Typically, I am not a reader of fiction and so it would be safe to predict me not to pick up a drama while searching for my next great find at Barnes & Noble. In the past when I have attended a play, I assumed that the performance safely mirrored the playwright’s intention, with the exception of budget and acting skill. Never did I realize just how much interpretation could affect the outcome of the play… until our discussion on Trifle’s.
When asked to rewrite the play in modern day, I doubted myself and my submission before I even started blogging about it. There were many people who suggested that having a modern day chauvinist would not be likely or acceptable. I myself, felt as though there was more chauvinism in today’s society than should be ignored. But the deeper into this I dove, I began to feel as though either position standing their ground resembled the closed mindedness of the men and women in the play. Stereotyping the stereotype and not allowing it at all; or overstating the stereotype and shining a bright flood light over it were only 2 of the many perspectives that we witnessed come out of this drama in our class discussions.
I had to grow to become comfortable with my own interpretation of it as well as feel open to the many other sides that were suggested. I think it was great to see all of our creativity evolve in those of us who wished to explore it and appreciate everyone’s independent ideas as they made me realize that interpretation is much bigger than budgets and casting.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Friday, June 26, 2009
"The Piano Lesson" by August Wilson - Part 2
Maretha was a character missing in the piano lesson discussion; Andrew brought up a good point when he mentioned that part of Berniece’s lesson was that her past is what makes her who she is and being a part of that is good for Maretha. Until then, I hadn’t given it much thought but that comment got me thinking… what was Berniece trying to keep Maretha away from??
When I first read Berniece ordering her daughter to go to her room or demanding that Doaker get her away from the conversaion, I dismissed it thinking, ‘this is just a mom who is agitated that her trouble-making brother is back in town’. Now I see there was more to it…
Many of us made the connection that Maretha was doing things for Berniece that Berniece used to do for Mama Esther, but I wonder how Mama Esther treated Berniece after Papa Charles died. Did Mama Esther become domineering, in an effort to feel control over her pain. Or did she take a more passive approach, isolating herself from the family as well as society? Either way, it could have molded Berniece and how she would parent Maretha in the future.
I have to ask, what kind of things was Maretha dealing with while her mother was so busy dealing with “piano issues”? Maretha seems like she could be the speaker in “Hanging Fire” (p650), and the name above the door her mother is locked behind is, "The Piano".
When I first read Berniece ordering her daughter to go to her room or demanding that Doaker get her away from the conversaion, I dismissed it thinking, ‘this is just a mom who is agitated that her trouble-making brother is back in town’. Now I see there was more to it…
Many of us made the connection that Maretha was doing things for Berniece that Berniece used to do for Mama Esther, but I wonder how Mama Esther treated Berniece after Papa Charles died. Did Mama Esther become domineering, in an effort to feel control over her pain. Or did she take a more passive approach, isolating herself from the family as well as society? Either way, it could have molded Berniece and how she would parent Maretha in the future.
I have to ask, what kind of things was Maretha dealing with while her mother was so busy dealing with “piano issues”? Maretha seems like she could be the speaker in “Hanging Fire” (p650), and the name above the door her mother is locked behind is, "The Piano".
"Hamlet" by William Shakespeare - Part 2
I think I read the first four pages before saying to my friend, “what does this mean? I have no idea what I’m reading.” To help me comprehend the dialogue, I bought a used copy of Kenneth Branagh’s filmed version, the first ever full-text film of Hamlet. I considered the words of Charles Lamb (mentioned on p1045), said to be one of the great analytics of Shakespeare, warning of the limitations of watching a performance of this great work, “When the novelty is past, we find to our cost that, instead of realizing an idea, we have only materialized and brought down a fine vision to the standard of flesh and blood. We have let go a dream in a quest of an unattainable substance.” But considering Lamb quoted that at the turn of the 19th century and this is my first (21st century) serious attempt to understand 16th century dialogue, I took the chance anyway.
I should consider myself lucky to have gotten my hands on the movie at all since it was filmed in 1996 but was not released to DVD until 2007, and even then only by the push a movement who made it a reality. If it is even possible for Hamlet to be a page-turner upon first read without the aid of the video, then I find it hard to describe the intensity of watching Branagh’s interpretation of it while reading my text at the same time. It is likely that not heeding Lamb’s 19th century warning at that time would have been detrimental to the experience, but as for me in today… following that advice would have left me clueless.
I should consider myself lucky to have gotten my hands on the movie at all since it was filmed in 1996 but was not released to DVD until 2007, and even then only by the push a movement who made it a reality. If it is even possible for Hamlet to be a page-turner upon first read without the aid of the video, then I find it hard to describe the intensity of watching Branagh’s interpretation of it while reading my text at the same time. It is likely that not heeding Lamb’s 19th century warning at that time would have been detrimental to the experience, but as for me in today… following that advice would have left me clueless.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
"Hamlet" by William Shakespeare
Though I read some Shakespeare in high school, this is the first time I have read him where I was the least bit interested (I know). I can say that the hint of understanding I gained from reading this has me hooked.
I loved the suspense of wondering if he was ever going to pull out his madness and when I found out it was in his plan to act so, I thought the way Shakespeare wrote him was incredibly eloquent. The monologue on pages 1362-63 stunned me. The shock he portrayed at how the actor could show so much emotion “For Hecuba!” and how he ached over how much more the actor would show had he been acting out the death of his father was very emotional. Shakespeare reached out to his audience at that time, relating to those who suffered far greater difficulties in real life. This moment was exemplified by the first part of Act III / Scene 2 where Hamlet gave an acting lesson to the actors (later taking over their lines on stage). He attempted to transcribe his emotions burried in his own heart from the pain of his father’s death through the actor. But how well did Hamlet speak the very things we wish we could say about our own angst, yet can not find the words? The play within the play was a great connection, once again, to the audience, made even more intense by Hamlet not trusting the actor to deliver his intensity as well as he could himself.
I loved the suspense of wondering if he was ever going to pull out his madness and when I found out it was in his plan to act so, I thought the way Shakespeare wrote him was incredibly eloquent. The monologue on pages 1362-63 stunned me. The shock he portrayed at how the actor could show so much emotion “For Hecuba!” and how he ached over how much more the actor would show had he been acting out the death of his father was very emotional. Shakespeare reached out to his audience at that time, relating to those who suffered far greater difficulties in real life. This moment was exemplified by the first part of Act III / Scene 2 where Hamlet gave an acting lesson to the actors (later taking over their lines on stage). He attempted to transcribe his emotions burried in his own heart from the pain of his father’s death through the actor. But how well did Hamlet speak the very things we wish we could say about our own angst, yet can not find the words? The play within the play was a great connection, once again, to the audience, made even more intense by Hamlet not trusting the actor to deliver his intensity as well as he could himself.
"The Piano Lesson" by August Wilson
I am not at all familiar with reading drama and I did my best to picture the play on stage in my mind as I was reading this but I guess my mind is too conditioned to imagine real life taking place as I read fiction. I have a feeling adjusting to this is going to take some practice. One thing I noticed as I read was the tone of the characters; the intensity of their emotion was effectively expressed in my mind’s ear. The confrontation between Berniece and Boy Willie at the of the first act was very loud and emotional and when the scene ended, it took me a minute to acclimate to the abrupt silence.
I did have a tough time getting to know Doaker on a deeper level. I guess he would be considered a good supporting character because we are not as intimate with him as we are with Berniece and Boy Willie. This did disappoint me a little because the introduction to his insight through the poetic monologue expressing the metaphor of the train (p1214-15 and how people keep leaving where they are at to solve their problems. It was a surprise to see he had anything to say at all and I was hoping to see more “lessons” come from him. But he wasnt the only surprise lesson in this drama, Boy Willie's lesson to Berniece (1254-55) about how to believe and push through rang in my own life. And Wining Boy's lesson on how to appreciate what you've got while you have it (1221) was just as important. It was dramatic that the "misfits" of the play had any lessons to teach at all.
I did have a tough time getting to know Doaker on a deeper level. I guess he would be considered a good supporting character because we are not as intimate with him as we are with Berniece and Boy Willie. This did disappoint me a little because the introduction to his insight through the poetic monologue expressing the metaphor of the train (p1214-15 and how people keep leaving where they are at to solve their problems. It was a surprise to see he had anything to say at all and I was hoping to see more “lessons” come from him. But he wasnt the only surprise lesson in this drama, Boy Willie's lesson to Berniece (1254-55) about how to believe and push through rang in my own life. And Wining Boy's lesson on how to appreciate what you've got while you have it (1221) was just as important. It was dramatic that the "misfits" of the play had any lessons to teach at all.
Friday, June 19, 2009
"Trifles" by Susan Glaspell
There were many things worth writing about in this drama based in 1916; to start: ‘who do you sympathize with as you are interpreting the characters?”
I felt obligated to balance the 1916 scales of justice myself by considering women’s suffrage issues such as: what rights a man would have had in this situation at that given time, domestic violence, the inability to speak against your husband, justice and empowerment found in circles from women resisting the way they were treated. Clearly they lived in a difficult time, governed by male dominance.
Mrs. Hale - strong, smart, loyal, feeling responsible for not being “there” for Mrs. Wright when she first sensed something was wrong, belonging to a community of women that had to stick together in order to emotionally and physically overcome - pieced together the crime scene herself and became the judge, jury, and prosecution -- unbeknownst to the inevitably unsuspecting men of that time and setting.
As a director interpreting this, what else is there to consider? What about an ambiguous interpretation so that the audience is faced with more dilemma in choosing a side. Or even a stronger case for sympathizing with Mr. Wright (thanks Andrew). In the “Trifles Discussion”, I rewrote the plot in a modern day setting, showing an abused wife who murdered her husband. The victim, once again, was a woman. Where is the creativity in re-spinning what has been done hundreds of times in modern box office? Even worse, it assumed my audience was unsophisticated and would be more challenged by “bigger, modern-day drama” rather than offering a unique interpretation of what was already written. The adjustment I should have offered instead was my unbiased perspective or simply an unexpected interpretation of sympathizing with the villain, Mr. Wright. Afterall, who was more "right" between Mr. and Mrs. Wright?? And whose right is it to decide.
I felt obligated to balance the 1916 scales of justice myself by considering women’s suffrage issues such as: what rights a man would have had in this situation at that given time, domestic violence, the inability to speak against your husband, justice and empowerment found in circles from women resisting the way they were treated. Clearly they lived in a difficult time, governed by male dominance.
Mrs. Hale - strong, smart, loyal, feeling responsible for not being “there” for Mrs. Wright when she first sensed something was wrong, belonging to a community of women that had to stick together in order to emotionally and physically overcome - pieced together the crime scene herself and became the judge, jury, and prosecution -- unbeknownst to the inevitably unsuspecting men of that time and setting.
As a director interpreting this, what else is there to consider? What about an ambiguous interpretation so that the audience is faced with more dilemma in choosing a side. Or even a stronger case for sympathizing with Mr. Wright (thanks Andrew). In the “Trifles Discussion”, I rewrote the plot in a modern day setting, showing an abused wife who murdered her husband. The victim, once again, was a woman. Where is the creativity in re-spinning what has been done hundreds of times in modern box office? Even worse, it assumed my audience was unsophisticated and would be more challenged by “bigger, modern-day drama” rather than offering a unique interpretation of what was already written. The adjustment I should have offered instead was my unbiased perspective or simply an unexpected interpretation of sympathizing with the villain, Mr. Wright. Afterall, who was more "right" between Mr. and Mrs. Wright?? And whose right is it to decide.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Interpretation Project: Part III
I needed to take a picture of a “Help Wanted” sign in a gas station. My plan was to approach the cashier and nicely ask if I could put the sign (I bought) in their window and take a pic for my school project. Of course, being the courteous person that I can sometimes be, I went into this elaborate explanation of what the movie was for all the way down to the detail of who wrote the poem (don’t ask.). What I hadn’t planned on (as if I’d planned on anything past my blah, blah, blahing and nice smile… hey. It usually works for me, ok?) was the cashier asking me how a help wanted sign in their window related to a Robert Frost poem…
My idea was to show choices and compare how one can choose to work in a less-than-ideal environment or get an education. But how could I say that to the guy who is working behind the register? Of course, my poor planning led to an embarrassing rejection (which I have to say, I am not the most equipped to handle) and sent me back to the drawing board. Lucky for me, there was a fine old chap smoking outside of the one down the street who didn’t seem to care if anyone walked into, out of, or crashed landed on top of his establishment. His response to my newly adjusted pitch, “just as long as you put the sign up yourself.”
My idea was to show choices and compare how one can choose to work in a less-than-ideal environment or get an education. But how could I say that to the guy who is working behind the register? Of course, my poor planning led to an embarrassing rejection (which I have to say, I am not the most equipped to handle) and sent me back to the drawing board. Lucky for me, there was a fine old chap smoking outside of the one down the street who didn’t seem to care if anyone walked into, out of, or crashed landed on top of his establishment. His response to my newly adjusted pitch, “just as long as you put the sign up yourself.”
Interpretation Project: Part II
I would like to start off by saying I had pretty good time doing the “movie thing”. I spent yesterday afternoon taking pictures for the project with my good friend, Pat. You will find him in the final slide, down by the water’s edge. I had to tell him to pull his pants up for the shot because he had a “little plumber” showing, but don’t let that fool you… he came up with the great idea to pour water in the “feel good” on the sand to make them stand out more in the shot. So, I guess you could call him a set manager more than a plumber.
We drove around what seemed like forever looking for the perfect “fork in the road” photo opportunity (slide 19, I believe). Where are those things when you need one?? We finally ran into our fine and dandy just outside of Lake Alvin. As I was standing on top of my car to get a crippled bird’s eye view, this snack delivery truck drove by me. I wasn’t going to snap the shot while he was there, but when I saw how cool it looked in the lens, I quick took it. It was complete luck – there is never a soul on that road and I would never bet my Starbuck’s that a snack truck delivery guy would show up and make my picture say something I couldn’t say without him.
We drove around what seemed like forever looking for the perfect “fork in the road” photo opportunity (slide 19, I believe). Where are those things when you need one?? We finally ran into our fine and dandy just outside of Lake Alvin. As I was standing on top of my car to get a crippled bird’s eye view, this snack delivery truck drove by me. I wasn’t going to snap the shot while he was there, but when I saw how cool it looked in the lens, I quick took it. It was complete luck – there is never a soul on that road and I would never bet my Starbuck’s that a snack truck delivery guy would show up and make my picture say something I couldn’t say without him.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Decisions, decisions....
Over the last couple of days, I have been tormented by the choice of whether to write a 4-6 page essay or do an interpretive poetry video. My friend made a picture video a couple of weeks ago that touched my heart; he also paid $14 for it. I thought it was so creative and endearing but the price?? What a coincidence to discover through Intro to Lit that an interpretation of poetry can be expressed in a similar fashion.
I love the idea of making a video that marries my interpretation of a poem (or any work for that matter) with pictures, music and voice over, but just how does one go about deciding what pictures tell “it” best?? I gave this question deep consideration. Professor Murphy mentioned that just as in a music video, the images do not have to be a picture of exactly what’s on the line. Do I play the images to fit the sound that the author intended? Do I concern myself with how he would want me to interpret this or do I personalize it to fit what I see in my mind? Even if I wanted to remain true to the author’s era or intent, how could I verify that is what he had in mind without speaking to him personally? Asking these questions is making me entirely change my mind on which poem I will interpret.
This will be an interesting project; one that I am sure I will learn a lot from – if I can stir up the Creative Genius inside and force her to create outside of her comfortable box.
I love the idea of making a video that marries my interpretation of a poem (or any work for that matter) with pictures, music and voice over, but just how does one go about deciding what pictures tell “it” best?? I gave this question deep consideration. Professor Murphy mentioned that just as in a music video, the images do not have to be a picture of exactly what’s on the line. Do I play the images to fit the sound that the author intended? Do I concern myself with how he would want me to interpret this or do I personalize it to fit what I see in my mind? Even if I wanted to remain true to the author’s era or intent, how could I verify that is what he had in mind without speaking to him personally? Asking these questions is making me entirely change my mind on which poem I will interpret.
This will be an interesting project; one that I am sure I will learn a lot from – if I can stir up the Creative Genius inside and force her to create outside of her comfortable box.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
"To Paint a Water Lily" by Ted Hughes
The true artist in “To Pain a Water Lily” is Ted Hughes. The descriptive language he used was so interactive that I have no choice but to say, “please don’t quit your day job.” The poem begins with a description of the lily leaves on the pond, “Roofs the pond’ chamber…” (2) makes me feel they are actually doing work!
“The flies furious arena: study” (3) – does he mean study the sound of them with your ears or the flies study in their arena? Either way, I the painting is making its way to reality. He wastes no time at all incorporating sound to tweak the senses, “And death-cries everywhere hereabouts” (10). By this time, I feel I am in the middle of a secluded forest with so much happening around me.
Of course he wouldn’t leave out the nemesis: “Prehistoric bedragonned times Crawl that darkness with Latin names Have evolved no improvements there, Jaws for heads, the set stare” (17-20) gives the image of the baddest crocodile in the land.
This poem was a treat, and more than a lesson in how to play words to mean more than what you expect them to. As for Hughes, I think the painting wouldn’t do his poem justice.
“The flies furious arena: study” (3) – does he mean study the sound of them with your ears or the flies study in their arena? Either way, I the painting is making its way to reality. He wastes no time at all incorporating sound to tweak the senses, “And death-cries everywhere hereabouts” (10). By this time, I feel I am in the middle of a secluded forest with so much happening around me.
Of course he wouldn’t leave out the nemesis: “Prehistoric bedragonned times Crawl that darkness with Latin names Have evolved no improvements there, Jaws for heads, the set stare” (17-20) gives the image of the baddest crocodile in the land.
This poem was a treat, and more than a lesson in how to play words to mean more than what you expect them to. As for Hughes, I think the painting wouldn’t do his poem justice.
"Morning" Billy Collins
I chose to write about this poem because of its refreshing change of pace. The speaker is so excited about getting out of bed and starting the morning that it made me smile at my own past, reminiscing on the days when I had no responsibilities but to enjoy my morning jo and to “catch up “ with friends, the order of my home and projects that brought me peace. Though when I read this poem, it was the middle of the night and I was overwhelmed with responsibilities, the tone brought me immediately to an emotion of happiness – as if I were there instead.
“But mostly buzzing around the house on espresso” (line 12) made me laugh because my happy mornings always have a wonderfully flavored coffee (not small) to get the day started right.
“Dictionary and atlas on the rug, the typewriter waiting for the key of the head” (line 13-14) gave me a sense of limitless possibilities waiting for me in each day. Of course, when the day is almost over, there is disappointment (especially if it is the only day off that week) that the hours are creeping away.
Being a person who adores new beginnings, I cherish this little piece. And there is nothing that makes you cherish a new beginning more than describing the thing that precedes it. “Why do we bother…” (line 1), “The swale of the afternoon, the sudden dip into evening” (line 1-2) were the lines that opened the poem. They combined with stanza 2 to form a question (the only question in the poem) that set up a melancholy mood only to surprise you with the sudden shift of alertness and happiness in line 6: “This is the best- (sounds childlike) throwing off the light covers”. It made me want to “just wake up” myself.
“But mostly buzzing around the house on espresso” (line 12) made me laugh because my happy mornings always have a wonderfully flavored coffee (not small) to get the day started right.
“Dictionary and atlas on the rug, the typewriter waiting for the key of the head” (line 13-14) gave me a sense of limitless possibilities waiting for me in each day. Of course, when the day is almost over, there is disappointment (especially if it is the only day off that week) that the hours are creeping away.
Being a person who adores new beginnings, I cherish this little piece. And there is nothing that makes you cherish a new beginning more than describing the thing that precedes it. “Why do we bother…” (line 1), “The swale of the afternoon, the sudden dip into evening” (line 1-2) were the lines that opened the poem. They combined with stanza 2 to form a question (the only question in the poem) that set up a melancholy mood only to surprise you with the sudden shift of alertness and happiness in line 6: “This is the best- (sounds childlike) throwing off the light covers”. It made me want to “just wake up” myself.
"Hanging Fire" by Audre Lorde
The speaker of this poem is in high need of some reassurance from her mother. The poem expresses her aloneness on this unstable road of puberty while hinting at her consideration of suicide: “There is nothing I want to do and too much that has been done” (line 19-21). It appears that she can’t picture her future because it is so overwhelming for her in this time yet each stanza she attempts to see herself living longer: “What if I die before morning” (line 8-9), “suppose I die before graduation” (line 15), “will I live long enough to grow up” (line 32-33).
If there were an adult there for her, she would be told that these feelings are normal and that she will get thru it; instead, being alone likely adds to the pressure she feels. The speaker makes references to both immediate problems and all encompassing problems but she is unable to discern between the two: “I have nothing to wear tomorrow will I live long enough to grow up” (line 31-33) “The boy I cannot live without (typical of pubescent love spells) still sucks his thumb in secret” (line 3-5) It’s possible she has considered her boyfriend as her rescue from her situation but gets very little comfort from it since he is only a kid himself.
Every question she asks, which are never ending, (evidenced by no question marks signaling the end of the any question as well as that every stanza is a single run-on sentence) falls upon no one's ears but her own; a fact, I am sure, she wishes to escape.
If there were an adult there for her, she would be told that these feelings are normal and that she will get thru it; instead, being alone likely adds to the pressure she feels. The speaker makes references to both immediate problems and all encompassing problems but she is unable to discern between the two: “I have nothing to wear tomorrow will I live long enough to grow up” (line 31-33) “The boy I cannot live without (typical of pubescent love spells) still sucks his thumb in secret” (line 3-5) It’s possible she has considered her boyfriend as her rescue from her situation but gets very little comfort from it since he is only a kid himself.
Every question she asks, which are never ending, (evidenced by no question marks signaling the end of the any question as well as that every stanza is a single run-on sentence) falls upon no one's ears but her own; a fact, I am sure, she wishes to escape.
Saturday, June 6, 2009
"Woodchucks" by Maxine Kumin
At first glance, I thought I was reading about a farmer failing at clearing out a rodent problem in one of his barns: “The knockout bomb from the Feed and Grain Exchange” (line 2). Not much else appeared to be developing in the second stanza, although my suspicions were anxiously starting to mount (“Gassing” line 1, “cyanide” line 8). The “rebellion” faded quickly by the 3rd; my emotions were boiling, my senses on overload. Everything I read up to that point was aggressively confirmed, and as much as I hated what I was reading, I wanted to know if anyone got away.
The narrator describes the escalation of his methods (and emotions) in assisting his fellow Germans in the occupation efforts during the holocaust of WWII. The choice to use woodchucks, another word for groundhog, to symbolize the Jewish people carried an array of intense suggestions, not limited to the obvious (Jewish associations with pork, rodents, land-hogs, people referred to as animals).
But I can not think of a way that true hatred be more perfectly portrayed than in the description of the exhilaration one race feels toward the killing, even with bare hand, of another: “O one-two-three the murderer inside me rose up hard,” (line 23), “I dream I sing along the barrel in my sleep.” (line 27-8)
The power of this poem forced me to look into a single mind propelled by that era. Regardless of how I feel about the poem, I can not deny the emotion of its accuracy.
The narrator describes the escalation of his methods (and emotions) in assisting his fellow Germans in the occupation efforts during the holocaust of WWII. The choice to use woodchucks, another word for groundhog, to symbolize the Jewish people carried an array of intense suggestions, not limited to the obvious (Jewish associations with pork, rodents, land-hogs, people referred to as animals).
But I can not think of a way that true hatred be more perfectly portrayed than in the description of the exhilaration one race feels toward the killing, even with bare hand, of another: “O one-two-three the murderer inside me rose up hard,” (line 23), “I dream I sing along the barrel in my sleep.” (line 27-8)
The power of this poem forced me to look into a single mind propelled by that era. Regardless of how I feel about the poem, I can not deny the emotion of its accuracy.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
6/3/09 "The Lame Shall Enter First" by Flannery O'Conner
Flannery O’Conner ramps the intensity in this dramatic irony involving a widowed man who maladaptively copes with the loss of his wife by immersing himself in the salvation of a troubled 14yr old. Though you’d never guess by his dialect, the boy possesses an impressive 140 IQ which lends to a “universe” of possibilities that the widower is obsessively determined to make the teen aware of. The name Sheppard, not so strangely resembling “Shepherd”, proves to be a disturbing tag for the adult who is totally incapable of caring for his 10yr old in the presence (or absence) of his humanitarian project, Johnson.
Receiving an open invitation (in the form of a key to the front door – with no regard to his history of vandalism), Johnson shows up just as Norton begins to sense his own isolation. Sheppard pushes his son continually further into the shadows aloneness (…”like a fugitive from Sheppard’s kindness” p385, par 163), a place so far away that the only one who can reach him is the Johnson that Sheppard is trying to save. The constant search for approval that Sheppard seeks from Johnson gives this Masterful Manipulator of Persons Unaware a world of power that he can not help but indulge in (impervious to those as unaware as Sheppard). “Sheppard was not deceived. Secretly [Johnson] was learning what he wanted him to learn – that his benefactor was impervious to insult and that there were no cracks in his armor of kindness and patience…” (p386, par 164) Norton gives up his hope, submitting to the power that has overtaken his father.
The psychological banter between Sheppard and Johnson repeatedly proves not only who had control of the moment but who doesn’t have control over his life. Sheppard attempts to stand his ground by telling Johnson he is mortally confused and doesn’t have to use his lame foot as an excuse. But Johnson’s last words, “The lame’ll carry off the prey!” (p399, par 404) echo deep into the house, long after Sheppard is delivered from him. Being the only one to take notice of Norton’s search for the truth in what happened to his mother after her passing, Johnson, a wolf in sheep’s clothing, already directed Norton to his own salvation.
Receiving an open invitation (in the form of a key to the front door – with no regard to his history of vandalism), Johnson shows up just as Norton begins to sense his own isolation. Sheppard pushes his son continually further into the shadows aloneness (…”like a fugitive from Sheppard’s kindness” p385, par 163), a place so far away that the only one who can reach him is the Johnson that Sheppard is trying to save. The constant search for approval that Sheppard seeks from Johnson gives this Masterful Manipulator of Persons Unaware a world of power that he can not help but indulge in (impervious to those as unaware as Sheppard). “Sheppard was not deceived. Secretly [Johnson] was learning what he wanted him to learn – that his benefactor was impervious to insult and that there were no cracks in his armor of kindness and patience…” (p386, par 164) Norton gives up his hope, submitting to the power that has overtaken his father.
The psychological banter between Sheppard and Johnson repeatedly proves not only who had control of the moment but who doesn’t have control over his life. Sheppard attempts to stand his ground by telling Johnson he is mortally confused and doesn’t have to use his lame foot as an excuse. But Johnson’s last words, “The lame’ll carry off the prey!” (p399, par 404) echo deep into the house, long after Sheppard is delivered from him. Being the only one to take notice of Norton’s search for the truth in what happened to his mother after her passing, Johnson, a wolf in sheep’s clothing, already directed Norton to his own salvation.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
6/2/09 "A Pair of Tickets" by Amy Tan
As many of us can relate to, the narrator, 15yr old Jing-mei identifies more to the hustle of her current teenage experience than she does to the background of her parents. Jing-mei’s mother tries to explain that the Chinese blood is forever a part of her genes but wisely lets the subject rest with a hint of anticipation, “Someday you will see… it’s in your blood, waiting to be let go.” (p205, par3)
At the time, Jing-mei, 15, dismissed her mother as embarrassing, but later found herself feeling ashamed for not appreciating her as much as she should have. I didn’t find this to be true but rather a guilty feeling often experienced by middle aged people who contrast their maturity levels of teenage years to present. I felt compassion for her when her Aunt did not pick up on this clue and help her resolve this feeling. (p207, par 30) In a raw moment, Jing-mei remembers asking questions that could not be answered after her mother’s death in order to prove to herself that she cared deeply enough; however, as she grew older the reasons for the questions changed into a true search for answers. (p211, par 73-4)
It is slightly ironic that when that she finally reaches a place in her life where she is genuinely interested in learning what her mother was (hoping her to find herself connected to her mother) only to land in the “heart” of Guangzhou, China (pop: 12M) surrounded by American trappings. To make matters worse, her father’s family who comes from rural Toishan, miles from the city, are intrigued by the American culture. This creates a tension within Jing-mei and her thwarted efforts to connect to the Chinese culture seem to isolate her from the group (despite the fact she is familiar with the exclusive Mandarin dialect that is spoken around her). This is where I first considered the story’s connection to the title: 1 ticket for Jing-mei’s trip into her mother’s culture in China and the other for her father’s family trip into and American experience within the borders of China. (p210-11, par 59-72)
The night before saying goodbye to his family, her father reveals the discriminated occasion, telling the story of why her mother left her sisters behind, which Jing-mei insists he share in Chinese. The details were heart-wrenching and my emotions quickly became fully vested in the story.
The end is fully resolved when Jing-mei sees her mother’s face in both of the twins expressions of relief as it is assumed the twins experience the same in their sister.(p217, par 140-41) All 3 are at last restored, fully connected to their mother evidenced by the meaning of her name, “long-cherished wish”, and the site of her emerging in the development of the Polaroid taken of the 3 girls. (p217, par 145) When considering the title at this point of the story, it is clear that 1 ticket was for Jing-mei and the other for the twins, all sharing the destination of their mother.
At the time, Jing-mei, 15, dismissed her mother as embarrassing, but later found herself feeling ashamed for not appreciating her as much as she should have. I didn’t find this to be true but rather a guilty feeling often experienced by middle aged people who contrast their maturity levels of teenage years to present. I felt compassion for her when her Aunt did not pick up on this clue and help her resolve this feeling. (p207, par 30) In a raw moment, Jing-mei remembers asking questions that could not be answered after her mother’s death in order to prove to herself that she cared deeply enough; however, as she grew older the reasons for the questions changed into a true search for answers. (p211, par 73-4)
It is slightly ironic that when that she finally reaches a place in her life where she is genuinely interested in learning what her mother was (hoping her to find herself connected to her mother) only to land in the “heart” of Guangzhou, China (pop: 12M) surrounded by American trappings. To make matters worse, her father’s family who comes from rural Toishan, miles from the city, are intrigued by the American culture. This creates a tension within Jing-mei and her thwarted efforts to connect to the Chinese culture seem to isolate her from the group (despite the fact she is familiar with the exclusive Mandarin dialect that is spoken around her). This is where I first considered the story’s connection to the title: 1 ticket for Jing-mei’s trip into her mother’s culture in China and the other for her father’s family trip into and American experience within the borders of China. (p210-11, par 59-72)
The night before saying goodbye to his family, her father reveals the discriminated occasion, telling the story of why her mother left her sisters behind, which Jing-mei insists he share in Chinese. The details were heart-wrenching and my emotions quickly became fully vested in the story.
The end is fully resolved when Jing-mei sees her mother’s face in both of the twins expressions of relief as it is assumed the twins experience the same in their sister.(p217, par 140-41) All 3 are at last restored, fully connected to their mother evidenced by the meaning of her name, “long-cherished wish”, and the site of her emerging in the development of the Polaroid taken of the 3 girls. (p217, par 145) When considering the title at this point of the story, it is clear that 1 ticket was for Jing-mei and the other for the twins, all sharing the destination of their mother.
6/2/09 "Bartleby the Scrivener" by Herman Melville
A common theme in this short story is the narrator’s constant struggle with his own character, provoked by how little he knew of Bartleby, how completely disarming his demeanor was and why Bartleby was able to get away with being unaccountable. The narrator turned to the 12yr old, Ginger Nut, for support when confronted with Bartleby’s “irreversible” resistance to his orders: “…if any disinterested persons are present, he turns to them for reinforcement for his own faltering mind.” (p. 160 par 40)
“ Ginger Nut,’ said I, willing to enlist the smallest suffrage in my behalf….” (p161 par 46)
The absence of detail on the character of Bartleby provided the landscape for the narrator to develop his own. The narrator offered his reactions (hardly reserved) to the distant Bartleby, by which I was progressively able to create his character in my mind.
When comparing himself and Bartleby to Colt/Adams incident where Adams’ provocation of Colt caused Colt to accidentally murder Adams, he described strong compassion for Colt, whom he contemplated as the victim, now having experienced a quite similar situation with Bartleby. “…and how poor Colt, being dreadfully incensed by Adams...” (p171, par 164)
He then battles the “demon”, Adam, inside of him: “But when this old Adam of resentment rose in me and tempted me concerning Bartleby, I grappled him and threw him. … simply by recalling… ‘A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another.’ “ (p171, par 165)
Shortly thereafter, he considers the image that Bartleby was sent to him for some divine purpose and that his worldly mission, never mind how small, is to provide Bartleby with office space so long as he needed it. But this idea, too, was quickly overturned at the thought of Bartleby scandalizing his reputation amongst his fellow attorneys as well as the possibility that Bartleby may be lingering around just long enough to “take over” once he keels. (p172-73, par 169)
The obsessions and racing thoughts of the narrator were even more comical when brought together by the idea that his character, prudish and perfect, was easily dismantled by someone as uneventful as Bartleby.
It is suggested in James Wilson’s, “Bartleby” that Melville uses this story as an allegory which reflects his relationship between himself, his readers and their opinions of his work. That brings an entirely new dimension to the story. If that is the case, it surprises me that Melville had so much compassion for the narrator and his employees: Turkey, Nippers and Ginger Nut, considering the harsh nature of his readers' criticisms. In the end, it was Bartleby who experienced the deepest levels of desperation, but the narrator desperately wanted to learn what he could possibly do to make life easier for Bartleby. Through Bartleby, was Melville creating in his readers a peculiarly strong desire to know him (the artist) on a deeper level? And was he hoping they would show as much compassion for him as he did for Narrator (his readers?) in this short story?
“ Ginger Nut,’ said I, willing to enlist the smallest suffrage in my behalf….” (p161 par 46)
The absence of detail on the character of Bartleby provided the landscape for the narrator to develop his own. The narrator offered his reactions (hardly reserved) to the distant Bartleby, by which I was progressively able to create his character in my mind.
When comparing himself and Bartleby to Colt/Adams incident where Adams’ provocation of Colt caused Colt to accidentally murder Adams, he described strong compassion for Colt, whom he contemplated as the victim, now having experienced a quite similar situation with Bartleby. “…and how poor Colt, being dreadfully incensed by Adams...” (p171, par 164)
He then battles the “demon”, Adam, inside of him: “But when this old Adam of resentment rose in me and tempted me concerning Bartleby, I grappled him and threw him. … simply by recalling… ‘A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another.’ “ (p171, par 165)
Shortly thereafter, he considers the image that Bartleby was sent to him for some divine purpose and that his worldly mission, never mind how small, is to provide Bartleby with office space so long as he needed it. But this idea, too, was quickly overturned at the thought of Bartleby scandalizing his reputation amongst his fellow attorneys as well as the possibility that Bartleby may be lingering around just long enough to “take over” once he keels. (p172-73, par 169)
The obsessions and racing thoughts of the narrator were even more comical when brought together by the idea that his character, prudish and perfect, was easily dismantled by someone as uneventful as Bartleby.
It is suggested in James Wilson’s, “Bartleby” that Melville uses this story as an allegory which reflects his relationship between himself, his readers and their opinions of his work. That brings an entirely new dimension to the story. If that is the case, it surprises me that Melville had so much compassion for the narrator and his employees: Turkey, Nippers and Ginger Nut, considering the harsh nature of his readers' criticisms. In the end, it was Bartleby who experienced the deepest levels of desperation, but the narrator desperately wanted to learn what he could possibly do to make life easier for Bartleby. Through Bartleby, was Melville creating in his readers a peculiarly strong desire to know him (the artist) on a deeper level? And was he hoping they would show as much compassion for him as he did for Narrator (his readers?) in this short story?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)