"It was a wife's worst nightmare. After nine years of marriage, Laxmi told Miranda, her cousin's husband had fallen in love with another woman" (Sexy). And this is someone's worst nightmare when they are in a relationship. I like this text because I think it explores an area that is familiar for many, but uncomfortable to talk about. Obviously, we all know that cheating is wrong and immoral, but that belief is based on the idea that everyone and everything is perfect and flawless. This is just not accurate and can be seen in our everyday lives. Of course nobody sets out to hurt another person, especially someone they love and care for; well, that is mostly true. Unfortunately, there are the occasional jerks that know what they are doing is harmful and intentional, but even those cases may be due to their own personal crisis within themselves. But when two mature people have a healthy relationship based on trust and love, perfection cannot be expected. We are human, we make mistakes, we do not have control over our feelings for others, only what we do with those feelings.
As I said in class, I have a friend who has been denied sexual relations with her boyfriend of thirteen years; this has been going on for the past two years. She loves him, so leaving just is not an option for her. So what is a person to do? Intimacy is a necessary and healthy part of a loving relationship, and it is not natural and can be emotionally damaging to be denied that from your partner. It can lead to depression, which can lead to physical health problems, so in a round about way, having sex is vital to your health! Okay, so maybe that's stretching it a bit and in light of a deep issue. But realistically, cheating is just not as cut and dry as we all want it to be. It is a decision, yes, but sometimes those decisions are not made in the best state of mind and circumstances. And sometimes they are incredibly hard and heartbreaking to make.
Friday, May 15, 2015
Race and the American Novel: Synthesis
I have learned a great deal during this course; reading UTC and Beloved especially had a profound impact. But even little things, like the reviews of the books we read left me thinking and exploring the issue of racism. I think what really impacted me the most was the chapter Raynaud devoted to Morrison's book, when she explained the unexplainable. She described many of the metaphors used in Beloved. The character, Beloved, was a representation of the memory of slavery itself.
I agree, and believe, that the nation is trying to suppress the reality of our true history. What I did not realize was this was also occurring in the slave narratives themselves. How could that be possible? It seems unreal to me that even when slaves wrote about their own experiences, they left out the horrifying details. But then, I guess I can understand why. Who would want to relive and remember such atrocious trauma? Even I have things that have happened to me that I do not want to remember. Of course, neither do the white people, want to remember what they did and became; they became exactly what they set out to destroy, what they thought was beneath them.
The slave owners treated men, women and children as objects and animals and, thus, became animals themselves. The barbaric enslavement and torturing, the raping and killing, that is what was animalistic. It is no wonder people refuse to remember such a disgusting time in history, but that is not the answer. It is important that we learn from this, to teach our children the accurate history, so that it may not ever be repeated. Just like the teacher Dan wrote about in his blog; we need more teachers like him. But look what happened when he stood up for what was right, when he did what he was hired to do-he was ostracized and fired! How does that make sense at all? Parents were outraged; if parents are outraged when their children are taught the truth we, as a nation, have a big problem with denial. It just goes to show that we still have a racial divide, as Bannon protested. But hopefully, as he also stated, this will slowly make its way out as the older, racist generation kicks the bucket.
Ultimately, I am left feeling that there is not one person or one type of person able to give a complete an accurate description of what happened during the time of slavery. Stowe was white, yes, so was half the nation. It is important to get accounts of what happened from white people, just as much as black people. As Baldwin put it ". . . the oppressed and the oppressor are bound together within the same society; they accept the same criteria; they share the same beliefs. . . " Both races lived among each other, they needed each other in order for this to have taken place, they are both equally a part of it, even if one was more evil than the other. Saying that only former slaves or black people should be telling stories is ignorant; even former slave narratives left out important information. It takes all angles, all accounts, everyone involved to create the whole picture of what went on. Every time we read a story, poem, narrative, bibliography, we get another piece of the puzzle.
I agree, and believe, that the nation is trying to suppress the reality of our true history. What I did not realize was this was also occurring in the slave narratives themselves. How could that be possible? It seems unreal to me that even when slaves wrote about their own experiences, they left out the horrifying details. But then, I guess I can understand why. Who would want to relive and remember such atrocious trauma? Even I have things that have happened to me that I do not want to remember. Of course, neither do the white people, want to remember what they did and became; they became exactly what they set out to destroy, what they thought was beneath them.
The slave owners treated men, women and children as objects and animals and, thus, became animals themselves. The barbaric enslavement and torturing, the raping and killing, that is what was animalistic. It is no wonder people refuse to remember such a disgusting time in history, but that is not the answer. It is important that we learn from this, to teach our children the accurate history, so that it may not ever be repeated. Just like the teacher Dan wrote about in his blog; we need more teachers like him. But look what happened when he stood up for what was right, when he did what he was hired to do-he was ostracized and fired! How does that make sense at all? Parents were outraged; if parents are outraged when their children are taught the truth we, as a nation, have a big problem with denial. It just goes to show that we still have a racial divide, as Bannon protested. But hopefully, as he also stated, this will slowly make its way out as the older, racist generation kicks the bucket.
Ultimately, I am left feeling that there is not one person or one type of person able to give a complete an accurate description of what happened during the time of slavery. Stowe was white, yes, so was half the nation. It is important to get accounts of what happened from white people, just as much as black people. As Baldwin put it ". . . the oppressed and the oppressor are bound together within the same society; they accept the same criteria; they share the same beliefs. . . " Both races lived among each other, they needed each other in order for this to have taken place, they are both equally a part of it, even if one was more evil than the other. Saying that only former slaves or black people should be telling stories is ignorant; even former slave narratives left out important information. It takes all angles, all accounts, everyone involved to create the whole picture of what went on. Every time we read a story, poem, narrative, bibliography, we get another piece of the puzzle.
Race and the American Novel: Reader Response
I found most of the reviews to be very positive. It seems that Beloved touches many people on a personal level. Many of the responses were saying similar things, talking about how this novel is part of the American experience. One woman wrote: "That feels like a strange and dorky thing for me to say, but it's how I felt. Slavery is such an essential part of all our heritage that reading this treatment of it felt very personal, like listening to secrets about your grandparents" (Goodreads). Another review said, "It's 6 o'clock in the morning and I have finished with one of the best books I have ever read in the course of my short life" (Goodreads).
However, not all responses were positive. One reader had this to say about the novel: "I found Beloved incomprehensible to the point of absurdity. It's one thing to have a book that is full of magic and poetry or to have a character's passion overwhelm their ability to describe the world from time to time, but I also need to know what is going on. For the story to grab me, I need to know what the story is" (Barnes & Noble).
I find this kind of review insulting and interesting at the same time. At first I was upset by his response, but then I realized this is precisely the issue Morrison forces her readers to face in this novel. He continued on saying how much he hated the book because he could not understand what it was trying to convey. I think if he had a better understanding of history and took a deeper look into the underlying meaning of the story, he would have a different opinion. People judge and dislike what they cannot understand.
However, not all responses were positive. One reader had this to say about the novel: "I found Beloved incomprehensible to the point of absurdity. It's one thing to have a book that is full of magic and poetry or to have a character's passion overwhelm their ability to describe the world from time to time, but I also need to know what is going on. For the story to grab me, I need to know what the story is" (Barnes & Noble).
I find this kind of review insulting and interesting at the same time. At first I was upset by his response, but then I realized this is precisely the issue Morrison forces her readers to face in this novel. He continued on saying how much he hated the book because he could not understand what it was trying to convey. I think if he had a better understanding of history and took a deeper look into the underlying meaning of the story, he would have a different opinion. People judge and dislike what they cannot understand.
Race and the American Novel: Contemporary Connections
Brad Bannon reports, in U.S. News and World Report, that a racial divide is still here. ". . . demography is destiny. The fabric of American society is changing and some people are fighting a doomed rearguard action to stop the inevitable" (Bannon). According to polls, the nation is split when it comes to the question of equality: Do black people get treated the same as white people by police officers? Half of the nation believes the answer is yes and the other half says no. But the racial divide, in reference to the exact same question, is far more dramatic: 63% of whites believe they are treated equally, but only 21% of blacks feel the same. This kind of split is bound to lead to conflict, that which has already been occurring.
Bannon states, "Sadly, everything old is new again in race relations in America." I could not agree more. Everything I have been seeing and hearing on the news, lately, has been related to race in one way or another. The most prevalent is all of the shootings and fatalities of minorities by white officers, which has led to a war on law enforcement, split by a racial divide. But far more than that, as Bannon reveal, is taking place; apparently the Colorado Springs headquarters of the NAACP has been bombed, the mayor of New York City is under pressure after warning his mixed race son of the violence upon minorities by white officers, and so on. What I find interesting is the new movie "Selma" that has just come out is a dramatization of the 1960's civil rights movement-irony? I think not.
This ties into the book, Beloved, more than I initially realized-this war, the war between two races, is not over. Even after the Emancipation Proclamation, so many years and generations later, this divide is still weighing down on the nation. And I think a big part of that problem is what Morrison portrayed in her book: nobody wants to remember the truth and teach this history in light of it. As long as we continue to ignore what happened and try to repress what is real, we will continue to face the same issue, time and time again. I have hope though, as Bannon thinks that most of the backwards, racist ideology is stemming from the older generation. Therefore, as this younger generation steps forward in the spotlight, we should, hopefully, see progress.
Bannon states, "Sadly, everything old is new again in race relations in America." I could not agree more. Everything I have been seeing and hearing on the news, lately, has been related to race in one way or another. The most prevalent is all of the shootings and fatalities of minorities by white officers, which has led to a war on law enforcement, split by a racial divide. But far more than that, as Bannon reveal, is taking place; apparently the Colorado Springs headquarters of the NAACP has been bombed, the mayor of New York City is under pressure after warning his mixed race son of the violence upon minorities by white officers, and so on. What I find interesting is the new movie "Selma" that has just come out is a dramatization of the 1960's civil rights movement-irony? I think not.
This ties into the book, Beloved, more than I initially realized-this war, the war between two races, is not over. Even after the Emancipation Proclamation, so many years and generations later, this divide is still weighing down on the nation. And I think a big part of that problem is what Morrison portrayed in her book: nobody wants to remember the truth and teach this history in light of it. As long as we continue to ignore what happened and try to repress what is real, we will continue to face the same issue, time and time again. I have hope though, as Bannon thinks that most of the backwards, racist ideology is stemming from the older generation. Therefore, as this younger generation steps forward in the spotlight, we should, hopefully, see progress.
Race and the American Novel Project: Critical Commentary
In The Cambridge Companion to Toni Morrison, Claudine Raynaud devotes a fifteen page chapter to the novel Beloved. She claims it is "one of the most important American novels of the post-war era" (Raynaud, 43). The point Raynaud makes in this chapter is that Beloved captures the true history of the African American slave life; she explains that this is purposely left out of slave narratives. Morrison "rips the veil" that these narrators were forced to draw over the stories and reconstructs and recovers the memories that both black and white people try to repress. Raynaud states:
"The porosity of the characters' consciousness['s], made possible by subtle transitions from one [focalization] to another, the leveling out of different time frames enable the novel to mimic and reflect the process of memory: the actual act of remembering as well as the incorporation of told memories into the oral tradition." (Raynaud)
I think Raynaud does a great job describing this in her text as she explains the metaphor of the antelope portraying the slaves. When Sethe tells Denver about her birth and the kicking she was doing she said, "When she stopped the little antelope rammed her with horns" (Raynaud, 44). Sethe talks again about slaves who "danced the antelope" in another part of the story as well. Raynaud insists that since Sethe has never seen an antelope, she cannot possibly know the secret meaning of the word. The dancing she refers to means to be transported to Africa free and unchained.
This chapter really helps understand what Morrison is trying to convey in her novel. It forces both white and black people to confront the past, the true past, that is being buried and disfigured throughout history books and narratives. The graphic scenes descripted, rape, torture, all make it impossible for the reader to distance themselves from the true nature of what went on during this time in history. Raynaud also believes that the character Beloved is to represent the memory of slavery, hence, the reason for her name being repeated, and even spelled out, so many times. This is also why it is so hard to pin down what she is, a ghost, an actual living person, etc. "Identities overlap because of the similarity and the persistence of traumas uttered in a common language" (Raynaud, 46). Beloved represents three atrocious events, rape on the slave ship, during slavery and even after the Emancipation Proclamation; this is representative of the so-called progress being made against racism.
I agree with Raynaud and her interpretations; I do believe slave narratives were repressive and both black and white people are uncomfortable dealing with the realities of history. This is made clear in the lack of true events in the teaching of history, both in the classroom and outside it. Morrison forces society to confront, to remember and to pass those true memories on so that they will not be forgotten, the way Beloved was.
Raynaud, Claudine. "The Cambridge Companion to Toni Morrison." (n.d.): 43-58.
"The porosity of the characters' consciousness['s], made possible by subtle transitions from one [focalization] to another, the leveling out of different time frames enable the novel to mimic and reflect the process of memory: the actual act of remembering as well as the incorporation of told memories into the oral tradition." (Raynaud)
I think Raynaud does a great job describing this in her text as she explains the metaphor of the antelope portraying the slaves. When Sethe tells Denver about her birth and the kicking she was doing she said, "When she stopped the little antelope rammed her with horns" (Raynaud, 44). Sethe talks again about slaves who "danced the antelope" in another part of the story as well. Raynaud insists that since Sethe has never seen an antelope, she cannot possibly know the secret meaning of the word. The dancing she refers to means to be transported to Africa free and unchained.
This chapter really helps understand what Morrison is trying to convey in her novel. It forces both white and black people to confront the past, the true past, that is being buried and disfigured throughout history books and narratives. The graphic scenes descripted, rape, torture, all make it impossible for the reader to distance themselves from the true nature of what went on during this time in history. Raynaud also believes that the character Beloved is to represent the memory of slavery, hence, the reason for her name being repeated, and even spelled out, so many times. This is also why it is so hard to pin down what she is, a ghost, an actual living person, etc. "Identities overlap because of the similarity and the persistence of traumas uttered in a common language" (Raynaud, 46). Beloved represents three atrocious events, rape on the slave ship, during slavery and even after the Emancipation Proclamation; this is representative of the so-called progress being made against racism.
I agree with Raynaud and her interpretations; I do believe slave narratives were repressive and both black and white people are uncomfortable dealing with the realities of history. This is made clear in the lack of true events in the teaching of history, both in the classroom and outside it. Morrison forces society to confront, to remember and to pass those true memories on so that they will not be forgotten, the way Beloved was.
Raynaud, Claudine. "The Cambridge Companion to Toni Morrison." (n.d.): 43-58.
Monday, May 11, 2015
The Woman Warrior
Maxine Kingston reveals her struggle with being a first generation, multi-cultural, immigrant in "The Woman Warrior". She uses the story her mother told her, of her aunt who committed suicide, to work through and tell her own journey of self-identification. As the daughter of immigrants, it was difficult to decipher which part of her was Chinese and which part was American. I am sure there are many of immigrants that endured this type of dilemma, but for Kingston it was compounded by the secrecy within the Chinese heritage of her family. "You must not tell anyone what I am about to tell you. In China your father had a sister who killed herself. She jumped into the family well. We say that your father has all brothers because it is as if she had never been born. That is an incredibly distressing thing for a child to hear, even from your own mother.
However, living in America gave Kingston a different vantage point; she experienced a far more relaxed, open and liberal type of childhood than she would have in China. And I imagine this was really perplexing for her. How do you comprehend the traditions and rituals of another culture, even if you are a descendent of such, when you are being raised in a completely alternative one? This is evident in the following quote:
However, living in America gave Kingston a different vantage point; she experienced a far more relaxed, open and liberal type of childhood than she would have in China. And I imagine this was really perplexing for her. How do you comprehend the traditions and rituals of another culture, even if you are a descendent of such, when you are being raised in a completely alternative one? This is evident in the following quote:
"Chinese-Americans, when you try to understand what things in you are Chinese, how do you separate what is peculiar to childhood, to poverty, insanities, one family, your mother who marked your growing with stories, from what is Chinese? What is Chinese tradition and what is the movies?" (Kingston)
Kingston realized that she could at least try to break away from the disturbing and dysfunctional influence of her parents, and she did this by telling her aunt's story. I think she understood the level of dysfunction and negativity that plagued her family's heritage and made a decision to embrace it, expose it and rise above it. This gave her power, the power to find herself, separate from her family history, but belonging to it at the very same time.
Monday, April 20, 2015
Blog #5: Lady Lazarus
I love the poem "Lady Lazarus" that was written by Sylvia Plath. I cannot begin to describe how I can relate to her and what she is feeling during this time in her life, when she wrote this. There is so much pain in her writing, especially this poem; it is clear that she suffered from depression. She mentions her yearning for death multiples times throughout the poem, as she tells of her attempts at suicide:
"I have done it again, One year in every ten I manage it . . . This is Number Three . . . The first time it happened I was ten, It was an accident. The second time I meant To last it out and not come back at all . . . Dying Is an art, like everything else. I do it exceptionally well." (p1418-19)
It is clear as day, to me, that Sylvia is talking about her many attempts at suicide, although, I could be wrong. However, we do know that she died as a result of committing suicide and also suffered from mental illness-which included, at least, depression-that resulted in mental hospitalization more than once. There is a particular part in this poem that speaks to me in a language others might not recognize, and so I wonder if my hypothesis is correct. In this next passage, as Plath portrays her second attempt, she reveals an experience not known to many:
"The second time I meant To last it out and not come back at all. I rocked shut As a seashell. They had to call and call And pick the worms off me like sticky pearls." (p1419)
In my opinion, I believe what Plath is expressing is her experience with electroshock therapy. Only individuals who have experienced such medical treatment would think of that when she speaks of "sticky pearls". If you have ever had electroshock therapy, you would know there are round, sticky, white things they put on you to deliver the shocks-this would greatly explain this part of the poem. There is, however, another alternative interpretation to this stanza. With the multiple attempts to kill herself, it would not be surprising if Sylvia was brought back to life with the help of a defibrillator, that uses white patches similar to what is used in electroshock therapy. Either way, we know she has undergone treatment and resuscitation, therefore, both are likely, but, in the end, does it really matter which one she meant? To me, it does not.
Being brought back to life is definitely something Plath portrays in this work of hers-you cannot miss it with her mention of Lazarus, who was raised from the dead by Jesus, and rising "Out of the ash . . . with my red hair. . ." I feel she wants her readers to know that she will find her place somewhere, just not here on earth. She could not live like other normal people, but she did not want to either. Every time "they" brought her back, she was stronger, more knowledgeable, but still the same woman they sought to save.
"I have done it again, One year in every ten I manage it . . . This is Number Three . . . The first time it happened I was ten, It was an accident. The second time I meant To last it out and not come back at all . . . Dying Is an art, like everything else. I do it exceptionally well." (p1418-19)
It is clear as day, to me, that Sylvia is talking about her many attempts at suicide, although, I could be wrong. However, we do know that she died as a result of committing suicide and also suffered from mental illness-which included, at least, depression-that resulted in mental hospitalization more than once. There is a particular part in this poem that speaks to me in a language others might not recognize, and so I wonder if my hypothesis is correct. In this next passage, as Plath portrays her second attempt, she reveals an experience not known to many:
"The second time I meant To last it out and not come back at all. I rocked shut As a seashell. They had to call and call And pick the worms off me like sticky pearls." (p1419)
In my opinion, I believe what Plath is expressing is her experience with electroshock therapy. Only individuals who have experienced such medical treatment would think of that when she speaks of "sticky pearls". If you have ever had electroshock therapy, you would know there are round, sticky, white things they put on you to deliver the shocks-this would greatly explain this part of the poem. There is, however, another alternative interpretation to this stanza. With the multiple attempts to kill herself, it would not be surprising if Sylvia was brought back to life with the help of a defibrillator, that uses white patches similar to what is used in electroshock therapy. Either way, we know she has undergone treatment and resuscitation, therefore, both are likely, but, in the end, does it really matter which one she meant? To me, it does not.
Being brought back to life is definitely something Plath portrays in this work of hers-you cannot miss it with her mention of Lazarus, who was raised from the dead by Jesus, and rising "Out of the ash . . . with my red hair. . ." I feel she wants her readers to know that she will find her place somewhere, just not here on earth. She could not live like other normal people, but she did not want to either. Every time "they" brought her back, she was stronger, more knowledgeable, but still the same woman they sought to save.
Literary Context: Ginsberg's "Howl" and The Beat Generation
Allen Ginsberg, who wrote "Howl", was a writer from the Beat Generation of the 1950's. It was the end of WWII and, therefore, a time of unrest; people were anxious, uncertain, on-guard, and-I'd venture to say-depressed. The Beat Poets represented change and defiance of conventional writing, thus, dawning the era of political and cultural anarchy. And this is so clearly demonstrated in "Howl", as Ginsberg is not shy with his words: ". . . who howled on their knees in the subway and were dragged off the roof waving genitals and manuscripts, who let themselves be fucked in the ass by saintly motorcyclists, and screamed with joy. . . (Howl p1358)." This was something society has never seen before in poetry or any literary work; this kind of language was considered obscene and vulgar by many, at the time.
But Ginsberg was just speaking-quite bluntly, however-the truth. He wrote of what he saw, day in and day out, and left nothing to the imagination. During these post-war times, experimenting with drugs was extremely popular; many Beat poets, including Ginsberg, dabbled with hallucinogens in order to achieve a higher state of consciousness. He would also write about the constant drug use, drinking and debauchery he was exposed to and a part of. For example, "I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked, dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix, angelheaded hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly connection to starry dynamo in the machinery of night. . . (Howl, p1356). Much of this poem is wrought with pathetic and depressive scenes, and drugs may have been a contributing factor to the, somewhat, hard-to-comprehend rambling, however, I believe there was a method to Ginsberg's madness.
In class we were talking about the lengthiness of the lines in "Howl"-in the backdrop on Allen Ginsberg, before the poem, he explains himself a bit:
"My feeling is for a big long clanky statement, one that accommodates, not the way you would say it, a thought, but the way you would think it-i.e., we think rapidly, in visual images as well as words, and if each successive thought were transcribed in its confusion . . . you get a slightly different prosody than if you were talking slowly." (p1355)
Plainly speaking, instead of writing sentences the way one would speak it, he writes his thoughts, the way one thinks them. It makes sense; nobody thinks in perfect sentences, it's all garbled, leaping from one thought to the next. If you put yourself in the shoes of someone living right after the end of a horrible war, seeing all the devastation, mental and physical anguish, suffering, it becomes a little easier to understand where he's coming from. I can relate to the feeling of not wanting to hold back, shut up, or cover up the truth, even if it's ugly...to just throw-up all that you see and hear and feel, with no regard, no pretty pink flowers to make it sweeter to swallow. That is how I see Ginsberg and other Beat poets. They were transcending from an era of "Leave it to Beavers", pretending all is perfect and right with the world, meanwhile, mommy sucks from the whiskey bottle and daddy's not around. After the reality of war and the horrifying atrocities it brings with it, I would not be able to pretend any longer. Nor could Ginsberg:
". . . with mother finally*******, and the last fantastic book flung out of the tenement window, and the last door closed at 4 AM and the last telephone slammed at the wall in reply and the last furnished room emptied down to the last piece of mental furniture, a yellow paper rose twisted on a wire hanger in the closet, and even that imaginary, nothing but a hopeful little bit of hallucination. . ."
(p1360)"
If I had to guess, I would say that Ginsberg was talking about the moment he heard of his mother's death. The first line, "with mother finally" and you fill in the blanks, and then slamming the last telephone in reply, speaks the most to me. He uses the word, last, five times, and mental furniture makes me think of the mental hospital she was in. A phone call and door closing at 4 am? All signs point to his mother passing away, but that's just my opinion.
I do love the colorfulness of this poem. Although it may be a tad dreary, I think it is far more alive than many others I've read. It speaks truthfully and honestly, ugliness and all.
Work cited:
www.poets.org. "A Brief Guide to the Beat Poets" 2004
The Norton Anthology of American Literature, "Howl" 2013, pp1354-60
But Ginsberg was just speaking-quite bluntly, however-the truth. He wrote of what he saw, day in and day out, and left nothing to the imagination. During these post-war times, experimenting with drugs was extremely popular; many Beat poets, including Ginsberg, dabbled with hallucinogens in order to achieve a higher state of consciousness. He would also write about the constant drug use, drinking and debauchery he was exposed to and a part of. For example, "I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked, dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking for an angry fix, angelheaded hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly connection to starry dynamo in the machinery of night. . . (Howl, p1356). Much of this poem is wrought with pathetic and depressive scenes, and drugs may have been a contributing factor to the, somewhat, hard-to-comprehend rambling, however, I believe there was a method to Ginsberg's madness.
In class we were talking about the lengthiness of the lines in "Howl"-in the backdrop on Allen Ginsberg, before the poem, he explains himself a bit:
"My feeling is for a big long clanky statement, one that accommodates, not the way you would say it, a thought, but the way you would think it-i.e., we think rapidly, in visual images as well as words, and if each successive thought were transcribed in its confusion . . . you get a slightly different prosody than if you were talking slowly." (p1355)
Plainly speaking, instead of writing sentences the way one would speak it, he writes his thoughts, the way one thinks them. It makes sense; nobody thinks in perfect sentences, it's all garbled, leaping from one thought to the next. If you put yourself in the shoes of someone living right after the end of a horrible war, seeing all the devastation, mental and physical anguish, suffering, it becomes a little easier to understand where he's coming from. I can relate to the feeling of not wanting to hold back, shut up, or cover up the truth, even if it's ugly...to just throw-up all that you see and hear and feel, with no regard, no pretty pink flowers to make it sweeter to swallow. That is how I see Ginsberg and other Beat poets. They were transcending from an era of "Leave it to Beavers", pretending all is perfect and right with the world, meanwhile, mommy sucks from the whiskey bottle and daddy's not around. After the reality of war and the horrifying atrocities it brings with it, I would not be able to pretend any longer. Nor could Ginsberg:
". . . with mother finally*******, and the last fantastic book flung out of the tenement window, and the last door closed at 4 AM and the last telephone slammed at the wall in reply and the last furnished room emptied down to the last piece of mental furniture, a yellow paper rose twisted on a wire hanger in the closet, and even that imaginary, nothing but a hopeful little bit of hallucination. . ."
(p1360)"
If I had to guess, I would say that Ginsberg was talking about the moment he heard of his mother's death. The first line, "with mother finally" and you fill in the blanks, and then slamming the last telephone in reply, speaks the most to me. He uses the word, last, five times, and mental furniture makes me think of the mental hospital she was in. A phone call and door closing at 4 am? All signs point to his mother passing away, but that's just my opinion.
I do love the colorfulness of this poem. Although it may be a tad dreary, I think it is far more alive than many others I've read. It speaks truthfully and honestly, ugliness and all.
Work cited:
www.poets.org. "A Brief Guide to the Beat Poets" 2004
The Norton Anthology of American Literature, "Howl" 2013, pp1354-60
Monday, April 6, 2015
"A Streetcar Named Desire"
In this particular playwright by Tennessee Williams, I think he does a wonderful job demonstrating the stereotypes plaguing the early 20th century, something he, himself, was victim to as well in these uncomfortable times. In his play he includes every aspect of discrimination: gender, sexuality, ethnicity, monetarily and politically social hierarchy. He makes this point, especially, clear when he introduces Stella's sister, Blanche, in the beginning of the play. Blanche is intended to be the quintessential "southern belle" as she appears at her sister, Stella's, flat in New Orleans. ". . . Her appearance is incongruous to this setting. She is daintily dressed in a white suit with a fluffy bodice, necklace and earrings of pearl, white gloves and hat, looking as if she were arriving at a summer tea or cocktail party in the garden district. . ." However, we soon learn that Blanche is, at the very least, attempting to hide some part of herself. When Stella makes her appearance, Blanche is beside herself, demanding Stella not look at her in the light until she is able to bathe and apply makeup. This is one of the many ways Williams defines the sexual roles of females at this time. Blanche has been traumatized by death back home and angry at Stella for not being there for her and to accompany her in the demands that death-in those days-took on a person responsible for such things. Regardless of such events, Williams portrays Blanche as a manipulative and -possibly even-vindictive person on a quest to right some wrongs done to her. This perspective is completely one-sided, however; Blanche was completely abandoned and left to her own devices, as a child. I, whole-heartedly, understand where Blanche is coming from, not only as a woman, but as a human being. Blanche may continue to be manipulative throughout the play, but I see this as her inner-child coming to terms with what life has handed her, or at least an attempt at it.
Monday, March 16, 2015
Blog #3
I really enjoyed reading Amy Lowell's poem, "September 1918." Although it may be short, I think Lowell captures and describes-in great detail-the ambience of the times. The first world war was almost over; she even mentions it in the first line of the third stanza, "Some day there will be no war." And this comes as a surprise, since the first two stanzas are littered with images of a beautiful, Autumn day, "This afternoon was the [colour] of water falling through sunlight, The trees glittered with the tumbling of leaves. . ." Yet, one could argue these first two lines are already giving away subtle hints: Lowell's use of the words tumbling and falling (and in the third line, dropped) can be considered to foreshadow the darker underlying theme she reveals near the end of the poem. With the war right outside her door the past four years, I am certain Lowell has heard the sound of bombs "dropping" and planes "falling" out of the sky. And I am sure these terms were expressed all the time in conversations and newspapers, as well, to describe the current events. (Anthology, p 713)
Lowell continues to paint a picture of beauty and happiness in the fourth line of the first stanza, "And the houses ran along them laughing out of square, open windows." Then she gives us the next, but last, line of merriment as she conveys the image of two boys in the park that, "Were carefully gathering red berries, To put in a pasteboard box." Thus far, Lowell has given her readers a reflection of enjoyment and prosperity, but the very next line contains her mention of the war. This stanza is represented with such darkness and melancholy, especially the first (aforementioned) and last three lines: "For I have time for nothing, But the endeavor to balance myself, Upon a broken world." (Anthology, p 713)
In contrast-amongst all the doom and gloom-I think Lowell is offering her readers hope, as well as herself; she talks of a brighter and more optimistic future. The first seven lines in the third stanza really explain this concept best. "Some day there will be no war. Then I shall take out this afternoon, And turn it in my fingers, And remark the sweet taste of it upon my palate, And note the crisp variety of its flights of leaves, To-day I can only gather it, And put it into my lunch-box. . ." I feel what Lowell is trying to articulate is that this moment, whether fantasy or reality, can only be retrieved when there is a time of peace-until then, it will just be a daydream, or memory. (Anthology, p 713)
Lowell continues to paint a picture of beauty and happiness in the fourth line of the first stanza, "And the houses ran along them laughing out of square, open windows." Then she gives us the next, but last, line of merriment as she conveys the image of two boys in the park that, "Were carefully gathering red berries, To put in a pasteboard box." Thus far, Lowell has given her readers a reflection of enjoyment and prosperity, but the very next line contains her mention of the war. This stanza is represented with such darkness and melancholy, especially the first (aforementioned) and last three lines: "For I have time for nothing, But the endeavor to balance myself, Upon a broken world." (Anthology, p 713)
In contrast-amongst all the doom and gloom-I think Lowell is offering her readers hope, as well as herself; she talks of a brighter and more optimistic future. The first seven lines in the third stanza really explain this concept best. "Some day there will be no war. Then I shall take out this afternoon, And turn it in my fingers, And remark the sweet taste of it upon my palate, And note the crisp variety of its flights of leaves, To-day I can only gather it, And put it into my lunch-box. . ." I feel what Lowell is trying to articulate is that this moment, whether fantasy or reality, can only be retrieved when there is a time of peace-until then, it will just be a daydream, or memory. (Anthology, p 713)
Thursday, March 12, 2015
Race and the American Novel: Personal Synthesis
Uncle Tom's Cabin is an interesting novel to read when dealing with the issue of racism-the fact that it was written by a white women is controversial enough. There is so much criticism, and some warranted, but at the end of the day I think it all leads us to one place. The idea that much progress has been made and that racism is a thing of the past is just absurd.
Sometimes I wonder if the critiquing of the person telling the story is a form of perpetuating the problem as well. Does it really matter who tells the story, so long as it gets told at all? But that is easy for me to say since I am white. What is that saying? "Blind are the privileged." Anyway, Baldwin made an astute observation when he pointed out the light-colored skin of Eliza and George. I don't know if I can agree with him that their differing fate was based on this fact, but then again, that may be my white privilege talking. It certainly seems possible, but would that not be an accurate representation of what went on in those times? Lighter-skinned African Americans did fair better than their darker counterparts. Had Stowe portrayed it the other way around, she would probably be criticized for painting a false, "rose-colored" picture of the times. And people would have been angry for her making it seem as though light-colored African Americans did not get preferential treatment and darker people sometimes did. So either way you look at it, it seems as though nobody can win when it comes to writing an accurate representation of that time period.
I was not there, so I have no idea what happened and what did not; I can only do my best to educate myself with the available information. But that is part of the controversy-what is accurate? If we just go by who is telling the story, then I don't know that any of it is. Slave narratives are not even telling the whole truth, so is anyone? I guess, in the end, I take all of it with a grain of salt. But, overall, this has given me a better understanding of what went on during the slavery years, both with black and white people, and it has also lead me to realize it is far from over. We have only made minimal progress-racism is just more subtle today. It may be politically frowned upon, but it is still morally justified, with some individuals. That is why classes like this need to exist and continue to teach the value of human life and dignity, and to understand and love one another, even when they are different from you.
Sometimes I wonder if the critiquing of the person telling the story is a form of perpetuating the problem as well. Does it really matter who tells the story, so long as it gets told at all? But that is easy for me to say since I am white. What is that saying? "Blind are the privileged." Anyway, Baldwin made an astute observation when he pointed out the light-colored skin of Eliza and George. I don't know if I can agree with him that their differing fate was based on this fact, but then again, that may be my white privilege talking. It certainly seems possible, but would that not be an accurate representation of what went on in those times? Lighter-skinned African Americans did fair better than their darker counterparts. Had Stowe portrayed it the other way around, she would probably be criticized for painting a false, "rose-colored" picture of the times. And people would have been angry for her making it seem as though light-colored African Americans did not get preferential treatment and darker people sometimes did. So either way you look at it, it seems as though nobody can win when it comes to writing an accurate representation of that time period.
I was not there, so I have no idea what happened and what did not; I can only do my best to educate myself with the available information. But that is part of the controversy-what is accurate? If we just go by who is telling the story, then I don't know that any of it is. Slave narratives are not even telling the whole truth, so is anyone? I guess, in the end, I take all of it with a grain of salt. But, overall, this has given me a better understanding of what went on during the slavery years, both with black and white people, and it has also lead me to realize it is far from over. We have only made minimal progress-racism is just more subtle today. It may be politically frowned upon, but it is still morally justified, with some individuals. That is why classes like this need to exist and continue to teach the value of human life and dignity, and to understand and love one another, even when they are different from you.
Race and the American Novel: Critical Commentary
I think what James Baldwin is trying to get at in his critique of UTC is that society should not have the power to label us; as human beings we are all unique but should be equal. "The failure of the protest novel lies in its rejection of life, the human being, the denial of his beauty, dread, power, in its insistence that it is his categorization alone which is real an which cannot be transcended" (Baldwin, 539). He explains that Stowe's representation of her fellow African American's in this novel has negative connotations, in this day and age, that is. I don't know if I entirely agree with that opinion, however, I think I see where he is coming from, at least.
There is so much talk of religion in the novel, but Baldwin reflects negatively on it, as if it is demeaning to the slaves portrayed in the book. "It must be remembered that the oppressed and the oppressor are bound together within the same society; they share the same beliefs, they both alike depend on the same reality" (Baldwin, 537). I think what he is trying to explain is that both blacks and whites in this novel are basing their lifestyles off of the same values and morals that go along with a very "white" Christian religion. And his point is that this religion, in and of itself, demeans the lives of African Americans. Or, at the very least, the way white people, and blacks as well, interpret the religion is that blacks are beneath them, and that in order to be descent human beings they must abide by the laws of the bible, but in accordance to how whites interpret it.
It is complicated and hard to decipher exactly what Baldwin is attempting to say, but I think he means that in Stowe's novel, black people are underestimating themselves, not giving themselves enough credit and dignity, and equating their own value with how they live their lives according to the way white people interpret the way the bible thinks they should. In other words, blacks feel they have triumphed over the adversity of the whites when they obey the "laws" of god; they receive comfort in the fact that their religious faith has promised them a fruitful "life after death" because they did right in the eyes of the lord. When, in fact, according to Baldwin, they did nothing of the sort. Baldwin is trying to say that this novel, as Stowe intended, was supposed to be about the triumph over adversity and racism by blacks. He thinks that all it did was perpetuate the categorization of people (blacks) based on theology. And I can see what he means by that. But I don't think this was a bad novel all. Stowe represented a particular era and the culture that accompanied it, and I don't think portraying something unrealistic would be appropriate at all. Maybe Baldwin is just uncomfortable that this is just the facts of what occurred during that time period; the truth is the truth, no matter how ugly for both parties involved. But I do understand what he is attempting to get across, and that is that there is a serious amount of categorization going on in this time frame. What Baldwin is uncomfortable with is that blacks are categorizing themselves within this theologically religious belief structure. This is entirely what the whites are doing, and doing to the blacks, and that is the problem. If you are to believe in a religious system that puts one race before another, you have already failed. I guess what he is trying to say is that Stowe only represented victory in accordance to a very flawed and racist categorization that blacks, themselves, believed in and abided by. But I argue that that is an easy justification for the times. You have to look at what it was like then. Of course, if she wrote this today it would be different, but these events didn't happen today, they happened a long time ago, when life was very different. All Stowe did was portray a very honest and accurate example of what life was life back in those times. And I don't think anyone from that time period would have wanted it any other way.
There is so much talk of religion in the novel, but Baldwin reflects negatively on it, as if it is demeaning to the slaves portrayed in the book. "It must be remembered that the oppressed and the oppressor are bound together within the same society; they share the same beliefs, they both alike depend on the same reality" (Baldwin, 537). I think what he is trying to explain is that both blacks and whites in this novel are basing their lifestyles off of the same values and morals that go along with a very "white" Christian religion. And his point is that this religion, in and of itself, demeans the lives of African Americans. Or, at the very least, the way white people, and blacks as well, interpret the religion is that blacks are beneath them, and that in order to be descent human beings they must abide by the laws of the bible, but in accordance to how whites interpret it.
It is complicated and hard to decipher exactly what Baldwin is attempting to say, but I think he means that in Stowe's novel, black people are underestimating themselves, not giving themselves enough credit and dignity, and equating their own value with how they live their lives according to the way white people interpret the way the bible thinks they should. In other words, blacks feel they have triumphed over the adversity of the whites when they obey the "laws" of god; they receive comfort in the fact that their religious faith has promised them a fruitful "life after death" because they did right in the eyes of the lord. When, in fact, according to Baldwin, they did nothing of the sort. Baldwin is trying to say that this novel, as Stowe intended, was supposed to be about the triumph over adversity and racism by blacks. He thinks that all it did was perpetuate the categorization of people (blacks) based on theology. And I can see what he means by that. But I don't think this was a bad novel all. Stowe represented a particular era and the culture that accompanied it, and I don't think portraying something unrealistic would be appropriate at all. Maybe Baldwin is just uncomfortable that this is just the facts of what occurred during that time period; the truth is the truth, no matter how ugly for both parties involved. But I do understand what he is attempting to get across, and that is that there is a serious amount of categorization going on in this time frame. What Baldwin is uncomfortable with is that blacks are categorizing themselves within this theologically religious belief structure. This is entirely what the whites are doing, and doing to the blacks, and that is the problem. If you are to believe in a religious system that puts one race before another, you have already failed. I guess what he is trying to say is that Stowe only represented victory in accordance to a very flawed and racist categorization that blacks, themselves, believed in and abided by. But I argue that that is an easy justification for the times. You have to look at what it was like then. Of course, if she wrote this today it would be different, but these events didn't happen today, they happened a long time ago, when life was very different. All Stowe did was portray a very honest and accurate example of what life was life back in those times. And I don't think anyone from that time period would have wanted it any other way.
Race and the American Novel: Textual Background and Context
Clearly, the 1800's was a time a great atrocities, sorrow, and genocide. About 1854 the controversy over slavery was reaching a boiling point as the congressional debate on the Kansas-Nebraska Act was underway. "Appeal to the Women of the Free States" describes-quite accurately-the general consensus of women when referring to the choice of being a slave state or free state. The author(s) explains the genuine disapproval women have of slavery and how devastating it was for them, emotionally, to watch it continue. "Of the woes, the injustice, and the misery of slavery, it is not needful to speak. There is but one feeling and one opinion on this among us all. I do not think there is a mother among us all, who clasps her child to her breast, who could ever be made to feel it right that that child should be a slave; not a mother among us all who would not rather lay that child in its grave (UTC p 459)."
The author(s) also touches on women's rights in this essay, "However ambition and the love of political power may blind the stronger sex (UTC p459)." It goes on to say that women don't have a voice because they are being silenced by the men who have such political power. And the author(s) insist that women need to speak up and make their voices heard because that is their duty as a women-which brings up my next point. I do love how women are trying to make a change and get involved in political matters, besides doing housework and taking care of their husbands. However the excerpt shows how prevalent female oppression still was then-even when pushing the boundaries for women's rights. "What, then, is the duty of American women at this time? The first duty is for each woman, for herself thoroughly to understand the subject, and to feel that as mother, wife, sister, or member of society, she is bound to give her influence on the right side (UTC p 461)."
That particular statement-the way it is worded-along with this one, "I do not think believe there is a husband who would think it right that his wife should be considered, by law, the property of another man, and not his own (UTC p 459)." is still tainted with sexist undertones. The belief that a women is a man's property once they are married, and that a wife's duty is to gently influence her husband, is also seen in the actual novel "Uncle Tom's Cabin." Mrs. Shelby pleads with her husband not to sell Tom-she begs him to turn to religion and look internally for some shred of morals and values that they swear to live by in church every Sunday, but to no avail. She reacts much the same way the author of "Appeal to the Women of the Free States" claims she would-she is upset and refuses to take part in any of the trade, "I'll be in no sense accomplice or help in this cruel business. . . they shall see, at any rate, that their mistress can feel for and with them (UTC p32)!"
I think this essay helps us, as readers, understand some of the moral dilemmas being faced at this time in history. But, particularly, this article helps us see that-on a much smaller, but still severe scale-women were a minority much like people of non-Caucasian descent. No, they were not all being savagely beaten and tortured, but they were looked at as property, abused, given duties, seen as inferior and less intelligent, belittled, bound by the law, and so on. Basically, they were looked at as a child, maybe one step above if at all; suffice to say, the oppression of women largely resembled slavery.
The author(s) also touches on women's rights in this essay, "However ambition and the love of political power may blind the stronger sex (UTC p459)." It goes on to say that women don't have a voice because they are being silenced by the men who have such political power. And the author(s) insist that women need to speak up and make their voices heard because that is their duty as a women-which brings up my next point. I do love how women are trying to make a change and get involved in political matters, besides doing housework and taking care of their husbands. However the excerpt shows how prevalent female oppression still was then-even when pushing the boundaries for women's rights. "What, then, is the duty of American women at this time? The first duty is for each woman, for herself thoroughly to understand the subject, and to feel that as mother, wife, sister, or member of society, she is bound to give her influence on the right side (UTC p 461)."
That particular statement-the way it is worded-along with this one, "I do not think believe there is a husband who would think it right that his wife should be considered, by law, the property of another man, and not his own (UTC p 459)." is still tainted with sexist undertones. The belief that a women is a man's property once they are married, and that a wife's duty is to gently influence her husband, is also seen in the actual novel "Uncle Tom's Cabin." Mrs. Shelby pleads with her husband not to sell Tom-she begs him to turn to religion and look internally for some shred of morals and values that they swear to live by in church every Sunday, but to no avail. She reacts much the same way the author of "Appeal to the Women of the Free States" claims she would-she is upset and refuses to take part in any of the trade, "I'll be in no sense accomplice or help in this cruel business. . . they shall see, at any rate, that their mistress can feel for and with them (UTC p32)!"
I think this essay helps us, as readers, understand some of the moral dilemmas being faced at this time in history. But, particularly, this article helps us see that-on a much smaller, but still severe scale-women were a minority much like people of non-Caucasian descent. No, they were not all being savagely beaten and tortured, but they were looked at as property, abused, given duties, seen as inferior and less intelligent, belittled, bound by the law, and so on. Basically, they were looked at as a child, maybe one step above if at all; suffice to say, the oppression of women largely resembled slavery.
Monday, February 9, 2015
Uncle Tom's Cabin
In Harriet Beecher Stowe's novel, "Uncle Tom's Cabin," Stowe touches on many difficult issues plaguing the time in which she lived: slavery, racism, sexism, etc. But the issue that seems most prevalent, thus far, is that of the downplaying of slavery and dehumanization of African-American slaves in the United States. Stowe begins the novel by introducing and describing two "gentleman," however, only one is considered a true gentleman of sorts, "For convenience sake, we have said, hitherto, two gentlemen. One of the parties, however, when critically examined, did not seem, strictly speaking, to come under the species" (Stowe, 1). Stowe was referring to Haley, a slave trader attempting to purchase slaves from Mr. Shelby; Shelby is the man that is supposed to embody the true gentleman portrayed in this conversation. Stowe even labels this very first chapter, "In Which the Reader Is Introduced to a Man of Humanity."
I do not think Stowe is really trying to say that Shelby is a man of humanity, though. What seems more accurate to me is that Stowe is explaining that Shelby is the lesser of two evils. This may not be the traditional way of thinking during these times, but that is exactly what I believe Stowe was trying to abolish in this novel: the traditional way of thinking. Shelby, in contrast to Haley, seems to be sensitive toward the slaves. Of course, in today's society, we would call that being human, but the dynamics of society were very different then. Stowe describes Shelby's "sensitivity" on the second page of the very first chapter, when he explains why he wants to arrange the sale of his slave, Tom, "Why, the fact is, Haley, Tom is an uncommon fellow; he is certainly worth that sum anywhere...steady, honest, capable, manages my whole farm like a clock" (Stowe, 2). Shelby's "sensitivity" appears more clearly(to the readers of today, at least)when Haley replies with, "You mean honest, as niggers go" (Stowe, 2).
In today's society we can very easily see the atrocities happening in this novel, but it was not as obvious to some, or as cut and dry, in those days. This is the reason, I feel, that Stowe includes these types of dialogues throughout her novel. Another perfect example she gives her readers is the constant mention of African-American slaves as "creatures." This is a large reason I think Stowe wants her readers to look deeper; she wants her readers to see past the dialogue, down into the ironic hypocrisy that plagued the daily lives of all who lived within this era.
I do not think Stowe is really trying to say that Shelby is a man of humanity, though. What seems more accurate to me is that Stowe is explaining that Shelby is the lesser of two evils. This may not be the traditional way of thinking during these times, but that is exactly what I believe Stowe was trying to abolish in this novel: the traditional way of thinking. Shelby, in contrast to Haley, seems to be sensitive toward the slaves. Of course, in today's society, we would call that being human, but the dynamics of society were very different then. Stowe describes Shelby's "sensitivity" on the second page of the very first chapter, when he explains why he wants to arrange the sale of his slave, Tom, "Why, the fact is, Haley, Tom is an uncommon fellow; he is certainly worth that sum anywhere...steady, honest, capable, manages my whole farm like a clock" (Stowe, 2). Shelby's "sensitivity" appears more clearly(to the readers of today, at least)when Haley replies with, "You mean honest, as niggers go" (Stowe, 2).
In today's society we can very easily see the atrocities happening in this novel, but it was not as obvious to some, or as cut and dry, in those days. This is the reason, I feel, that Stowe includes these types of dialogues throughout her novel. Another perfect example she gives her readers is the constant mention of African-American slaves as "creatures." This is a large reason I think Stowe wants her readers to look deeper; she wants her readers to see past the dialogue, down into the ironic hypocrisy that plagued the daily lives of all who lived within this era.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)