Week 2 9/6 - 9/10 On the Reading of "Araby" by James Joyce,
and "A Rose for Emily" by William Faulkner
Please tell us which aspects of these two stories stood out for you the most and why.
What are the most prominent elements of fiction that we find here? What "meanings"
are conveyed by these stories?
Answer: In terms of "Araby" by James Joyce, the Plot of the Protagonist in "Araby" is
relayed with an indirect presentation giving the reader an opportunity to identify with
the main character of the plot. (First Person narratives have a way of creating
parallels that may strike a chord in the reader or not at all).
I don't believe it demonstrates as much artistic unity as "A Rose For Emily" though
very well written. However, there are very strong parallels that brings these two
Essay Themes together (which I would get to later).
In Dramatization of the Character, it is much easier to relate to the main character in
"Araby", simply because the character is closer to the general norm of romance and
inclinations of romance for an average crush story. It is not so for "A Rose in Emily",
which is definitely a psychological perversion of romance, or Love (whatever that
character was).
Both characters were dynamic, however, the main character in "A Rose For Emily"
was much more dynamic, simply because she lived over 70 years, long enough to
change ones lifestyle a hundred times in our generation.
In dramatization the reader sees the symbolisms in pluralism of death in "A Rose
for Emily" (where the main character dies and all her loves), but sees just one
symbolism of death (in this case of the Priest) in "Araby". In the former, the death of
the Father was a source of misery, pain, distrust, isolations and a perverted
disposition towards the world outside, which eventually led to secrets of love and
fear, shame and guilt and very scary obsessions.
In "Araby" what you see is a direct opposite of the energy at work. The main
character seizes on the good will and noble character of the dead Priest to pray out
loud for the one that he loves, and he is granted his wish. He is released from the
shackles of his desires for love when she (the one he loves) walks up to him, and
thereafter seeks an open avenue to show that Love.
In "A Rose for Emily" the Antagonists really needed to be relieved of their burden of
the smell of death, and all their efforts would not accomplish their desire until the
very day the main character dies. This very community were in love with love, and
had a strong empathy for Emily, that looked almost as if they were looking for the
romance that would light up their own world by Emily finding her true love, or what
would make her most happy. (Please relate this paragraph to the Main Character in
Araby)
The antagonists also had a dynamism, that makes them unify (in the community) to
save themselves from a reoccurring frustration - (The Smell!). Were they trying to
help take the smell away because they love Emily or what was the motivation...?
Now what brings these two themes together, are the building climaxes to resolve
the conflict of emotions to find immediate answers to their anxieties and
frustrations.
"Araby's" main character, would therefore symbolize the Community of "A Rose For
Emily", who both petition those in authority for an answer to love and deliverance.
Both are in a quest to make their burdens easier to carry, and at the climax the
reader finds the frustration in both symbolisms, as they do all they can, to get what
they want or need.
The Main character of “Araby” is unyielding as he asks for his money for the bazaar
that would help him keep his word to his love, the whole driving force of his
emotions.
The whole community is unyielding as they petition the courts and the sheriff, until
they resolved to wait it out, just like the Main Character waited for his uncle. (I'll wait
or die for the money to this Bazaar). The Community after trying in vain to get the
smell out (just like the main character in “Araby” trying to get the attention of
Mangan's sister), could not wait to bury Emily, so they could get rid of the smell.
The frustration led to the relief of the burial (relief of getting the money from the uncle
in "Araby") which led to the events in the house that led to the upper rooms (similar
to the main Character in the Upper Rooms of Hall Ways at The Bazaar) and the utter
shock of dismay at the sight of the dead with no life at all (the utter darkness "Lights
out" of the bazaar room and the utter shock and dismay of the reality of nothing to
show his Love, in "Araby")
Week 5 9/27 - 10/1 Reading on “The Yellow Wall Paper” by
Charlotte Gilman, and “A Woman On A Roof” by Doris Lessings.
Charlotte Gilman lived in the early 20th century(1860-1935) and was radically
opposed to the Cult of True Womanhood, Cult of domesticity, Cult of purity.
Understanding this era of consciousness is to also try to grapple with the
imbalance of personal responsibility and sacrifice, that must be made by the
woman when dictated or accepted by a majority (both of the man that ruled and the
woman who propagated his ruling agenda).
The imbalance of freedom fought against by Gilman, was to overlap the birth of
Doris Lessings (1919-) who would write her first novel 15 years after her
predecessor in continuation of this fight against repression. The gulf that separated
these two writers is only as deep as the struggle that bonded them against a
common fight. Their writings only show the path to escape. In looking at the times
you find a continuum of a struggle that carries on the legacy of a fight, and brings it
closer home in the writings of Lessings. Let me expound.
Charlotte Gilman would have loved the room in the ground floor, which would have
given her a sense of closeness to things beautiful, and speaks freedom and
expression. She was denied that opportunity, but was given a room with a
Wallpaper that was determined to keep her in line with the repressions she is
fighting against (top floor which is close to the roof). In that shackle she is overcome
with a madness, a result of a psychological repressive torture.
Doris Lessings takes her legacy and weaves an intricate pattern of escape, but also
one in which there is a triumphant edge that shouts freedom; Instead of continuing
the understanding from a ground level of freedom, she takes it to the roof of a
building. She brings in a mountain top reality to shout out a fight that carries a sting
of "victory" in continuum of her predecessors struggles against the madness of
repression. She also does it without any dialogue through verbal communication
with the protagonist of her story. The silent and incoercible sunbather is a very
different twist from a coercible wife in Gilman's, "The Wallpaper".
Furthermore, instead of a closed golf like the story of Gilman, with the physician,
the locked door, and a thrown away key where her oppressor can not reach her, she
gives us the same gulf only this time both the repressed and the oppressor see eye
to eye: An open gulf symbolic of fearlessness.
However, she gets even more direct in the writing, the gulf that separates them is
not as simple as an innocent door to shower love to a wife, but it's a gulf of death
that builds hatred and separates the repressed from the oppressor. In these case
she builds a widening gap of confrontations and misunderstandings as opposed to
a thin gap of misunderstanding in Gilman's "The Wallpaper". The times are
definitely changing; Redefining Relationships 101.
My question; What is the link between men and women in a cooperating society of
ideal, values and responsibilities? Are there differences that must stay relevant
between a male and a female? Or are these differences just a factor of outward
disillusionments?
Finally, if they are, where do we begin the reconditioning of the man to woman
concept of equality, on what grounds and standards, and to what extent would it
promote/constitute the legacy of positive human evolution for generations to come?
Week 8 10/18 - 10/22 Reading on "The Man to Send Rain clouds"
by Leslie Silko, "Red Convertible" by Eldrich Louise, and "The
Ones Who Walk Away From Omela" by Ursula LeGuin.
Our three authors for this week write about problems in our culture. They focus on
different parts of our society and address their chosen issues in different ways.
Keeping this in mind, please comment on why one of these stories made a more
powerful impact than the others for you, contrasting it to the other two as you do so.
Leslie Silko's "Man to send rain clouds", Eldrich Louise's "Red Convertible", and
Ursula K.
LeGuin's "The Ones who walk away from Omela" are classic examples of Conflict
within a plot.
"The ones who walk away from Omela" had more impact, simply because it
touches on the Utopian Society of a Platonic type. It demonstrates the tenants of
Platonic Christian/Agapic Principles in a society where all is fair, but places you in a
paradox by asking those who choose to identify with this Utopian Society of excess
and fairness, whether they would gladly enjoy these excesses by the eternal slavery
or oppression of another.
There in lies the Conflict where, each individual looks within himself to know if they
are themselves oppressors who turn away their eyes from the evils/perils in society.
And whether they turned away their eyes, so they can maintain their position of
wealth, fame, security and all the bliss of a thriving society.
Though the language of the Plot is laced with Fantasy and the surrealistic, (the child
that never grows, and is made to stay in a very oppressive state of living), is
symbolic of those who have to remain at the bottom and poverty level of society
throughout their lives, so the rich can thrive on the ideals of comfort and excesses.
" ...Where the language of "the Rich" is used then there must be the existence of the
ever present poor"...... (AOB)
However, for those who make a choice to take responsibility for the truth behind
their pleasures, they are forced to make life altering decisions to their living
conditions that forces them out of blissful ignorance into responsible
acknowledgement of their wrong doings.
In terms of all this, I reaffirm the value in taking responsibility for one's actions and
not making another suffer endlessly, based on a willful disregard of that ones
freedom, fairness and equality (in ratio to one's self)
--- A good example of Social Conflict (Man vs Society)
In terms of contrasting this story against "Red Convertible" and "Man to send rain
clouds", I would say the Red Convertible showed nearly all the major Conflicts in a
short story element through the Protagonist in the Plot. I can not directly relate to the
Protagonist based on my personal experiences, however, I can strongly empathize
based on my exposure to people who have lived to regret the wars they fought in.
However, the idea of taking responsibility for ones actions also plays an important
part of the plot; a role in which the Protagonist is in war with himself, with society,
with other's, in this case Lyman his brother, and with circumstances. He won every
war he was involved with "except the war with himself". In quotes, simply because
this is a matter of opinion, he could have won that war by being very relaxed in the
arms of death itself when the river carried him away.
(For the benefit of more exposition on the author and his writings, I found that
Eldrich used red as an Anti-american symbolism and most short stories seem to
employ the use of symbolisms). Therefore, drawing from that reasoning, Lyman
Lamentine (the protagonist) which rhymes with lamentations may have been a
name created to heighten the anti-American sentiments of Lyman, against a war that
empowers others at the expense of the less fortunate.
Lastly, in "Man to send rain clouds", Teofilo who died and was to be buried under
the usual mass and rite service was not buried like he should have been. His death
was used as a vehicle to receive blessings howbeit through the manipulation and
the cunnings of the Priest by the grandson. It shows to what extent one may be
inclined to compromise their integrity for a better way of life or state of living.
The Plot shows the Conflict within the priest who must weigh all the balances at
play and bend the rules so as to appease those who he may indirectly have to
depend on in society. It uses conflict with himself, conflict with society (clergy
protocols), conflict with another (verbal refuting of the request
made by the grandson), and circumstances (in terms of the death of Teofilo).
The Priest seemed to win the war with the grandson, the oddness, where the water
he sprinkles disappears before it reaches Teofilo's, and he becomes quite
comfortable pouring the holy water. However, though the fact existed, that the holy
water was not touching the subject (which he probably wanted to rationalize), the
priest finally came to a decision while he was sprinkling never to return to his
priestly duties, and so pours out the rest of his holy water with a passionate intent.
(Also this story is similar to an Old Man with Enormous Wings where the Angel was
taken advantage of, where as "The Man to Send Rain Clouds" was done in a more
realistic setting with conflicting cultural and religious beliefs, and with a repentant
protagonist who knew he had taken advantage of his Priest Oath.)
Based on the Conflicts of the Plots in each of these stories I found it easier to relate
to the Plot in "The One's Who Walk Away from Omela" which also demonstrates all
four conflicts I enumerated in the other stories. This choice even though surrealistic
in Plot, has more symbolic reality implied in which the Protagonists make heavily
weighted decision when faced with the truth of their day to day living environment.
Week 9 10/25 - 10/29 Reading on Cultural Studies, Gender,
Reader-Response, Historical, Sociological, Deconstructive and
Psychological critical approaches to Literature
Give us your thoughts on how the different critical approaches to literature treat the
text very differently. How do they see the reader's role? What is the text's
relationship to its period, to the reader and to the author?
Deconstruction is a great premise to find the links in contradictory extremes of any
opposing view or idea within a text. When I find time to write stories, I write with the
intention of the deconstruction approach, among others, to be applied to its text. The
reader's role is to rethink the literary text being de constructed and engage in some
meaningful reflection about the part they play in the story. In my opinion, a readers
role is nearly always the same in any critical approach, if they use it as a tool to
reflect on the deeper meanings of a literary work and how it relates to themselves.
The text relationship to reader, author and period is "multi-layered" in terms of
cultural, social, ethical or evolutionary implications within society. I believe this
applies to nearly all the approaches. (except probably in the closed form of critical
approach), however, in the deconstruction approach it is within the extreme
opposites within text or symbolisms.
Feminist/Gender Criticism is another great premise to loosen ones preconceived
notions about subservient roles in society. To the extent that gender approach is a
male-female hierarchical role analysis, is the deconstruction approach also visited,
just with more specificity.
Again the roles of the readers are similar as in the former. The premise of the
reader's role only differ based on which role category they fall under (that is, within
the sentiments of the antagonist vs protagonist, or oppressor vs victim within the
approach), or it could simply serve as a confirmatory standpoint of what they already
believe. This is mostly gender related in terms of a woman's role in society, which
can be symbolized to any role that needs a form of liberation, in which a reader can
also identify regardless of gender, race, or any such labels.
Historical Criticism is a great way to engage a reader with the political, social,
psychoanalytical, and any form of discourse in a literary text with a Historical eye. I
believe to the extent that history defines a past, any literary text written within the
confines of time can be approached historically; however, it can only be accurately
done to the degree that the flaws/bias within recorded history do not destroy the
objectivity of the approach.
Biographical/Psychoanalytical Criticism is a powerful literary approach to self
awareness. It creates a raw zone of reflective reading, allowing a reader to get to the
core of their person. This is a matter of opinion, since it could be an abstract
discourse or approach in itself. It gives the author an opportunity to explore their
awareness of who they are in a hope of aligning that understanding with their
readers objectivity.(AOB)
Reader-Response is an approach full of different possibilities as readers respond
to literary works. The divergent mind of experiences, and unique opinions only help
to foster the sometimes controversial style of this approach. (AOB) Critics argue that
each "reader sees meaning from their experiences or the norms that govern an
interpretive society"
Structuralism in my opinion is a noble approach to resolving human extremes in
terms of oppositions, and in terms of finding the mediating factor within literary texts.
The fact that this approach was/still is heavily influenced by linguists infers an
ideation through/under which most humans are controlled, defined, or manipulated.
Therefore, the expositions within this approach, though extremely encompassing in
its topics, can serve as a deeper liberating tool for humankind and society within the
readers role.(AOB)
Marxist is what brings to light revolutionary views as in the civil unrest, discontent,
and the inferred need for liberation from social orders of repression when
approaching a literary text. Noted the fallacy of labelling any one a Marxist simply by
a shared agreement within this approach, could be a misleading judgment to bring
to bear on any one. However, to the extent that equality can be visited, is the extent to
which one may also infer a Marxist philosophy, which is also within the tenants of
many other philosophies. eg Christianity, Buddhism etc This is a "clash of the
classes" form of approach.(AOB)
New Criticism could also be made synonymous with Closed/Narrow Minded
Criticism. It tends to focus simply on the text and characterizing simply the text for
what it is. However, I do not believe the judgement that arises from the readers/critic
roles is necessarily closed. I believe the measure of the readers rounded exposure
to the society, gives a form of stimulation that would make only focusing on the
literary text and form, an extremely unique and imaginative process. This approach
tends to deal with the form and characterization of the literary text without taking into
consideration external variable that come to play in terms of the author, period, etc
Formalism is what I may call the extroverted form of the New Criticism or Closed
Approach. The approach is more an exploration that brings out discoveries in the
language and form of literary texts. They find the new beginnings of a form that sets
a trend or new thinking pattern in the literary text. The readers role in my opinion is to
look at the new discoveries in an objective way while choosing to partake in the
revelations or not. The authors role is to find this patterns for objective reader
analysis.
Cultural Criticism is an approach that involves critical analysis of literary text
produced in countries that have come under control of European Colonial Power at
some point in time. In my opinion, this has a way of highlighting the bias that is
sometimes held has the dogmatic mandates or norms for society, and balancing it
against the diversity of cultural views that exist in a post colonial society, or global
culture. The readers role is to make objective conclusions about what could be a
manipulative plot still in play by the culture of this colonial power, and how it affects
his/her cultural views on a global level. A controversial example would be the
manuscripts of books like the King James Bible,... Etc
Week 10 Reading on "Babylon Revisited" by Francis Fitzgerald,
and "The Five Forty- Eight" by John Cheever.
The conflict significance in relation to the periods of each story: In Fitzgerald's
Babylon Revisited Charles Wales the Protagonist of the story is faced with a
situation/conflict where he needs to realign himself with the priorities of his life. The
daughter was the key to this exoneration. If he had his daughter all would be fine.
The conflict creates rising actions between him and his antagonist Marion through-
out the story.
The greatest conflict is actually taking place in Marion who must balance the
emotions of guilt, dishonesty and a whole lot more in the face of uncertainties in
yielding up her trust to a "tangible villain". It relates to circumstances where it looks
like everything is going fine, and then you hit a major bump on the road and all
things fall apart.
The period of this story, though written in an Industrialist era, is very much one of
realism, where you can find everyday affairs that relate to issues of this nature. The
period and the content, sort of leaps into parallel possibilities in a present day post
industrial/technological era.
Cheever's Five Forty Eight, is one of conflict where the "competent., punctual, and
good typist" indirectly died to her dreams, and aspirations (symbolic of Helen), and
must take up a different role (symbolic of Marion and Honoria). Great is the conflict
within this antagonist of the story, that she comes across more as the dominant
character in the plot, even though the narration comes from the point of view of
Blake (the protagonist of the story).
Her holding a gun that could rip a major hole the size of a ball in his belly (Blake), is
demonstrative of her wielding the symbolic power of Honoria over Blake. Blake finds
every way imaginable to get over the situation, which he does, but not under his own
conditions (if he could shake her off him all would be fine...).
His relief/escape from death of his own dreams and wishes, was at the mercy of
Miss Dent, whose desires or rules he must concede to, if he wanted to keep them
(that is his dreams and wishes).
They were both extremely great reads and very engaging. I preferred Cheever's
twists in the plot, which was a lot and created a kind of suspense or conflict within
the reader as well. Fitzgerald was good, and both demonstrate plots possible in a
present day America.
Week 11 11/8 - 11/12 Reading on "The Prophecy" by Anjana
Appachana, and "The lady With Pet Dog" by Anton Chekov
Please reflect on the predicament of the chief characters in these two stories,
especially
as they relate to personal choice and the pursuit of happiness.
Hemu in the Prophecy was ready to sacrifice her safe haven of school, to keep a
friend close by her side. It did not matter if she broke the rules to accomplish this.
She loved her friend and was ready to stand by her, when it came to holding unto
their relationship.
However, it takes each of the girls responsibility for their decisions to make their life
truly blossom. They both find love, however, their secrets are in the open and
repercussions for it paid for.
Anna and Dmitri are similar characters as well, Dmitry was ready to sacrifice what
he thought was his safe haven of marriage to be with someone he knew he could
not help but have close. And though he has to go through the pain of secrecy just
like the girls in the prophecy, it was worth the world for him to make the relationship
work.
He finds his happiness in doing what he believes would give him a chance to be
truly liberated in Love.
This secret affair is awaiting discovery.
Week 12 11/15 - 11/19 reading on "Everyday Use" by Alice
Walker, and "I Stand Here Ironing" by Tillie Olsen
What is the specific problem that Olsen and Walker expose in their stories? What is
the author's view, and how do you know that?
These are two first person accounts of motherhood, and what I may safely assume
to be single parenting as well. It is the battle of mothers who single handedly
balance the needs, desires and wants of children they love so dearly, at the
expense of their own happiness/joy if the need be. (Specific problems are monetary
ability and class structure determinants, while being a single parent in a stratified
society.)
After reading through "Everyday Use", one sees Dee, as a child who must get all
she wants by all means necessary, even when the environment given her does not
allow it. She "burns down the house", which I am quite positive she did, inferred by
this statement made by the narrator; "And Dee. I see her standing off under the
sweet gum tree she used to dig gum out of; a look of concentration on her face as
she watched the last dingy gray board of the house fall in toward the red-hot brick
chimney. WHY DON'T YOU DO A DANCE AROUND THE ASHES? I'd wanted to ask
her. SHE HAD HATED THE HOUSE THAT MUCH."
The environment one grows up in (which is a different kind of antagonist in both
stories), must determine the development and cognitive processes of any one
individual: In these case, it is Emily (I Stand here Ironing) and Dee(Everyday Use),
under the watchful eyes and indigent status of their mothers.
The idea of Social Stratification (though with its flaws) is inherently placed in society
to dictate the kind of cognitive ability any one individual is predisposed to. This is an
issue much deeper than freedom of expression, equal rights for all etc. It has to do
with keeping norms, folkways etc. "sacred/open to an elite few", who must
understand the implications of total access and abuse. .....": Who would be
responsible enough to handle this information and strata allocation for continued
societal control and order". ...Who is to be trusted with keeping order?"
Hence, the inability of Dee to appreciate the poverty she was chained to by reason of
her birth, was an influence based on a culture that promised even more out of life,
which she had determined from an early age to be a part of. Her passionate dislike
of her home as a child, must have been a connection to the nonchalant and
sometimes brutal ways she indirectly/directly treated Maggie.
She forces her world of beauty on her Mother, "I am the way my daughter would want
me to be; a hundred pounds lighter, my skin like an uncooked barley cake"; a link to
this ideology of control or manipulation.
When one reads this story we can immediately, appreciate the desire of locating
the affluent class structure, by a child, Dee, in a family known to have been denied a
more rich day to day living.
But even more, is the fact that it is being defined around the hands of a single
mother and her children.
Dee, finds that world eventually, and comes to appreciate her roots probably by the
prodding of Hakim- a-Barber. But she gets to become an antique collector, and the
first things she does on a visit to her home, is take advantage of her less privileged
relatives. It's strange that even after she is afforded everything class can offer, she
still would like to take advantage of the little that the family has; A typical capitalist
takeover.
These mothers worlds is learning when to say enough is enough, and doing the
best without giving up the nest.
Like wise in "I stand here ironing", I get the impression the first person narrator is
talking to a teacher, who found the gifted child one that must be pruned. This is
because in the story Emily is already nineteen years, and on the last page (799) first
paragraph she says, "You ought to do something about her with a gift like that -- but
without money or knowing how, what does one do? We have left it all to her, and the
gift has as often eddied inside, clogged and clotted, as been used and growing.";
probably a concerned and interested teacher/counsellor looking into scholarship
allocation for Emily.
The mother must determine a world for her children and balance it against her own
desires. It's strange that in both stories it shows the psychological battle a mother
must go through without a male role model. This story also shows a quiet
determination by Emily's mother against all odds to keep things in perspective for
her child. Emily needs to bloom like Dee (Everyday Use), she needs this Counselor
to -- "help make it so there is a cause for her to know that she is more than this
dress on the ironing board helpless before the iron."; A deep reflection done in love
by a mother for a child.
Now let me point out a contrast/irony; Emily is like Maggie (Everyday Use), shy and
reserved, who loves the books like Dee (Everyday Use), is recognized and
resourceful, yet without the means to fully blossom like Dee, because she does not
have the glibness and quickness, or the resources at her disposal.
Dee is like Susan (I stand here ironing), with all the looks and beauty, but shrewed,
glib and quick witted, and adding to that has the gift of Emily (I stand here ironing)
when it came to the books. She is the strange combination of Susan and Emily
(without the reserved and oppressed factor) in one personality.
She did not need the counsellor, because she somehow manages to find a way;
"Asalamalakim" must have been all she said. (not to be spiteful)
What affords Emily and Dee their opportunities is a determination to do something
different; But are the resources available to make their dreams not just a passing
remark, and would it be at the expense of their mother's joy?
(Off topic: I believe the issue, of being one of color and denied total access, is easily
solved by locating access by a change of demographic location; done by moving to
a region where one can be accorded the respect for ones ability, including an
affluent class status, based on the demographical shift e.g. Moving from America to
Japan may accord one a societal privilege not readily enjoyed by the Japanese, and
vise-versa-- Talking on the issue of societal disparages)
Week 14 11/29 - 12/3 Reading on "Tell tale Heart" by Edgar A.
Poe, and "A Small, Good Thing" by Raymond Carver
What observations can you make about Carver’s and Poe’s very different
approaches to the short story format? Do you note any similarities between the two
stories, either in style, message, narrative voice, point of view, or reader positioning?
Starting with Poe's "The Tell Tale Heart", first narrative, with that ever present
omniscient narrator that comes in once in a while. Poe has the punch line story
telling style, that brings you in with a bang of the emotions, and does not stop
pounding away with his characters (in this case the protagonist) until the very end.
Extremely quick paced story, that seems to captivate the reader so quickly, and
leaving you just as fast.
Furthermore, the reader, in my opinion, manages to walk away knowing and
breathing the story. It is quite intriguing to read Poe, because, in my opinion, one
manages to have the story etched in memory. What is also peculiar is that his
writings contains has much imagery as would a seven page story, which is also
confirmed in the perspectives of the author.
This last statement leads me to the style in "A Small Good Thing": Carver is like Poe
playing a persola piece of Argentine music. Carver draws out your emotions, like an
accordion, over a number of pages, making you identify with the misery or mystery
his characters are going through, and then delivers a last page crescendo full of
emotions.
Both protagonist in the stories, were repentant of their deeds, but Poe's protagonist
was definitely guilty of the crime, and could not hide any longer under his deceptive
exterior. Whereas, the baker was only trying to be modest and courteous when he
called,not knowing how to balance the urgency of getting the birthday cake to his
customer.
This was probably due to his culture, experiences, or understandings in life, as we
would see when he invites his guests into the bakery in the middle of the night. It
was no fault of his that the child died, but he took responsibility for the loss by
making it his responsibility, and shifted the burden/guilt of the loss of the child on
himself. He then allowed his customers to be comforted with his warm and
delicious bakery, all the while sharing his life with them.
The story was extremely captivating, "longer"(than Poe's Tell Tale),emotionally
draining, but very engaging. Even, with the nature of death and the emotions in the
story, Carver leaves us with a happily ever after communion, which sort of balanced
the painful death of the child that took place during the narration.
Week 15 12/6 - 12/10 Reading on Happy Endings" by Margaret
Atwood, and "Janus" by Ann Beattie
Think about the statements that these two stories make about intimate relationships.
What is missing, all too often, according to the authors? How does all this reflect on
the
rest of our lives? You may also comment on the authors' choices of narration and
style.
WHAT IS MISSING?
"John and Mary" types seem like an atypical phenomenon passing away with the
older generation. One needs only wait for the old man that has turned current in
style, then one may be up for what I call a shocker.
The idea of convenience, dictating the lifelong destination of the heart is a scary
understanding of bondage. The confusion/mistake of not making the right initial
choice of marital bliss, could also come to haunt a true connection of hearts.
In Janus, the symbolism of Love in and for the bowl, was a potent love affair capable
of keeping the character happy whether her husband was there or not. She could
probably be happy without her husband at this point, having fallen in love with an
inanimate object that provided a companionship that seems to connect, and be
there for her deepest desires and purpose in life.
--both third person narratives
The inherent truth/ignorance about relationships, is not knowing what it would take
to sustain the relationship over the life of it. What is that key connection between one
and their significant other, that transcends time itself? What is that thing between
one and their significant other, that would help that person and their significant other
make connections, that they can laugh about together in the continuum of time?
What is that part of one's connection with another, that one can always count on to
sustain them whether that significant other is alive or not?
TAKE A CHURCH SETTING.
"Well Son/daughter we know both of you love each other with all your heart, oh yes
we can see, but it is advisable you get married to one of the Church members here,
simply because you get to keep the family chair of honor. Some things are only to be
wished...
"What do you think of Mr/s Jones? S/he is a gorgeous individual"
(This takes on different forms.)
A GREEN CARD SCENARIO
" I got married because I needed a green card, I don't really love him/her. I know we
have had our intimate moments, it comes with marriage, you know......
I love you NOW that's what matters."
How does one handle this kind of rhetoric?
THE HELPED ME OUT SCENARIO
You know when I was really going through difficult times s/he helped me out, and
we got to looking at life together, and I just wanted to be there for him/her. I felt the
best thing was to get married. But our dreams in life do not match. S/he does not
believe in school, or the importance of education. Nowadays, s/he goes from state
to state, hopping from one club to another now that we have settled down.
Now what is that for a "marriage"?
Deep, real love, and committed relationships, in my own opinion is more subject to
a wind fall reality, in todays environment of wanton excesses, choices, and
alternatives. I say true relationships born out of irreversible love is the toughest part
of existence when you really want to do the right thing. In my own opinion it is the
hardest road to understand, short of blatant promiscuity.
What happens if a married man/woman finds his/her real love/soul mate outside of
his/her marriage? Is it too late to make amends? Is it convenience/traditions that
defines the role of compatibility? Etc.
I was speaking to a young lady yesterday, and my contention was, why should I be
considered in a different light, because I am talking to a lady on a simple level of
interaction... Does it necessary connote an intimate relationship lurking in secret?
I shake a young lady's hand with an upward palm as oppose to hugging, not
because I do not enjoy hugging my female friends, but it suggest a weakness from
their position which I do not totally support; the idea that they need to be cared for,
which is not supported in the idea of single parenting homes, to which mothers play
most of the bread winning roles today. ( Sometimes I am pressured by the norms,
and I am still forced to give the hug anyway, but they can tell it's not my style at all)
With a close relative who though married looks like a single parent, I get really
flabbergasted about what true relationships are all about, and so my belief is just
stick to my guns, and be on target when I decide to be relationship bound. I have
had enough of my own wrong choices for relationships.
Love relationships could be a blast, if it is the right one. The question is, which one
is the right one, and how do you know you have found that symbolic connection
between each other that transcends time itself? And what is the price, if any, that you
have to pay for it?
© Adebowale Balogun
