expects that in marriage"(9). John does not take anything the narrator says seriously. He also doesn't take the time to truly listen to her, even when it is about her own illness. The narrator mentions, "You see he does not believe I am sick! And what can one do"(10)? She also says, "John does not know how much I really suffer"(14). A husband who truly wanted his wife to get better would listen to what she has to say about her illness and at least take it into consideration. Throughout the story John controls every aspect of the narrator's life. She is no longer aloud to write because John hates it. He has her on a "schedule prescription for each hour of the day"(12). The narrator is under his complete control. John even gets to decide wen she is allowed to see her own family. Yet he is not even around the majority of the time. The narrator writes, "John is away all day, and even some nights..."(13). If he really cared John would be there to offer his wife love and support, not busy himself with "cases" in town. Overall John is a terrible husband who offers only disrespect, lack of trust, control and neglect.
The Things They Carried Reader Response
The Things They Carried by Tim O'Brien is a great book, that is full of detail and emotion. It offers a window to a surprising real view of the war. Tim O'Brien is a wonderful author, who kept me interested throughout the book but also confused.
When it comes to the complete truth behind this book, I wasn't quite sure what to believe. In the beginning it seems the book is a recollection of Tim's personal experiences in Vietnam. Yet O'Brien writes,"...a long time ago I walked through Quang Ngai Province as a foot soldier. Almost everything else is invented"(179). The stories and characters in The Things They Carried seem so real and really drew me in, but is it all made up?
Although, even if the characters and stories aren't completely true they still offer a strong truth of what Vietnam was like. Through this book O'Brien shares the soldier's view of the war, not the politicians or the patriotic citizens, but the young men who were sent over to a fight a war most didn't understand. O'Brien mentions his own breakdown when he received his draft notice. His near escape to Canada, a choice between safety or pride. I thought it was strange when Tim mentions he was a coward because he went to war. In society we normally think of soldiers as heroes, brave men risking their lives for their country. But for Tim it was different, he was a coward for giving into a war he didn't believe in or understand. The descriptions of the war from a soldiers stand point caught my eye. It is a honest recollection by men who lived through it. O'Brien recalls, "but it was not battle, it was just the endless march, village to village, without purpose, nothing won or lost"(15). War is not as glorious as it is made to be, it is a continuous march with no clear destination. O'Brien writes, "war has a feel...of a great ghostly fog...There is no clarity...Right spills over into wrong. Order blends into chaos, love into hate..."(82). For the soldiers war was like another world, nothing is the same and all the rules change.
Each chapter in the book seems as if it could be its own short story. Sometimes it was easy for me to follow along, and other times it seemed like the book jumped around too much. But I think each chapter is essential to get the full meaning of the book.
I loved the first chapter of the book and how O'Brien would start each new thought with what the soldiers carried. He mentioned how they carried things by necessity, various missions, protection and how they carried each other. Tim states, "Often, they carried each other, the wounded or weak" (14). It helps show the bonds that form between each solider, and how they need each other to get through the war. The soldiers learn and grow together with each new day. They form their own families and lean on each other to get through the war.
I did not care for Sweetheat of the Song Tra Bong, it was my least favorite chapter. I could not get over the fact that Mark Fossie actually flew his girlfriend to Vietnam. How is that even possible? Why would you want your girlfriend to experience something so atrocious as war. Mary Ann is a very unique character though, who brought her own spin to the book. She went to Vietnam as a young, bubbly naive girl. Curious about everything, soaking up as much information as she could. The war begins to take its toll on her and she ends up joining the Green Berets an wearing a necklace of human tongues. It is all too far fetched for me.
Overall this book impressed my immensely. I love O'Brien's writing style and how descriptive the stories and characters are. He had great quotes and opened my eyes to a new view on war stories.
A few questions...
How much of the story is true, if any at all.
Are the character in the book real people because he did dedicated the book to them.
Why did Rat torture the baby buffalo? Was it his way to deal with Lemon's death?
When it comes to the complete truth behind this book, I wasn't quite sure what to believe. In the beginning it seems the book is a recollection of Tim's personal experiences in Vietnam. Yet O'Brien writes,"...a long time ago I walked through Quang Ngai Province as a foot soldier. Almost everything else is invented"(179). The stories and characters in The Things They Carried seem so real and really drew me in, but is it all made up?
Although, even if the characters and stories aren't completely true they still offer a strong truth of what Vietnam was like. Through this book O'Brien shares the soldier's view of the war, not the politicians or the patriotic citizens, but the young men who were sent over to a fight a war most didn't understand. O'Brien mentions his own breakdown when he received his draft notice. His near escape to Canada, a choice between safety or pride. I thought it was strange when Tim mentions he was a coward because he went to war. In society we normally think of soldiers as heroes, brave men risking their lives for their country. But for Tim it was different, he was a coward for giving into a war he didn't believe in or understand. The descriptions of the war from a soldiers stand point caught my eye. It is a honest recollection by men who lived through it. O'Brien recalls, "but it was not battle, it was just the endless march, village to village, without purpose, nothing won or lost"(15). War is not as glorious as it is made to be, it is a continuous march with no clear destination. O'Brien writes, "war has a feel...of a great ghostly fog...There is no clarity...Right spills over into wrong. Order blends into chaos, love into hate..."(82). For the soldiers war was like another world, nothing is the same and all the rules change.
Each chapter in the book seems as if it could be its own short story. Sometimes it was easy for me to follow along, and other times it seemed like the book jumped around too much. But I think each chapter is essential to get the full meaning of the book.
I loved the first chapter of the book and how O'Brien would start each new thought with what the soldiers carried. He mentioned how they carried things by necessity, various missions, protection and how they carried each other. Tim states, "Often, they carried each other, the wounded or weak" (14). It helps show the bonds that form between each solider, and how they need each other to get through the war. The soldiers learn and grow together with each new day. They form their own families and lean on each other to get through the war.
I did not care for Sweetheat of the Song Tra Bong, it was my least favorite chapter. I could not get over the fact that Mark Fossie actually flew his girlfriend to Vietnam. How is that even possible? Why would you want your girlfriend to experience something so atrocious as war. Mary Ann is a very unique character though, who brought her own spin to the book. She went to Vietnam as a young, bubbly naive girl. Curious about everything, soaking up as much information as she could. The war begins to take its toll on her and she ends up joining the Green Berets an wearing a necklace of human tongues. It is all too far fetched for me.
Overall this book impressed my immensely. I love O'Brien's writing style and how descriptive the stories and characters are. He had great quotes and opened my eyes to a new view on war stories.
A few questions...
How much of the story is true, if any at all.
Are the character in the book real people because he did dedicated the book to them.
Why did Rat torture the baby buffalo? Was it his way to deal with Lemon's death?
Thursday, February 8, 2007
The Yellow Wallpaper Debate
John is not a good husband at all and can be blamed for the narrator's breakdown throughout the novel John symbolizes the majority of men during the 1980s. He has no respect for his wife and treats her like a child, or a pet instead of a human being. Early on in the book the narrator states "John laughs at me, of course, but one expects that in marriage"(9). He doesn't take the time to truly listen to her, even when it is about her own illness. The narrator mentions "You see he does not believe I am sick! And what can one do?"(10). She also says "John does not know how much I really suffer"(14). A husband who truly wanted his wife to get better would listen to what she had to say about her illness and at least take it into consideration. Throughout the story John controls every aspect of the narrator's life. She is no longer aloud to write because John hates it. He has her on a "schedule prescription for each hour of the day"(12). The narrator is under his complete control. John even gets to decide when she is allowed to see her own family. John is not even around most of the time. The narrator writes "John is away all day, and even some nights..."(13). If he really cared he would be there to offer the narrator love and support, not busy himself with "cases" in town.Overall John is a terrible husband who offers only disrespect, lack of trust, control, and neglect.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)