Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Light vs. Dark
In Part I of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, Marlow tells the story of his experience of going to Africa. Throughout his own narrative, Marlow often incorporates the contrast between light and dark. Some examples are “A lot of people, mostly black and naked, moved about like ants . . . A blinding sunlight drowned all this . . .” (15), “ . . . the brass-wire set into the depths of darkness and in return came a precious trickle of ivory” (18), and “The edge of a colossal jungle so dark green as to be almost black, fringed with white surf, ran straight, like a ruled line, far far away along a blue sea whose glitter was blurred by a creeping mist” (13). What does the contrast Conrad sets up in Heart of Darkness do for the reader? Does he use this as a racial contrast? Or did Conrad have something else in mind?
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Unity or Contradiction?
One aspect of the article “Rereading Faulkner: Authority, Criticism, and The Sound and the Fury,” by Stacy Burton, really struck me. Burton allows the reader to question the notion of both unity and contradiction within William Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury. This article examines the following question: is contradiction, or unity, the true theme of the novel? With “the three first-person narrators, who recount interior monologues of the three Compson brothers, speak in distinct voices . . . : Benjy by mental limitations, Quentin by neurosis, Jason by defensive self-justification. The fourth does not resolve them but instead demonstrates, in conjunction with them, the impossibility of an omniscient point of view,” Burton shows that some critics believe that this novel does in fact, demonstrate unity (610). On the contrary, other critics “have focused on its contradictions and the ways it complicates attempts at resolution and undermines attempts at closure” (610). With the first two narrations by Benjy and Quentin, the complicatedness of the novel is evident; however, as the reader moves on to the next narration through Jason’s point of view, things slowly begin to unfold, and the reader is able to get a better sense of the issues within the Compson family. To me, there is a certain unity in Faulkner’s novel with the three narrators giving the reader a chance to see inside each brother’s mind and observe the Compson family through his eyes. Each narration allows the reader to decipher the nature of each character from different points of view. I think it’s interesting that Faulkner chose Benjy, Quentin, and Jason to act as narrators versus Caddy; the same incidents, though the same actions and consequences, would be portrayed differently through Caddy’s eyes; therefore, those incidents would more likely than not have a very different effect on the reader.
I chose this article because the word unity barely comes to mind when reading a book such as The Sound and the Fury. It wasn’t until I read this article that I really took a step back and realized the unifying factors that are portrayed through the narrations, especially when certain scenes are replayed in two different narrations, through two different Compson brothers’ eyes. (367)
Rereading Faulkner: Authority, Criticism, and "The Sound and the Fury"
Stacy Burton
Modern Philology, Vol. 98, No. 4 (May, 2001), pp. 604-628
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
I chose this article because the word unity barely comes to mind when reading a book such as The Sound and the Fury. It wasn’t until I read this article that I really took a step back and realized the unifying factors that are portrayed through the narrations, especially when certain scenes are replayed in two different narrations, through two different Compson brothers’ eyes. (367)
Rereading Faulkner: Authority, Criticism, and "The Sound and the Fury"
Stacy Burton
Modern Philology, Vol. 98, No. 4 (May, 2001), pp. 604-628
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
June Second, 1910
The dysfunctional Compson family is played out before Quentin’s eyes in the scene where Mother talks about how Caddy and Benjy are “cursed.”
When Quentin remembers the scene in which Mother says to Father, “. . . I can take Jason and go where we are not known I’ll go down on my knees and pray for the absolution of my sins that he may escape this curse try to forget that the others ever were,” does his mother talking about his siblings as a curse heavily affect Quentin (104)? Quentin is the one who repeats what he has heard when he says to Caddy, “theres a curse on us its not our fault is it our fault . . . you cant make me theres a curse on us” (158). What is the purpose of Faulkner having Mother believe that all her children except Jason are “cursed”? What is the effect on Quentin when he remembers this and reiterates his Mother’s words to Caddy?
I think that Quentin almost feels that it’s his responsibility to “lift the curse” from his siblings. He was not specifically mentioned during Caroline’s rant, so maybe he feels that he is not directly part of that category. It almost seems as if his not being directly mentioned in that group makes him even more protective of Caddy, in whatever way, especially when he attempts to fight Dalton Ames. (234)
When Quentin remembers the scene in which Mother says to Father, “. . . I can take Jason and go where we are not known I’ll go down on my knees and pray for the absolution of my sins that he may escape this curse try to forget that the others ever were,” does his mother talking about his siblings as a curse heavily affect Quentin (104)? Quentin is the one who repeats what he has heard when he says to Caddy, “theres a curse on us its not our fault is it our fault . . . you cant make me theres a curse on us” (158). What is the purpose of Faulkner having Mother believe that all her children except Jason are “cursed”? What is the effect on Quentin when he remembers this and reiterates his Mother’s words to Caddy?
I think that Quentin almost feels that it’s his responsibility to “lift the curse” from his siblings. He was not specifically mentioned during Caroline’s rant, so maybe he feels that he is not directly part of that category. It almost seems as if his not being directly mentioned in that group makes him even more protective of Caddy, in whatever way, especially when he attempts to fight Dalton Ames. (234)
Sunday, October 4, 2009
half blog
So far, I’ve read 3 short stories: “Allegiance,” by Aryn Kyle; “So Much for Artemis,” by Patrick Ryan; and “Elder Jinks,” by Edith Pearlman. I enjoyed “Elder Jinks” the most. Basically, the lesson I took from this story is this: there are always second chances in life, but it’s up to you to take the initiative to find or perhaps, form, those chances, just as Grace and Gustave attempt to mend their relationship at the end of the story. Their relationship almost seems broken from the beginning with the subtle disagreements between something as seemingly trivial as the way the lawn chairs are placed. Toward the middle of the story, when Gustave unexpectedly returns home to find an interesting group of people in his living room, the relationship is already “over.” When Hal Karsh pulls Grace out of the house, the relationship seems to be completely terminated. They weren’t on the same page, especially shown when Gustave thought the sweater was for him, whereas Grace actually made the sweater for her granddaughter. The ending of the story was quite surprising to me; given the circumstances of the characters, I thought the relationship was doomed from the start. But, nonetheless, Pearlman gives us a “happy” ending; however, I’m not sure how long the happiness will last between Grace and Gustave. But, nevertheless, I enjoyed the lesson because Pearlman does address the dangers of this second chance for both of them. Consequently, she shows that the dangers of giving yourself and somebody else second chances might be worth the risk if the reward is great enough.
I am curious about the title of the story, though. So far, this is what I’ve thought about the title: the two main characters are “elderly,” hence the first word of the title. Jinks can be defined as “a sudden, quick change of direction” according to the Oxford dictionary, which reminds me of the nature of Grace and Gustave’s relationship. I saw it like this: at any time, something can alter their relationship. (337)
I am curious about the title of the story, though. So far, this is what I’ve thought about the title: the two main characters are “elderly,” hence the first word of the title. Jinks can be defined as “a sudden, quick change of direction” according to the Oxford dictionary, which reminds me of the nature of Grace and Gustave’s relationship. I saw it like this: at any time, something can alter their relationship. (337)
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Time and Guilt in a Mother-Daughter Relationship
As the narrator continues ironing, and as Emily inadvertently “leaves her seal” on the family, time is ticking faster and faster on the clock. In Tillie Olsen’s “I Stand Here Ironing,” the precious gift of time persistently speaks whenever the mother harbors her guilt about Emily’s childhood. Just as the clock “scared [Emily] what it talked,” the clock, likewise, frightens her mother, as it diminishes her chances of reversing her mistakes and mending her daughter’s childhood. Through this short story, Olsen reveals the consequence of a true mother-daughter relationship: although time spares a child certain animosity from his or her childhood, the mother forever harbors her guilt from her child’s youth, whether expressing that via herself or via an object, an iron.
Although insecure, ill, and distressed, Olsen’s descriptions of Emily’s heartbreaking childhood present Emily with a chance for her to get better, become happier, and challenge the notion of time that worries her. From the beginning of her upbringing, “. . . . there was not time for [Emily]. She had to help be a mother, and housekeeper, and shopper” (641). Emily, able to overcome her mother’s disregards during her childhood, suffers through an immense amount of pain, yet is able to become “Somebody” by performing in numerous plays. Interestingly enough, her mother is the one who suggests her performing, possibly a way of altering her guilt into something that is ultimately responsible for Emily’s sudden happiness, a gift to both Emily and her mother.
The narrator knows that time is running out for her to love Emily, for her to fix Emily’s childhood and relieve her own guilt when she sees that “[Emily’s] physical lightness and brightness . . . [are only] momentary” (640). This guilt almost comes involuntarily to the narrator when she connects her own action of ironing to Emily’s own “. . . . struggle over books . . . .” (641). The narrator’s guilt interjects into her parenting abilities when she permits Emily to be sent away to a home in the country that forbids children to keep their parents’ letters, or when she allows her children to stay home from school, merely for her own insecurities that arise when her family is apart. With this, Emily’s mother attempts to recapture the time before she “released” Emily from her grasp by trying to make up for her unintentional negligence from Emily’s childhood after “now when it is too late,” she checks in on Emily during the night (639). The narrator knows her mistakes; she understands that her “wisdom came too late” after she sees the life of “a child of anxious, not proud, love” (642). And yet, she also recognizes that she cannot go back and fix the past with Emily; guilt will remain an eternal feeling within her.
The iron harbors the narrator’s guilt toward herself every time she sees Emily; her guilt fails to be washed away until she sees a glimpse of happiness in her first daughter. When Emily arbitrarily asks her mother, “Aren’t you ever going to finish the ironing, Mother?,” the answer is no. Emily’s mother will always “stand there ironing” because time will forever engrave the remorse obtained from her daughter’s childhood. Olsen illustrates through a typical household item, the iron, that guilt is something that can never be fully washed away; even after the narrator witnesses Emily’s joy, she still irons, showing that she will always face her guilt, especially when she relives Emily’s childhood with “a weeping [she] can hear yet” (638). The clock that worries both Emily and her mother will continue ticking, just as the narrator will continue ironing. (605)
Although insecure, ill, and distressed, Olsen’s descriptions of Emily’s heartbreaking childhood present Emily with a chance for her to get better, become happier, and challenge the notion of time that worries her. From the beginning of her upbringing, “. . . . there was not time for [Emily]. She had to help be a mother, and housekeeper, and shopper” (641). Emily, able to overcome her mother’s disregards during her childhood, suffers through an immense amount of pain, yet is able to become “Somebody” by performing in numerous plays. Interestingly enough, her mother is the one who suggests her performing, possibly a way of altering her guilt into something that is ultimately responsible for Emily’s sudden happiness, a gift to both Emily and her mother.
The narrator knows that time is running out for her to love Emily, for her to fix Emily’s childhood and relieve her own guilt when she sees that “[Emily’s] physical lightness and brightness . . . [are only] momentary” (640). This guilt almost comes involuntarily to the narrator when she connects her own action of ironing to Emily’s own “. . . . struggle over books . . . .” (641). The narrator’s guilt interjects into her parenting abilities when she permits Emily to be sent away to a home in the country that forbids children to keep their parents’ letters, or when she allows her children to stay home from school, merely for her own insecurities that arise when her family is apart. With this, Emily’s mother attempts to recapture the time before she “released” Emily from her grasp by trying to make up for her unintentional negligence from Emily’s childhood after “now when it is too late,” she checks in on Emily during the night (639). The narrator knows her mistakes; she understands that her “wisdom came too late” after she sees the life of “a child of anxious, not proud, love” (642). And yet, she also recognizes that she cannot go back and fix the past with Emily; guilt will remain an eternal feeling within her.
The iron harbors the narrator’s guilt toward herself every time she sees Emily; her guilt fails to be washed away until she sees a glimpse of happiness in her first daughter. When Emily arbitrarily asks her mother, “Aren’t you ever going to finish the ironing, Mother?,” the answer is no. Emily’s mother will always “stand there ironing” because time will forever engrave the remorse obtained from her daughter’s childhood. Olsen illustrates through a typical household item, the iron, that guilt is something that can never be fully washed away; even after the narrator witnesses Emily’s joy, she still irons, showing that she will always face her guilt, especially when she relives Emily’s childhood with “a weeping [she] can hear yet” (638). The clock that worries both Emily and her mother will continue ticking, just as the narrator will continue ironing. (605)
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Is it the End or the Beginning?
During class, we started to discuss whether or not Norma Jean committed suicide at the end of Bobbie Ann Mason’s “Shiloh.” Did she end her life by jumping off the bridge? Did she feel the need to commit suicide because her marriage was going downhill, and her mother had caught her smoking, and her life was going back to when she was eighteen? Or did she not commit suicide at all? Did she merely go onto the bridge to obtain a peaceful, serene landscape where she can gather her thoughts without Leroy or Mabel, and just release everything that has happened in the past? I think the latter.
Norma Jean is confused. She feels like she is going back to her life when she was eighteen again with Leroy, and she “can’t face that all over again,” yet she “ha[s] this crazy feeling [she] missed something” (612, 606). I see Norma Jean as a woman full of contrasting thoughts. She never seems to know exactly what she wants. It seems like Mason characterizes Norma Jean as a woman who may be independent and seemingly okay with everything in her life, but truthfully, she is not. She has a fed up type of attitude with her life, which she discovers after certain triggers, such as Mabel catching her smoking. But does that make her want to commit suicide? I feel that Mason’s final paragraph gives Leroy a sense of false hope of living a happy life, but it gives Norma Jean a sense of real hope for her life as a truly independent woman. With a tranquil landscape such as the Tennessee River, her newfound hobby of exercising, and her words to Leroy, Norma Jean is able to reevaluate her own life in respect to herself, rather than to Leroy, rather than to Mabel, rather than to anyone else but herself. Her independence had already been previously shown through her want of Leroy to leave the house more often, but her self-reliance truly shines when she is alone on the bridge during the final scene of this short story. To me, overlooking such a landscape allows one to see further into the future; Norma Jean sees her dreams and her hope and her future over that river. Mason does not give an ending to Norma Jean’s part of the story. Norma Jean’s being on the bridge is not the final curtain of “Shiloh”; rather, it is a continuation of the story for Norma Jean. Perhaps it is the end of the story for Leroy, and possibly Mabel, but Norma Jean’s story continues after the author stops writing.
So, I think the notion that Norma Jean committed suicide is very interesting because I look at the scene from a more optimistic view when I see a sense of hope sprouting as the beginning, not the end, of something for Norma Jean. In my opinion, it’s almost as if Leroy is the one who metaphorically commits suicide. When “Leroy is trying to comprehend that his marriage is breaking up, but for some reason he is wondering about the white slabs in a graveyard,” he shows that deep within his heart, he does not care all that much about his marriage (612). Maybe he is concerned about Norma Jean and his own future, but they both know that the marriage is over, so there is no point for Leroy to have a sense of false hope, but I still feel Leroy’s false hope in the final paragraph. Norma Jean represents the stronger person in this story because she is able to gather herself even after the realization that things aren’t working out the way they should have. Leroy, on the other hand, almost pushes it to the back of his mind by thinking about other things and fails to take Norma Jean seriously when she states that she is leaving him. On the contrary, Norma Jena gives herself a sense of real hope when she tries to better herself with her exercises in the end, yet Leroy has a sense of false hope when he thinks Norma Jean is waving to him when she is standing on the bridge (613). Even after she leaves him, he still stands “admiring” her and gathering his thoughts when he wonders “Is she beckoning to him? She seems to be doing an exercise for her chest muscles” (613). (730)
Norma Jean is confused. She feels like she is going back to her life when she was eighteen again with Leroy, and she “can’t face that all over again,” yet she “ha[s] this crazy feeling [she] missed something” (612, 606). I see Norma Jean as a woman full of contrasting thoughts. She never seems to know exactly what she wants. It seems like Mason characterizes Norma Jean as a woman who may be independent and seemingly okay with everything in her life, but truthfully, she is not. She has a fed up type of attitude with her life, which she discovers after certain triggers, such as Mabel catching her smoking. But does that make her want to commit suicide? I feel that Mason’s final paragraph gives Leroy a sense of false hope of living a happy life, but it gives Norma Jean a sense of real hope for her life as a truly independent woman. With a tranquil landscape such as the Tennessee River, her newfound hobby of exercising, and her words to Leroy, Norma Jean is able to reevaluate her own life in respect to herself, rather than to Leroy, rather than to Mabel, rather than to anyone else but herself. Her independence had already been previously shown through her want of Leroy to leave the house more often, but her self-reliance truly shines when she is alone on the bridge during the final scene of this short story. To me, overlooking such a landscape allows one to see further into the future; Norma Jean sees her dreams and her hope and her future over that river. Mason does not give an ending to Norma Jean’s part of the story. Norma Jean’s being on the bridge is not the final curtain of “Shiloh”; rather, it is a continuation of the story for Norma Jean. Perhaps it is the end of the story for Leroy, and possibly Mabel, but Norma Jean’s story continues after the author stops writing.
So, I think the notion that Norma Jean committed suicide is very interesting because I look at the scene from a more optimistic view when I see a sense of hope sprouting as the beginning, not the end, of something for Norma Jean. In my opinion, it’s almost as if Leroy is the one who metaphorically commits suicide. When “Leroy is trying to comprehend that his marriage is breaking up, but for some reason he is wondering about the white slabs in a graveyard,” he shows that deep within his heart, he does not care all that much about his marriage (612). Maybe he is concerned about Norma Jean and his own future, but they both know that the marriage is over, so there is no point for Leroy to have a sense of false hope, but I still feel Leroy’s false hope in the final paragraph. Norma Jean represents the stronger person in this story because she is able to gather herself even after the realization that things aren’t working out the way they should have. Leroy, on the other hand, almost pushes it to the back of his mind by thinking about other things and fails to take Norma Jean seriously when she states that she is leaving him. On the contrary, Norma Jena gives herself a sense of real hope when she tries to better herself with her exercises in the end, yet Leroy has a sense of false hope when he thinks Norma Jean is waving to him when she is standing on the bridge (613). Even after she leaves him, he still stands “admiring” her and gathering his thoughts when he wonders “Is she beckoning to him? She seems to be doing an exercise for her chest muscles” (613). (730)
Sunday, September 20, 2009
The Unexpected Chosen One
During class, the question arose about who the true religious person in Flannery O’Connor’s “Parker’s Back” is. Is it Parker, the seemingly rebellious, non-religious, tattooed man? Or is it Sarah Ruth, his seemingly deeply religious wife who thinks Parker’s tattoos are ways of him “putting some more trash on [him]self” (394)? Through this short story, O’Connor questions traditional beliefs pertaining to both understanding God and exactly what being religious means. Through Parker’s back, the author shows that to have God choose you does not equal being a fanatically “religious” person like Sarah Ruth; sometimes, God picks the person least expected to carry His religious torch.
In the beginning of “Parker’s Back,” Sarah Ruth seems to worship God in the sense that she shows the reader and Parker that religion is the very definition of her life; however, this type of behavior appears as a type of falsehood: she merely devotes herself to God, not to find salvation but to act like she has been saved, for her own purposes. As the story proceeds, the reader gets the impression that Parker develops a better and deeper connection with God and religion, even though he does not fully understand that feeling. A turning point in the story that exemplifies this deeper connection with God is when Parker finally acquires the tattoo of God on his back, but unlike the other tattoos that he often examine in the mirror, Parker refuses to see this one, stating “That tattoo ain’t going nowhere. It’ll be there when I get there” (392). What does Parker, the rebel to religion, mean by that? I saw it as Parker thinking, or knowing, that God will be there for him whenever Parker gets there. At whatever time Parker finds religion and is able to devote himself to that type of life, he knows that God will be there waiting for him. This begins a certain change in the story, focusing the reader on the connection between Parker and religion, rather than Sarah Ruth and religion.
Another revelation happens when Parker whispers his real name, Obadiah, into the door after Sarah Ruth refuses his entrance into the house. When he murmurs his religious name aloud, suddenly he “turn[s] his spider web soul into a perfect arabesque of colors, a garden of trees and birds and beasts” (394). His soul and his tattoos are no longer “haphazard and botched” because of the significance between his name and the tattoo on his back (385). The final connection between his reaching his “destination” from the first time he sees the beauty that the colors on the man at the fair exerts to his crashing into the tree to his dwelling at the Haven of Light Christian Mission all end up happening for the same reason: God has chosen Parker.
So, maybe Parker is the more religious one in the story, and maybe God selects Parker as a man of religion, but is that the only reason Parker becomes the true religious person? In a way, it almost seems like Sarah Ruth is the one who makes him religious in the end. Parker had only wanted tattoos where he could see them; he did not necessarily care about where other people could see them, until the end of the story. He gets a tattoo on his back because of Sarah Ruth; he is willing to please her, but at the same time, this pushes him onto a path to find a religious connection. It seems like Sarah Ruth plays a role, however significant, in Parker finding religion. (593)
In the beginning of “Parker’s Back,” Sarah Ruth seems to worship God in the sense that she shows the reader and Parker that religion is the very definition of her life; however, this type of behavior appears as a type of falsehood: she merely devotes herself to God, not to find salvation but to act like she has been saved, for her own purposes. As the story proceeds, the reader gets the impression that Parker develops a better and deeper connection with God and religion, even though he does not fully understand that feeling. A turning point in the story that exemplifies this deeper connection with God is when Parker finally acquires the tattoo of God on his back, but unlike the other tattoos that he often examine in the mirror, Parker refuses to see this one, stating “That tattoo ain’t going nowhere. It’ll be there when I get there” (392). What does Parker, the rebel to religion, mean by that? I saw it as Parker thinking, or knowing, that God will be there for him whenever Parker gets there. At whatever time Parker finds religion and is able to devote himself to that type of life, he knows that God will be there waiting for him. This begins a certain change in the story, focusing the reader on the connection between Parker and religion, rather than Sarah Ruth and religion.
Another revelation happens when Parker whispers his real name, Obadiah, into the door after Sarah Ruth refuses his entrance into the house. When he murmurs his religious name aloud, suddenly he “turn[s] his spider web soul into a perfect arabesque of colors, a garden of trees and birds and beasts” (394). His soul and his tattoos are no longer “haphazard and botched” because of the significance between his name and the tattoo on his back (385). The final connection between his reaching his “destination” from the first time he sees the beauty that the colors on the man at the fair exerts to his crashing into the tree to his dwelling at the Haven of Light Christian Mission all end up happening for the same reason: God has chosen Parker.
So, maybe Parker is the more religious one in the story, and maybe God selects Parker as a man of religion, but is that the only reason Parker becomes the true religious person? In a way, it almost seems like Sarah Ruth is the one who makes him religious in the end. Parker had only wanted tattoos where he could see them; he did not necessarily care about where other people could see them, until the end of the story. He gets a tattoo on his back because of Sarah Ruth; he is willing to please her, but at the same time, this pushes him onto a path to find a religious connection. It seems like Sarah Ruth plays a role, however significant, in Parker finding religion. (593)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)