" I wished Mike would not behave so terribly to Cohn, though. Mike was a bad drunk. Brett was a good drunk. Bill was a good drunk. Cohn was never drunk. Mike was unpleasant after he passed a certain point. I liked to see him hurt Cohn. I wished he would not do it, though, because afterward it made me disgusted at myself. That was morality; things that made you disgusted afterward. No, that must be immorality." (p. 152)
I really don't understand how there can be such a thing as a good or bad drunk. I understand the point that Jake is making. However, I do not believe that a drunk is a good thing. Perhaps this is because of the culture I have been raised in, but it seems disgraceful, being drunk. The way that Mike behaves would be beyond belief, embarassing and sad. Even Brett, when drunk, makes such horrible decisions. So, I disagree with the thought process Jake goes through here. However, I did love the end of the quote, "That was morality; things that made you disgusted with yourself afterward." It makes sense. You know something is wrong because of how you feel afterward. In that, I feel states how being drunk is wrong as well.
THIS IS MY LAST BLOG!!!!!!!!!!!!! I FEEL SO ACCOMPLISHED! (just wanted to say that because I'm so glad I've finally gotten them finished. Essay time!)
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Chicken or the Egg
"'First the egg,' said Bill. 'Then the chicken. Even Bryan could see that.'
'He's dead. I read it in the paper yesterday.'
'No,. Not really?'
'Yes. Bryan's dead.'
Bill laid down the egg he was peeling.
'Gentlemen,' he said, and unwrapped a drumstick from ta piece of newspaper. ' I reverse the order. For Bryan's sake. As a tribute to the Great Commoner. First the chicken; then the egg.'
'Wonder what day God created the chicken?'
'Oh,' said Bill, sucking the drumstick, 'how should we know? We should not question. Our stay on earth is not for long. Let us rejoice and believe and give thanks.'" (p. 126)
This paragraph made me laugh while I was reading it. The ultimate question, which came first: the chicken, or the egg? So many times I have read jokes over this discussion and it is comical to see it in a rather serious novel. I rather enjoyed how they are using the discussion to decide what to eat first. Then, how Bill takes on the persona of a priest in his discussion over not questioning God's will. It is clear that the entire conversation is a joke, but at the same time, it is a serious conversation over the death, I believe, of someone they knew. The little jokes like this in the novel really helped me to keep reading when I would reach parts that were less interesting. I think things like this helped to keep the book light. It makes me wonder what type of humor Hemingway may have had, or if he was usually entirely serious?
'He's dead. I read it in the paper yesterday.'
'No,. Not really?'
'Yes. Bryan's dead.'
Bill laid down the egg he was peeling.
'Gentlemen,' he said, and unwrapped a drumstick from ta piece of newspaper. ' I reverse the order. For Bryan's sake. As a tribute to the Great Commoner. First the chicken; then the egg.'
'Wonder what day God created the chicken?'
'Oh,' said Bill, sucking the drumstick, 'how should we know? We should not question. Our stay on earth is not for long. Let us rejoice and believe and give thanks.'" (p. 126)
This paragraph made me laugh while I was reading it. The ultimate question, which came first: the chicken, or the egg? So many times I have read jokes over this discussion and it is comical to see it in a rather serious novel. I rather enjoyed how they are using the discussion to decide what to eat first. Then, how Bill takes on the persona of a priest in his discussion over not questioning God's will. It is clear that the entire conversation is a joke, but at the same time, it is a serious conversation over the death, I believe, of someone they knew. The little jokes like this in the novel really helped me to keep reading when I would reach parts that were less interesting. I think things like this helped to keep the book light. It makes me wonder what type of humor Hemingway may have had, or if he was usually entirely serious?
Apostrophe
"'My God,' Georgette said. 'What a box to sweat in!'
'It's hot.'
'Hot, my God!'" (p. 27)
"My God!" is the apostrophe in this passage. More often than not, this is the apostrophe that appears throughout this novel. Since Georgette is calling upon God, it is technically an invocation, as well. I believe that if one were to look at every day conversation, "my God," or "Oh my God" would be more common than any other type of existent apostrophe. I feel that this phrase is not necessarily important, it has just become extremely common over time as it has nearly developed into a cliché. Overall, I wish this phrase wasn't used as often, because to me it seems a little bland. I wonder if it wasn't slightly less common then, or if it has always existed in such frequent use.
'It's hot.'
'Hot, my God!'" (p. 27)
"My God!" is the apostrophe in this passage. More often than not, this is the apostrophe that appears throughout this novel. Since Georgette is calling upon God, it is technically an invocation, as well. I believe that if one were to look at every day conversation, "my God," or "Oh my God" would be more common than any other type of existent apostrophe. I feel that this phrase is not necessarily important, it has just become extremely common over time as it has nearly developed into a cliché. Overall, I wish this phrase wasn't used as often, because to me it seems a little bland. I wonder if it wasn't slightly less common then, or if it has always existed in such frequent use.
Resolution
"'Oh, Jake,' Brett said, 'we could have had such a damned good time together.'
Ahead was a mounted policeman in khaki directing traffic. He raided his baton. The car slowed suddenly pressing Brett against me.
'Yes,' I said. 'Isn't it pretty to think so?'" (p.251)
This is the absolute resolution of this novel. It is THE END, and to me it is kind of vague. Though it is the end, I am left feeling like there ought to be something a little more to end the story. I don't feel like everything was resolved. We know that Brett and Mike are likely done for a while, and that Cohn will probably go back to Frances. I honestly feel like there should be something more to terminate the novel. What happens with Brett and Jake? Where will there friendship go? These questions seem important to me and I think they ought to be answered. Since they are unanswered though, this is the resolution and termination of all that is "The Sun Also Rises."
Ahead was a mounted policeman in khaki directing traffic. He raided his baton. The car slowed suddenly pressing Brett against me.
'Yes,' I said. 'Isn't it pretty to think so?'" (p.251)
This is the absolute resolution of this novel. It is THE END, and to me it is kind of vague. Though it is the end, I am left feeling like there ought to be something a little more to end the story. I don't feel like everything was resolved. We know that Brett and Mike are likely done for a while, and that Cohn will probably go back to Frances. I honestly feel like there should be something more to terminate the novel. What happens with Brett and Jake? Where will there friendship go? These questions seem important to me and I think they ought to be answered. Since they are unanswered though, this is the resolution and termination of all that is "The Sun Also Rises."
Stream of Conscience
"Walking across the square to the hotel everything looked new and changed. I had never seen the trees before. I had never seen the flagpoles before, nor the front of the theatre. It was all different. I felt as I felt once coming home from an out-of-town football game..." (p.196)
I believe this is an example of stream of conscience, though I am not quite certain. I believe this because, although the author is telling this a story, it is an expression of Jake's thoughts. As he goes on, he changes from subject to subject as though a thought process. However, he maintains the appearance of telling a story. Throughout the novel, Hemingway expresses Jake's opinions in this way. In so doing, the stream of conscience is not jumpy as it normally would be in a person, but tells a story. I like how I am able to Jake's thoughts, but not become lost in the process. It gives a sense of better understanding of the character in the novel when the thoughts flow together. In this way, it is easier to read and comprehend.
I believe this is an example of stream of conscience, though I am not quite certain. I believe this because, although the author is telling this a story, it is an expression of Jake's thoughts. As he goes on, he changes from subject to subject as though a thought process. However, he maintains the appearance of telling a story. Throughout the novel, Hemingway expresses Jake's opinions in this way. In so doing, the stream of conscience is not jumpy as it normally would be in a person, but tells a story. I like how I am able to Jake's thoughts, but not become lost in the process. It gives a sense of better understanding of the character in the novel when the thoughts flow together. In this way, it is easier to read and comprehend.
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Food
"I went in and ate dinner. It was a big meal for France but it seemed very carefully apportioned after Spain." (p. 236)
I love this quote. I know to most people it wouldn't stand out much. After spending six weeks in Spain, it becomes very easy for me to sympathize with the quote. In Spain, they pile food on your plate. When you're finished, they ask if you want more. If you say no, they give you more and if you say yes, they pile on more. There is no end to the food. To me, this quote is comical because I ran into the problem more often than not of being full and yet having more bread and dinner and then desert shoved down my throat. Being back in the US was a shock because of how little I eat compared to Spain. I think this must have been the same feeling that Jake underwent in France having a more proportionate meal. Overall, I really only picked this quote because it describes one of the cultural differences that many often do not think of.
I love this quote. I know to most people it wouldn't stand out much. After spending six weeks in Spain, it becomes very easy for me to sympathize with the quote. In Spain, they pile food on your plate. When you're finished, they ask if you want more. If you say no, they give you more and if you say yes, they pile on more. There is no end to the food. To me, this quote is comical because I ran into the problem more often than not of being full and yet having more bread and dinner and then desert shoved down my throat. Being back in the US was a shock because of how little I eat compared to Spain. I think this must have been the same feeling that Jake underwent in France having a more proportionate meal. Overall, I really only picked this quote because it describes one of the cultural differences that many often do not think of.
Antagonist
"I swung at him and he ducked. I saw his face duck sideways in the light. He hit me and I sat down on the pavement. As I started to get on my feet he hit me twice. I went down backward under a table. I tried to get up and felt I did not have any legs. I felt I must get on my feet an try and hit him, Mike helped me up. Some one poured a carafe of water on my head. Mike had an arm around me, and I found I was sitting on a char. Mike was pulling at my ears." (p. 195)
At this point in the novel, I feel pretty secure in naming Cohn as the antagonist, It isn't that Jake and he aren't friends at the end of the novel, I just feel that once he attacks Jake, Cohn crosses the line. From this point on, he is no longer completely a friend. He becomes not only the enemy, but also competition for Brett's love. Even though Jake knows that Brett feels nothing but annoyance with Cohn, clearly Jake would still feel some competition. Secondly, after the attack, even though Jake and Cohn make-up, hard feelings still remain. This places Cohn in the antagonistic position of this novel. He may not be the same degree of enemy as, for example, Harry Potter and Voldemort, but he verges on enemy. Thus, he is at least partial the antagonist. If not for his actions, many of the negative events never would have occurred in the novel.
At this point in the novel, I feel pretty secure in naming Cohn as the antagonist, It isn't that Jake and he aren't friends at the end of the novel, I just feel that once he attacks Jake, Cohn crosses the line. From this point on, he is no longer completely a friend. He becomes not only the enemy, but also competition for Brett's love. Even though Jake knows that Brett feels nothing but annoyance with Cohn, clearly Jake would still feel some competition. Secondly, after the attack, even though Jake and Cohn make-up, hard feelings still remain. This places Cohn in the antagonistic position of this novel. He may not be the same degree of enemy as, for example, Harry Potter and Voldemort, but he verges on enemy. Thus, he is at least partial the antagonist. If not for his actions, many of the negative events never would have occurred in the novel.
Shame
"'Always,' he said in English, and laughed.'So they don't kill me.' he looked at her across the table.
'You know English well.'
'Yes,' he said. 'Pretty well, sometimes. But I must not let anybody know. It would be very bad, a torero who speaks English.'
'Why?' asked Brett.
'It would be bad. People would not like it. Not yet.'
'Why not?'
'They would not like it. Bull-fighters are not like that.'
'What are bull-fighters like?'
He laughed and tipped his hat down over his eyes and changed the angle of his cigar and the expression of his face.
'Like at that table,'..." (p. 190)
This is another example of the Spanish dislike of American culture. It isn't exactly that they dislike Americans, because many ideas from the US have spread to Spain. In this case, it is a sense of pride. A torero must represent the Spanish culture. If he can speak English, he may as well adopt the ignorant American culture. To many, this would be shameful, because it is believed that the Americans cannot understand the Spanish culture and when they try to act as much, only bring shame upon themselves. It is kind of sad that such stereotypes prevent the spread of ideas throughout cultures. However, with breakers of stereotypes such as Pedro, there is still hope for dispersal of knowledge.
'You know English well.'
'Yes,' he said. 'Pretty well, sometimes. But I must not let anybody know. It would be very bad, a torero who speaks English.'
'Why?' asked Brett.
'It would be bad. People would not like it. Not yet.'
'Why not?'
'They would not like it. Bull-fighters are not like that.'
'What are bull-fighters like?'
He laughed and tipped his hat down over his eyes and changed the angle of his cigar and the expression of his face.
'Like at that table,'..." (p. 190)
This is another example of the Spanish dislike of American culture. It isn't exactly that they dislike Americans, because many ideas from the US have spread to Spain. In this case, it is a sense of pride. A torero must represent the Spanish culture. If he can speak English, he may as well adopt the ignorant American culture. To many, this would be shameful, because it is believed that the Americans cannot understand the Spanish culture and when they try to act as much, only bring shame upon themselves. It is kind of sad that such stereotypes prevent the spread of ideas throughout cultures. However, with breakers of stereotypes such as Pedro, there is still hope for dispersal of knowledge.
Understatement
"And Michael. Michael's been lovely too." (p. 185)
This is a perfect of example of an understatement. I would prefer to call it sarcastic, but I believe that at times understatements are used in novels, but are not sarcastic. I honestly have not come across many in "The Sun Also Rises." In this case, it is used to exemplify Michael's lack of manners while is drunk, as well as his lack of control. The way that Brett says this helps us to understand that this is one of her least favorite characteristics in Mike. Her understatement emphasizes her dislike and annoyance with the behaviors of both Mike and Cohn. I believe that often if there was an understatement in this novel, it was using the words "lovely" or "pretty." Are there any other such statements in this novel without these two words. They seem overly British and colloquial. Most of all, I believe that a novel is fine without a lot of understatements which overload the true sense of the novel.
This is a perfect of example of an understatement. I would prefer to call it sarcastic, but I believe that at times understatements are used in novels, but are not sarcastic. I honestly have not come across many in "The Sun Also Rises." In this case, it is used to exemplify Michael's lack of manners while is drunk, as well as his lack of control. The way that Brett says this helps us to understand that this is one of her least favorite characteristics in Mike. Her understatement emphasizes her dislike and annoyance with the behaviors of both Mike and Cohn. I believe that often if there was an understatement in this novel, it was using the words "lovely" or "pretty." Are there any other such statements in this novel without these two words. They seem overly British and colloquial. Most of all, I believe that a novel is fine without a lot of understatements which overload the true sense of the novel.
Spanish and French
"'Globos illuminados,' Mike said. 'A collection of globos illuminados. That's what the paper said.'" (p. 183)
This is an example of Hemingway's frequent use of vernacular. In this case, "globos illuminados" are lighted globes or fireworks. I like how far those who may not be able to speak language, Hemingway puts the words in an understandable context. This and also the use of French help the reader to feel more as if they are in the settings of France or Spain. Hemingway's choice of vernacular is quite interesting, and I love that it is frequently used and doesn't just use it once or twice each couple of chapters. I believe the use Spanish one of the main attractions for me while reading this book. I was more comfortable with this book because I miss Spain so much, and it provided me with so much that I miss. I believe that without this part of the novel, I would not have loved it as much. In the end, I would like to try reading another novel by Hemingway if there are more over France or better yet, Spain.
This is an example of Hemingway's frequent use of vernacular. In this case, "globos illuminados" are lighted globes or fireworks. I like how far those who may not be able to speak language, Hemingway puts the words in an understandable context. This and also the use of French help the reader to feel more as if they are in the settings of France or Spain. Hemingway's choice of vernacular is quite interesting, and I love that it is frequently used and doesn't just use it once or twice each couple of chapters. I believe the use Spanish one of the main attractions for me while reading this book. I was more comfortable with this book because I miss Spain so much, and it provided me with so much that I miss. I believe that without this part of the novel, I would not have loved it as much. In the end, I would like to try reading another novel by Hemingway if there are more over France or better yet, Spain.
Flat Character
"'Mike was awful. he's terrible when he's tight.'
'He wasn't so tight.'
'The hell he wasn't. I know what we had before we came to the café.'
'He sobered up afterward.'
'Good. He was terrible. I don't like Cohn, God knows, and I think it was a silly trick of him to go down to San Sebastian, but nobody has any business to talk like Mike.'" (p. 149-150)
To me, Mike appears to be a very flat character. Throughout the novel he doesn't change. All we knew of him is that he is often drunk, in love with Brett, and bankrupt. There isn't much to his personality. It appears that these are usually the type of men Brett chooses. She is often caught with drunks or those men who would worship her. The advantage to Mike is that he has no personality. He never does much more than drink, so he is predictable. This predictability is, I suppose a comfort, but it makes him a rather dull character. In this case, perhaps he needs a term more empty than flat character.
'He wasn't so tight.'
'The hell he wasn't. I know what we had before we came to the café.'
'He sobered up afterward.'
'Good. He was terrible. I don't like Cohn, God knows, and I think it was a silly trick of him to go down to San Sebastian, but nobody has any business to talk like Mike.'" (p. 149-150)
To me, Mike appears to be a very flat character. Throughout the novel he doesn't change. All we knew of him is that he is often drunk, in love with Brett, and bankrupt. There isn't much to his personality. It appears that these are usually the type of men Brett chooses. She is often caught with drunks or those men who would worship her. The advantage to Mike is that he has no personality. He never does much more than drink, so he is predictable. This predictability is, I suppose a comfort, but it makes him a rather dull character. In this case, perhaps he needs a term more empty than flat character.
Simile or Something More?
"' Look how he knows how to use his horns,' I said. "He's got a left and a right just like a boxer.'" (p.144)
This is an example a simile. The comparison ist that of a a bull to a boxer. I also feel that it indirectly foreshadows Cohn's attacking of Jake later on in the novel. Jake is like the steer who attempts to deflect the blows of Cohn to "the walls" (his friends) and takes off the blows himself. In the end Cohn knocks him down, and he suffers. However, Jake, like the steer gets back up again, but never fully rejoins his friends. In this way, the simile also becomes and extended foreshadowing metaphor. Though, I do wonder what other ways there are to interpret this simile. Perhaps, there are no true meanings beyond the metaphor itself.
This is an example a simile. The comparison ist that of a a bull to a boxer. I also feel that it indirectly foreshadows Cohn's attacking of Jake later on in the novel. Jake is like the steer who attempts to deflect the blows of Cohn to "the walls" (his friends) and takes off the blows himself. In the end Cohn knocks him down, and he suffers. However, Jake, like the steer gets back up again, but never fully rejoins his friends. In this way, the simile also becomes and extended foreshadowing metaphor. Though, I do wonder what other ways there are to interpret this simile. Perhaps, there are no true meanings beyond the metaphor itself.
Stereotype
"They were always very polite at first, and it amused them very much that i should be an American. Somehow it was taken for granted that an American could not have aficion. He might simulate it or confuse it with excitement, but he could not really have it." (p.137)
I encountered this stereotype of Americans while I was in Spain. People often believed that Americans could not know or understand the Spanish culture the way that they saw it. In this case its understanding over the bull fighting in Pamplona and throughout Spain was what they believed to be impossible to understand. To many in Spain it was an extremely important part of culture and still is. Surprisingly, there is a lot more to bull fighting than only killing a bull. In this case, it holds unique meaning in masculinity and the power of man over animals. Perhaps with our anti-animal cruelty minds the bull-fights are hard to understand. On the other hand, maybe to understanding is something we as Americans is something we should better learn to do.
I encountered this stereotype of Americans while I was in Spain. People often believed that Americans could not know or understand the Spanish culture the way that they saw it. In this case its understanding over the bull fighting in Pamplona and throughout Spain was what they believed to be impossible to understand. To many in Spain it was an extremely important part of culture and still is. Surprisingly, there is a lot more to bull fighting than only killing a bull. In this case, it holds unique meaning in masculinity and the power of man over animals. Perhaps with our anti-animal cruelty minds the bull-fights are hard to understand. On the other hand, maybe to understanding is something we as Americans is something we should better learn to do.
España
"After a whole we came out of the mountains, and there were trees along both sides of the road, and a stream and ripe fields of grain, and the road went on, very white and straight ahead, and then lifted to a little rise, and off on the left was a hill with an old castle, with buildings close around it and a field of grain going right up tot the walls and shifting in the wind. I was up in front with the driver and I turned around. Robert Cohn was asleep, but Bill looked and nodded his head. Then we crossed a wide plain, and there was a big river off on the right shining on the sun from between the line of trees, and away off you could see the plateau of Pamplona rising out of the plain, and the walls of the city, and the great brown cathedral, and the broken skyline of the other churches. In back of the plateau were the mountains, and every way you looked there were other mountains, and ahead the road stretched out white across the plain going toward Plamplona." (p. 99)
This description makes me miss our excursions in Spain more than anything in the world. Traveling though the Spanish countryside, often times I saw sights such as this. So, to me, this just goes to show how well Hemingway was able to accurately and beautifully describe settings. On my way from Ciudad Real to Madrid, I saw many plains and even a river such as the one described. I love that I can imagine me time in Spain and remember the details even better because of the way the author write. In a way, it makes me a little more homesick for Spain. I have some pictures just like those described as well. Throughout the novel, I most enjoyed Hemingway's descriptions of the landscape. This really seemed to help in giving life to the novel, and at times it was better than the plot line.
This description makes me miss our excursions in Spain more than anything in the world. Traveling though the Spanish countryside, often times I saw sights such as this. So, to me, this just goes to show how well Hemingway was able to accurately and beautifully describe settings. On my way from Ciudad Real to Madrid, I saw many plains and even a river such as the one described. I love that I can imagine me time in Spain and remember the details even better because of the way the author write. In a way, it makes me a little more homesick for Spain. I have some pictures just like those described as well. Throughout the novel, I most enjoyed Hemingway's descriptions of the landscape. This really seemed to help in giving life to the novel, and at times it was better than the plot line.
Friday, August 20, 2010
France
"We walked on and circled the island. The river was dark and a bateau mouche went by , all bright with lights, going fast and quiet up and out of sight under the bridge. Down the river was Notre Dame squatting against the night sky. We crossed to the left bank of Seine by the wooden foot-bridge from the Quai de Bethune, and stopped on the bridge the island looked dark, the houses were high against the sky and the trees were shadows." (p. 83)
I love Hemingway's descriptive ability. This scene is such a perfect example of Hemingway's ability to put a small number of words together and yet provide a thorough view of a landscape. Not only is there a simile within this paragraph, but also there are words from the French language. To me, the inclusion of these two literary tools helps the reader to view the setting just a little bit better, and to feel a tad closer to France itself. I also like how this paragraph alludes to numerous famous sites in Paris. Overall. this paragraph contains everything and is a small display of his talents as an author. This panoramic view of France may very well be locatable. This is one type of description that I myself wish I could better display. It takes a lot of work to put so much into so little, and it is a wonder that Hemingway could do so.
I love Hemingway's descriptive ability. This scene is such a perfect example of Hemingway's ability to put a small number of words together and yet provide a thorough view of a landscape. Not only is there a simile within this paragraph, but also there are words from the French language. To me, the inclusion of these two literary tools helps the reader to view the setting just a little bit better, and to feel a tad closer to France itself. I also like how this paragraph alludes to numerous famous sites in Paris. Overall. this paragraph contains everything and is a small display of his talents as an author. This panoramic view of France may very well be locatable. This is one type of description that I myself wish I could better display. It takes a lot of work to put so much into so little, and it is a wonder that Hemingway could do so.
Frances
" ' Yes, I'll tell. Robert had a little secretary on the magazine. Just the sweetest little thing in the world, and though she was, and then I came along and he thought I was pretty wonderful, too. So I made him get rid of her, and he had brought her to Provincetown from Carmel when he moved the magazine, and he didn't even pay her fare back to the coast. All to please me. He thought i was pretty fine, then. Didn't you Robert?'" (p. 56-7)
For all of the downfalls Cohn has later on in the novel, this is one thing that I do not think he deserved. Frances is clearly a very controlling woman, but during this tirade, one is able to see the strength and self-control Cohn has. Also, we are able to see why he might have fallen so hard for Brett. If she was kind to him, it would be an instant connection for him. It is just like if a puppy is abused, then goes into a loving home, it will become so much more attached if only for the fact that it feels safe for once. I also can't help but wonder if Cohn didn't get some of the personality he displays later in the book from the treatment of Frances. After all, in the end he seems to want to control everything that Brett does. Maybe after spending so much time under Frances's thumb, this was all he knew. Whatever the case may be, Frances is most definitely my least favorite character.
For all of the downfalls Cohn has later on in the novel, this is one thing that I do not think he deserved. Frances is clearly a very controlling woman, but during this tirade, one is able to see the strength and self-control Cohn has. Also, we are able to see why he might have fallen so hard for Brett. If she was kind to him, it would be an instant connection for him. It is just like if a puppy is abused, then goes into a loving home, it will become so much more attached if only for the fact that it feels safe for once. I also can't help but wonder if Cohn didn't get some of the personality he displays later in the book from the treatment of Frances. After all, in the end he seems to want to control everything that Brett does. Maybe after spending so much time under Frances's thumb, this was all he knew. Whatever the case may be, Frances is most definitely my least favorite character.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
The Conflict
"This was Brett, that I had felt like crying about. Then I thought of her walking up the street and stepping into the car, as I had last seen her, and of course in a little while I felt like hell again. It is awfully easy to be hard-boiled about everything in the daytime, but at night it is another thing." (p. 42)
The conflict throughout the novel is obvious here in this quote. It is not directly stated her, but clearly Jake is in love with Brett, though he believes it to be for the best if he lets her go. This internal conflict continues on throughout the story, no matter the man that Brett may be with. I believe that Jake and Brett in these stories are similar to the knight and the damsel in distress, only with a spin on the classic tales. Jake is a representation of the perfect knight, and Brett is the damsel, only the thing that is holding her back is alcohol and her relationships with men. Consistently these relationships fail and she looks for comfort in Jake. In this way, Jake feels the instinct to protect her, because of her love for her. Eventually, however, this constant need and the loss of need by Brett may become tiring to Jake, which is where the inner turmoil plays out. Should he convince her to stay or let her go? This question is never directly stated in the novel, but I feel it is important. By the end of the novel though, we still have no clear answer.
The conflict throughout the novel is obvious here in this quote. It is not directly stated her, but clearly Jake is in love with Brett, though he believes it to be for the best if he lets her go. This internal conflict continues on throughout the story, no matter the man that Brett may be with. I believe that Jake and Brett in these stories are similar to the knight and the damsel in distress, only with a spin on the classic tales. Jake is a representation of the perfect knight, and Brett is the damsel, only the thing that is holding her back is alcohol and her relationships with men. Consistently these relationships fail and she looks for comfort in Jake. In this way, Jake feels the instinct to protect her, because of her love for her. Eventually, however, this constant need and the loss of need by Brett may become tiring to Jake, which is where the inner turmoil plays out. Should he convince her to stay or let her go? This question is never directly stated in the novel, but I feel it is important. By the end of the novel though, we still have no clear answer.
Fear
"She was sitting up now. My arm was around her and she was leaning back against me, and we ere quite calm. She was looking into my eyes with that way she had of looking that made you wonder whether she really ever saw out of her own eyes. they would look on and on after everyone else's eyes in the world would have stopped looking, She looked as though there were nothing on earth she would not look at like that, and really she was afraid of so many things." (p. 34)
I love this quote with a passion. I feel like there is an extremely deep meaning that I can not completely reach, but I understand some of it. I think Hemingway intends for the audience to understand from the sequence of events directly before the quote and including the quote as well, that Brett has been through a lot in her life. She has been hurt more than most people, and because of it, she looks at the world differently, and in a way, not at all. By not looking entirely at the world, and only seeing what she wants to see, yet in seeing everything at the same time, she can protect herself from harm. Also, this quote says that for all that she had been through, Brett did her best not to let it show, as it was only visible to Jake in her eyes. I believe the last line is my favorite part of the entirety of this novel because to me, it states that for all that had occurred, Brett was still willing to try to see everything possible in the world, even though the world itself terrified her.
I love this quote with a passion. I feel like there is an extremely deep meaning that I can not completely reach, but I understand some of it. I think Hemingway intends for the audience to understand from the sequence of events directly before the quote and including the quote as well, that Brett has been through a lot in her life. She has been hurt more than most people, and because of it, she looks at the world differently, and in a way, not at all. By not looking entirely at the world, and only seeing what she wants to see, yet in seeing everything at the same time, she can protect herself from harm. Also, this quote says that for all that she had been through, Brett did her best not to let it show, as it was only visible to Jake in her eyes. I believe the last line is my favorite part of the entirety of this novel because to me, it states that for all that had occurred, Brett was still willing to try to see everything possible in the world, even though the world itself terrified her.
Teeth
"She grinned and I saw why she made a point of nit laughing. With her mouth closed she was a rather pretty girl." (p. 23)
I think everyone knows these kinds of people. In general, they are quite amazing, but there is one thing, whether a physical or mental trait, that is off-putting. What I find so interesting in this girl, is that Jake does not turn her away at the point of seeing her teething and knowing she can not be claimed as upper class. He continues to talk with her against, probably, his better judgment. This passage is another expression of Jake's personality and humor upon which will be expanded later in the novel. I also like dhow he, as a writer is able to communicate his impressions of this girl in such small details. I believe that in each of the characters in this novel, important or unimportant, Hemingway points out one characteristic flaw of each. These in the end make the characters more believable, more realistic and deep.
I think everyone knows these kinds of people. In general, they are quite amazing, but there is one thing, whether a physical or mental trait, that is off-putting. What I find so interesting in this girl, is that Jake does not turn her away at the point of seeing her teething and knowing she can not be claimed as upper class. He continues to talk with her against, probably, his better judgment. This passage is another expression of Jake's personality and humor upon which will be expanded later in the novel. I also like dhow he, as a writer is able to communicate his impressions of this girl in such small details. I believe that in each of the characters in this novel, important or unimportant, Hemingway points out one characteristic flaw of each. These in the end make the characters more believable, more realistic and deep.
Libro Numero Dos: Allusion
"Then there was another thing. He had been reading W.H. Hudson> That sounds like an innocent occupation, but Cohn had read and reread "The Purple Land." "The Purple Land" is a very sinister book if read to late in life." (p. 17)
This allusion to "The Purple Land" helps to clarify Cohn's personality indirectly. From the paragraph, one can learn that Cohn is very easily influenced. Secondly, he seems to be severely disappointed in his life. The novel, "The Purple Land" is about a young man's misadventures, according to http://uwpress.wisc.edu/books/2325.htm.
The content of this book, if Cohn was indeed experiencing a mid-life crisis, would only increase his feelings of failure, as expressed by Jake in the novel. I think novel also helps to clarify the time period in which this novel occurs and after reading the information on the previously mentioned website, I understand why it was that Cohn wanted to go to South America initially. Overall, I think this allusion successfully displays and foreshadows his personality to come later in the book, but on a smaller scale. I believe that over time, with more information on Cohn's character, he changes from a likable to an irritating character.
This allusion to "The Purple Land" helps to clarify Cohn's personality indirectly. From the paragraph, one can learn that Cohn is very easily influenced. Secondly, he seems to be severely disappointed in his life. The novel, "The Purple Land" is about a young man's misadventures, according to http://uwpress.wisc.edu/books/2325.htm.
The content of this book, if Cohn was indeed experiencing a mid-life crisis, would only increase his feelings of failure, as expressed by Jake in the novel. I think novel also helps to clarify the time period in which this novel occurs and after reading the information on the previously mentioned website, I understand why it was that Cohn wanted to go to South America initially. Overall, I think this allusion successfully displays and foreshadows his personality to come later in the book, but on a smaller scale. I believe that over time, with more information on Cohn's character, he changes from a likable to an irritating character.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
The End
" And then it becomes 1990. I'm forty-three years old, and a writer now, still dreaming Linda alive in exactly the same way. She's not the embodied Linda; she's mostly made up, a new identity, a new name' like the man who never was. Her real name doesn't matter. She was nine years old. I loved her and then she died. And yet right here, in the spell of memory and imagination, I can still see her as if through ice, as if I'm gazing into some other world, a place where there are no brain tumors and no funeral homes, where there are no bodies at all. I can see Kiowa, too, and Ted Lavender and Curt Lemon, and sometimes I can even see Timmy skating with Linda under the yellow floodlights. I'm young and happy. I'll never die. I'm skimming across the surface of my own history, moving fast, riding the melt beneath the blades, doing loops and spins, and when I take a high leap into the dark and come down thirty years later, I realize it is as Tim trying to save Timmy's life with a story." (p. 232-3)
With this the story ends. It is a bit confusing trying to figure out what O'Brien is saying by this, but I have some idea. I believe that O'Brien is trying to say that by writing several books, he keeps trying to prove and sustain the innocence of the boy he once was. Through war and fighting he has lost that innocence, but he believes that if he can write the story correctly he can bring it back, remind people of what he once was. For all of the violence in this story, this is the most comforting and peaceful ending, more so than could be expected. In a way, it is a nice ending, but it is also unexpected. However, I wish that I could figure out the root of this book and and of this final chapter, because it leaves me a little confused in the end. I would like to know what O'Brien really wanted to teach through this novel, what I was meant to learn. What I have taken away is that war will always have lasting effects that can never be counteracted. These scars will continue on until wars are ended and peace is sustained. This is what I think O'Brien was trying to say.
With this the story ends. It is a bit confusing trying to figure out what O'Brien is saying by this, but I have some idea. I believe that O'Brien is trying to say that by writing several books, he keeps trying to prove and sustain the innocence of the boy he once was. Through war and fighting he has lost that innocence, but he believes that if he can write the story correctly he can bring it back, remind people of what he once was. For all of the violence in this story, this is the most comforting and peaceful ending, more so than could be expected. In a way, it is a nice ending, but it is also unexpected. However, I wish that I could figure out the root of this book and and of this final chapter, because it leaves me a little confused in the end. I would like to know what O'Brien really wanted to teach through this novel, what I was meant to learn. What I have taken away is that war will always have lasting effects that can never be counteracted. These scars will continue on until wars are ended and peace is sustained. This is what I think O'Brien was trying to say.
Linda
"Linda was nine then, as I was, but we were in love. And it was real. When I write about her now, three decades later, it's tempting to dismiss it as a crush, an infatuation of childhood, but I know for a fact that what we felt for each other was as deep and rich as love can ever get. it had all the shadings and complexities of mature adult love, and maybe more, beaus there were not yet, and because it was not yet fixed to comparisons or chronologies or the ways by which adults measure such things." (p. 216)
I love this story about Linda. The ending is terribly sad, but it is one of the few times in the novel in which O'Brien speaks of his own life and love. His wife is never truly mentioned and his daughter only twice. However, Linda receives several pages. I think the loss of this girl about whom he so obviously cared also helps to explain his emotions throughout the novel. He seems to have a lack of love in the novel and the loss of someone is always extremely hard for him. It seems as though each death is very vivid for the author and maybe this is because he never learned to let go after Linda. Whatever the real reason behind his actions, I think that Linda is an influence on O'Brien throughout the novel, whether she is mentioned or not. For this reason, I believe that her story is a very important one.
I love this story about Linda. The ending is terribly sad, but it is one of the few times in the novel in which O'Brien speaks of his own life and love. His wife is never truly mentioned and his daughter only twice. However, Linda receives several pages. I think the loss of this girl about whom he so obviously cared also helps to explain his emotions throughout the novel. He seems to have a lack of love in the novel and the loss of someone is always extremely hard for him. It seems as though each death is very vivid for the author and maybe this is because he never learned to let go after Linda. Whatever the real reason behind his actions, I think that Linda is an influence on O'Brien throughout the novel, whether she is mentioned or not. For this reason, I believe that her story is a very important one.
Death
"The place was deserted - no people, no animals - and the only confirmed kill was an old man who lay face-up near a pigpen at the center of the village. His right arm was gone. At his face there were already many flies and gnats. Dave Jensen went over and shook the old man's hand."(p.214)
This section of the book really bothers me. I believe in complete reverence toward the dead, be they enemies or no. So, when the soldiers in this story are almost mocking their 'kill', it is rather uncomfortable for me. I believe that O'Brien includes this to explain that it is how the men cope with the guilt of having killed someone. They have jokes and act as though nothing has happened, as though the man is alive. In this way, they can nearly distract themselves from the fact that the man is dead. I can not ever agree with these actions, but I think I understand why they were taken. I did like that O'Brien refused to participate, as he had a moral conscience. This to me shows strength and is a different form of coping with the deaths they see throughout the novel.
This section of the book really bothers me. I believe in complete reverence toward the dead, be they enemies or no. So, when the soldiers in this story are almost mocking their 'kill', it is rather uncomfortable for me. I believe that O'Brien includes this to explain that it is how the men cope with the guilt of having killed someone. They have jokes and act as though nothing has happened, as though the man is alive. In this way, they can nearly distract themselves from the fact that the man is dead. I can not ever agree with these actions, but I think I understand why they were taken. I did like that O'Brien refused to participate, as he had a moral conscience. This to me shows strength and is a different form of coping with the deaths they see throughout the novel.
Effects of War
"I was down there with him, inside him, I was part of the night, I was the land itself- everything everywhere- the fireflies and paddies, the midnight rustlings, the cool phosphorescent shimmer of evil - I was atrocity - I was jungle fire, jungle drums - I was the blind stare in the eyes of all those poor, dead ex-pals of mine - all the pale young corpses, Lee Strunk and Kiowa and Curt Lemon - I was the beast on their lips - the horror and the war." (p. 199)
I believe this paragraph is also an extended metaphor, but I liked it because it shows just what war has done to O'Brien. Often one hears about post-traumatic stress disorders in war veterans, and I think this paragraph exemplifies it. O'Brien has gone so hungry for revenge, that he himself is the war, he is able to use everything that he knows scares himself to scare Jorgenson. What is worse though, is that later on, he ends up scaring himself. To me it is as if the war has take root in his soul and he can never stop fighting. O'Brien must always remember and always reuse what he has seen. This paragraph has an almost spooky tone to it when you realize how far over the edge O'Brien seems to have gone in it. It certainly makes me wonder what kind of effects the wars of today are having on veterans now.
I believe this paragraph is also an extended metaphor, but I liked it because it shows just what war has done to O'Brien. Often one hears about post-traumatic stress disorders in war veterans, and I think this paragraph exemplifies it. O'Brien has gone so hungry for revenge, that he himself is the war, he is able to use everything that he knows scares himself to scare Jorgenson. What is worse though, is that later on, he ends up scaring himself. To me it is as if the war has take root in his soul and he can never stop fighting. O'Brien must always remember and always reuse what he has seen. This paragraph has an almost spooky tone to it when you realize how far over the edge O'Brien seems to have gone in it. It certainly makes me wonder what kind of effects the wars of today are having on veterans now.
Alliteration and Rhyming
"'Well, goody gum drop,' he said." (p. 196)
"How-dee-doo."
"Pleased as punch" (p. 214)
Many times throughout this novel, O'Brien uses alliteration in the phrases uttered by the men. Perhaps these phrases are just more 'catchy' to say because of the repetition. On occasion, the author also uses alliteration in his paragraphs to create rhythm within the word structure. This seems to help the paragraphs flow more smooth and keeps the sentences from being stunted. I also noticed that O'Brien also uses a bit of rhyming in some of his paragraphs. For example:
"'How-dee-do, ' he said. One by one the others did it too." (p. 214)
Additionally, as this scene is suppossed to seem comical to most of the men, it might explain why alliteration and rhyming are used. It is an odd moment, and the rhythm the two literary devices create add to the feeling of the moment. Perhaps this will then cause the reader to re-read the sentence and find it to be as such. Overall, I just think it is interesting how O'Brien is able to use these devices to his advantage in a novel without it sounding forced or awkward.
"How-dee-doo."
"Pleased as punch" (p. 214)
Many times throughout this novel, O'Brien uses alliteration in the phrases uttered by the men. Perhaps these phrases are just more 'catchy' to say because of the repetition. On occasion, the author also uses alliteration in his paragraphs to create rhythm within the word structure. This seems to help the paragraphs flow more smooth and keeps the sentences from being stunted. I also noticed that O'Brien also uses a bit of rhyming in some of his paragraphs. For example:
"'How-dee-do, ' he said. One by one the others did it too." (p. 214)
Additionally, as this scene is suppossed to seem comical to most of the men, it might explain why alliteration and rhyming are used. It is an odd moment, and the rhythm the two literary devices create add to the feeling of the moment. Perhaps this will then cause the reader to re-read the sentence and find it to be as such. Overall, I just think it is interesting how O'Brien is able to use these devices to his advantage in a novel without it sounding forced or awkward.
Flashback
"Now, looking out at the field, I wondered if it was all a mistake. Everything was too ordinary. A quiet sunny day, and the field was not the field I remembered. I pictured Kiowa's face, the way he used to smile, but all I felt was the awkwardness of remembering." (p. 176)
In truth, I would like to label more or less all of this novel as a flashback. O'Brien constantly looks back to his past throughout this novel. However, we are brought back to the present by his comments or his description of things in the less distant past. O'Brien also frequently diverges into another story directly in the middle of the one he is telling, usually to clarify. I believe this too is a form of a flashback. After all, he has changed courses and goes farther back into the past. He also occasionally jumps to the future as well. All of the movement throughout the story actually helped me to pay better attention and kept the novel interesting. Without it, I do not know if I would have been able to read it so easily.
In truth, I would like to label more or less all of this novel as a flashback. O'Brien constantly looks back to his past throughout this novel. However, we are brought back to the present by his comments or his description of things in the less distant past. O'Brien also frequently diverges into another story directly in the middle of the one he is telling, usually to clarify. I believe this too is a form of a flashback. After all, he has changed courses and goes farther back into the past. He also occasionally jumps to the future as well. All of the movement throughout the story actually helped me to pay better attention and kept the novel interesting. Without it, I do not know if I would have been able to read it so easily.
Personification
"This little field, I thought, had swallowed so much." (p. 176)
I love it when authors use this type of personification in their writing. In this sentence, the personification is subtle, but clear. It is not blatantly obvious, and so it does not overwhelm the paragraph. To me, this form of personification accentuates the the writing. However, when I read something that personifies animals, it just does not fall well with me. In this case, the thought of the land swallowing up things reminds me of floods, when the land is so wet that it absorbs everything like a sponge. With this wording, I can imagine things sinking into the mud and settling at the bottom. Then, years later to be excavated as part of history, to be studied and examined. It took me a while to find personification in this novel, and for me that is a good sign. I am glad this is not a novel where personification is over abundant.
I love it when authors use this type of personification in their writing. In this sentence, the personification is subtle, but clear. It is not blatantly obvious, and so it does not overwhelm the paragraph. To me, this form of personification accentuates the the writing. However, when I read something that personifies animals, it just does not fall well with me. In this case, the thought of the land swallowing up things reminds me of floods, when the land is so wet that it absorbs everything like a sponge. With this wording, I can imagine things sinking into the mud and settling at the bottom. Then, years later to be excavated as part of history, to be studied and examined. It took me a while to find personification in this novel, and for me that is a good sign. I am glad this is not a novel where personification is over abundant.
Honesty
"What stories can do, I guess, is make things present. I can look at things I never looked at. I can attach faces to grief and love and pity and God. I can be brave. I can make myself feel again. 'Daddy, tell the truth,' Kathleen can say, 'did you ever kill anybody?' And I can say honestly, 'Of course not.' Or I can say, honestly, 'Yes.' (p. 172)
I think this is a really moving paragraph and a kind of "WOW!" moment. I do not know how to explain why it is one of these moments for me, I can only say that it is. In this paragraph, O'Brien finally seems to come to peace with his past. Yes, he still carries guilt, but he is not afraid to confront his past any longer. When he talks of stories, I believe he is saying that the way a story is told effects the outcome. The wording may make it seem, in his case, like he did kill someone, or as though he had no choice and so it really was not his fault. I like how with this recognition, it seems that O'Brien is more open to telling his daughter the story. Without this openness, I do not believe he could truly come to terms with his past. I do not believe I truly understand what O'Brien means to say in this chapter, but for some reason, it sticks with me that he can honestly say yes or no.
I think this is a really moving paragraph and a kind of "WOW!" moment. I do not know how to explain why it is one of these moments for me, I can only say that it is. In this paragraph, O'Brien finally seems to come to peace with his past. Yes, he still carries guilt, but he is not afraid to confront his past any longer. When he talks of stories, I believe he is saying that the way a story is told effects the outcome. The wording may make it seem, in his case, like he did kill someone, or as though he had no choice and so it really was not his fault. I like how with this recognition, it seems that O'Brien is more open to telling his daughter the story. Without this openness, I do not believe he could truly come to terms with his past. I do not believe I truly understand what O'Brien means to say in this chapter, but for some reason, it sticks with me that he can honestly say yes or no.
Repetition
"Norman Bowker followed the tar rod on its seven-mile loop around the lake, then he stared all over again, driving slowly, feeling safe inside his father's big Chevy, now and then looking out on the lake to watch the boars and water-skiers and scenery." (p. 130)
"In the interests of truth, however, I wan to make it clear that Norman Bowker was in no way responsible for what happened to Kiowa. Norman did not experience a failure of nerve that night. He did not freeze up or lose the Silver Star for valor. That part of the story is my own." (p. 154)
The chapter from which the first quote originates and the two chapters proceeding it really caught my attention. Each time the story of Kiowa's death was repeated, it changed a bit. In the end , when O'Brien explains that he is, in a way, the Norman from his story, it took a moment for me to fully understand. It was as though everything I had thought I had read changed right before my eyes. Finally, my brain clicked and suddenly I understood. With that understanding came a feeling of, well, I felt sorry for O'Brien. Imagining the weight of the guilt he must have felt makes one feel that way. Most importantly though, I liked how the second quote helps to explain and clarify what happens throughout the next chapter.
"In the interests of truth, however, I wan to make it clear that Norman Bowker was in no way responsible for what happened to Kiowa. Norman did not experience a failure of nerve that night. He did not freeze up or lose the Silver Star for valor. That part of the story is my own." (p. 154)
The chapter from which the first quote originates and the two chapters proceeding it really caught my attention. Each time the story of Kiowa's death was repeated, it changed a bit. In the end , when O'Brien explains that he is, in a way, the Norman from his story, it took a moment for me to fully understand. It was as though everything I had thought I had read changed right before my eyes. Finally, my brain clicked and suddenly I understood. With that understanding came a feeling of, well, I felt sorry for O'Brien. Imagining the weight of the guilt he must have felt makes one feel that way. Most importantly though, I liked how the second quote helps to explain and clarify what happens throughout the next chapter.
The Dance
"There was no music. Most of the hamlet had burned down, including her house, which was now smoke, and the girl danced with her eyes half closed, her feet bare. She was maybe fourteen. She had black hair and brown skin." (p.129)
I do not understand the purpose of this chapter in this novel. The girl's family has died, and yet she is dancing. Also, why is the chapter entitled "Style"? I honestly can not see how this chapter has any effect on the rest of the novel. I believe that without this chapter the book could be viewed in exactly the same way. Maybe there is some symbolism or metaphor deep within this dance, but I am not sure. Is this dance some form of ritual funeral? I think it could possible be a play off of the funeral chapter, to show that the men feel some reverence toward death, although often they portray death to be a joke. I can not really think of another explanation for it.
I do not understand the purpose of this chapter in this novel. The girl's family has died, and yet she is dancing. Also, why is the chapter entitled "Style"? I honestly can not see how this chapter has any effect on the rest of the novel. I believe that without this chapter the book could be viewed in exactly the same way. Maybe there is some symbolism or metaphor deep within this dance, but I am not sure. Is this dance some form of ritual funeral? I think it could possible be a play off of the funeral chapter, to show that the men feel some reverence toward death, although often they portray death to be a joke. I can not really think of another explanation for it.
The Effects of Imagery
"His jaw was in his throat, his upper lip and teeth were gone, his one eye was shut, his other eye was a star-shaped hole, his eyebrows were thin and arched like a woman's, his nose was undamaged, there was a slight tear at the lobe of one ear, his clean black hair was swept upward into a cowlick at the rear of the skull, his forehead was lightly freckled, his fingernails were clean,the skin at his left cheek was peeled back in three ragged strips, his right cheek was smooth and hairless, there was a butterfly on his chin, his neck was open to the spinal cord and the blood thee was thick and shiny and it was this wound that had killed him. He lay face-up in the center of the trail..." (p. 118)
The way that O'Brien uses both violent and peaceful imagery in this passage is intriguing. It shows both sides of war, as well as both sides of death. Throughout this novel, O'Brien uses highly descriptive imagery which helps one to imagine the characters and setting fairly easily. The underlined parts in the section above are that which carry violence, and I think it is different how once O'Brien begins to include such violence, he suddenly skips back into a description of normalcy. It is as if he is trying to reconcile the violence by covering it up with something more peaceful, more beautiful and less painful to remember. O'Brien's form of imagery often comes across to me as his thought process and his memories, more than his trying to give details to a fictional story. This is one of the reasons I have enjoyed reading this novel so much. The images that I can form in my head are fully described, yet at the same time lack enough to allow me to become part of the action of the novel. I think this takes great skill in a writer, not to come across as forcing details upon the reader.
The way that O'Brien uses both violent and peaceful imagery in this passage is intriguing. It shows both sides of war, as well as both sides of death. Throughout this novel, O'Brien uses highly descriptive imagery which helps one to imagine the characters and setting fairly easily. The underlined parts in the section above are that which carry violence, and I think it is different how once O'Brien begins to include such violence, he suddenly skips back into a description of normalcy. It is as if he is trying to reconcile the violence by covering it up with something more peaceful, more beautiful and less painful to remember. O'Brien's form of imagery often comes across to me as his thought process and his memories, more than his trying to give details to a fictional story. This is one of the reasons I have enjoyed reading this novel so much. The images that I can form in my head are fully described, yet at the same time lack enough to allow me to become part of the action of the novel. I think this takes great skill in a writer, not to come across as forcing details upon the reader.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
The Way They Talk
"'You don't mess with churches." (p. 113)
This is one of many forms of diction and colloquialism used throughout this novel. O'Brien also used curse words frequently, as a form of speech for soldiers. When not speaking of soldier, O'Brien would drop these words. I find it interesting how the diction gives the characters a defined personality. Although curse words may be extreme, perhaps for soldiers they were the least of their worries, or maybe they were just brought up differently. I don't quite understand why these words are so necessary to the fabric of the story. I also believe that use of words such as "mess" show the down-to-earth, normal personality that can easily be understood by all. Without the wording, the characters would be more difficult to relate with and the story might lose its tone. If the story were written in proper English, I doubt that many would read it.
This is one of many forms of diction and colloquialism used throughout this novel. O'Brien also used curse words frequently, as a form of speech for soldiers. When not speaking of soldier, O'Brien would drop these words. I find it interesting how the diction gives the characters a defined personality. Although curse words may be extreme, perhaps for soldiers they were the least of their worries, or maybe they were just brought up differently. I don't quite understand why these words are so necessary to the fabric of the story. I also believe that use of words such as "mess" show the down-to-earth, normal personality that can easily be understood by all. Without the wording, the characters would be more difficult to relate with and the story might lose its tone. If the story were written in proper English, I doubt that many would read it.
Sweetheart of the Song Tra Bong
"The way Rat told it, she came in by helicopter along with the daily resupply shipment out of Chu Lai. A tall, big-boned blonde. At best, Rat said, she was seventeen years old, fresh out of Cleveland Heights Senior High. She had long white legs and blue eyes and a complexion like strawberry ice cream. Very friendly, too." (p. 89)
"It was as though he had trouble recognizing her. She wore a bush hat and filthy green fatigues; she carried the standard M-16 automatic assault rifle; her face was black with charcoal." (p. 98)
"Her eyes seemed to shine in the dark - not blue, though, but a bright glowing jungle green." (p. 101)
I really enjoyed this story, although it was one of the longer chapters in the novel. I thought it was interesting how Mary Anne changed under the effects of the war. This is one of the few stories I've heard written of modern war times that include women. Usually when I have read such a novel, the woman is always the damsel in distress. In this case, Mary Anne was the hero and Eddie became more or less the damsel. It is interesting that for once the woman is the one to become strong and independent, and it breaks several normal beliefs. During war times, feminism has never been fervently followed and its inspiring that O'Brien took so much of his novel to write about a woman's strength. Even though in the end Mary Anne changed far beyond the normal boundaries, I think this is an inspirational chapter.
"It was as though he had trouble recognizing her. She wore a bush hat and filthy green fatigues; she carried the standard M-16 automatic assault rifle; her face was black with charcoal." (p. 98)
"Her eyes seemed to shine in the dark - not blue, though, but a bright glowing jungle green." (p. 101)
I really enjoyed this story, although it was one of the longer chapters in the novel. I thought it was interesting how Mary Anne changed under the effects of the war. This is one of the few stories I've heard written of modern war times that include women. Usually when I have read such a novel, the woman is always the damsel in distress. In this case, Mary Anne was the hero and Eddie became more or less the damsel. It is interesting that for once the woman is the one to become strong and independent, and it breaks several normal beliefs. During war times, feminism has never been fervently followed and its inspiring that O'Brien took so much of his novel to write about a woman's strength. Even though in the end Mary Anne changed far beyond the normal boundaries, I think this is an inspirational chapter.
Poetic Prose
"How do you generalize? War is hell, but that's not the half of it, because war is also mystery and terror and adventure and courage and discovery and holiness and pity and despair and longing and love. War is nasty; war is fun. War is thrilling ; war is drudgery. War makes you a man; war makes you dead." (p. 77)
This passage appears to me to be nearly a poem. With "war is..." as the refrain, I believe in poetic form the passage would look something like this:
How do you generalize?
War is hell, but that's not the half of it,
because war is also mystery and terror
and adventure and courage and discovery
and holiness and pity and despair
and longing and love.
War is nasty; war is fun.
War is thrilling ; war is drudgery.
War makes you a man; war makes you dead.
I enjoy the way the repetition gives this passage a different sort of fast paced rhythm that slows at the middle and then speeds up again at the very end. I think these lines more or less summarize the feelings of many on war, although it is ironic because more often than not, when one thinks of war, one doesn't see any beauty in it, only evil and pain and suffering. O'Brien expresses a different view of war, one of interest, beauty, even of love. However, in the end, he comes to the same conclusion as do all, that "war makes you dead." These simple words bring all of the poetic rhythm to a dead halt, a standstill. It is odd that after such a long list of words, more or less without violence, O'Brien's conclusion to this paragraph is the pure and simple truth. The truth that war is violence, it may do many things, but its root and core will always be violence, destruction, and death. This seems to me to be the root lesson that O'Brien intends to teach throughout the novel. There are things beyond a war, but it will always be war. We must always be able to see all side but never forget the essentials. That is a truly inspiring thought.
This passage appears to me to be nearly a poem. With "war is..." as the refrain, I believe in poetic form the passage would look something like this:
How do you generalize?
War is hell, but that's not the half of it,
because war is also mystery and terror
and adventure and courage and discovery
and holiness and pity and despair
and longing and love.
War is nasty; war is fun.
War is thrilling ; war is drudgery.
War makes you a man; war makes you dead.
I enjoy the way the repetition gives this passage a different sort of fast paced rhythm that slows at the middle and then speeds up again at the very end. I think these lines more or less summarize the feelings of many on war, although it is ironic because more often than not, when one thinks of war, one doesn't see any beauty in it, only evil and pain and suffering. O'Brien expresses a different view of war, one of interest, beauty, even of love. However, in the end, he comes to the same conclusion as do all, that "war makes you dead." These simple words bring all of the poetic rhythm to a dead halt, a standstill. It is odd that after such a long list of words, more or less without violence, O'Brien's conclusion to this paragraph is the pure and simple truth. The truth that war is violence, it may do many things, but its root and core will always be violence, destruction, and death. This seems to me to be the root lesson that O'Brien intends to teach throughout the novel. There are things beyond a war, but it will always be war. We must always be able to see all side but never forget the essentials. That is a truly inspiring thought.
The Power Behind the Metaphor
"One evening, just at sunset, he pointed up at an owl circling over the violet-lighted forest to the west. "Hey, O'Brien," he said. "There's Jesus." The man was sharp - he didn't miss much. Those razor eyes. Now and then he's catch me staring out at the river, at the far shore, and I could almost hear the tumblers clicking in his head. Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt it." (p. 47)
Vale (and I would like the make it a point now to clarify that I may use this word, "vale", which in Spanish is "okay", frequently without noticing it. This is just a forewarning.) I really liked this quote, not because there is an owl (although this is an added bonus), but because of the metaphor within it. I enjoy using metaphors in my writing, especially when dealing with something from nature. In this passage, as O'Brien is thinking about escape, I believe the owl is a symbol of freedom. As Jesus gave freedom to all sinners in His death, this connects to the freedom with which the owl has to fly where it would like. I believe since it is stated that the owl is Jesus, I believe the owl also symbolizes the freedom that is nature. Thus, Jesus is nature and in nature, O'Brien might find freedom. By crossing the river he can come into a new land, like Heaven, and be free, though he will have to travel through nature to get there. It is a bit difficult to explain my thought process with this metaphor, and only the author could say whether or not it is true. I wonder if there are not other interpretations of the quote, but this is just how I see it.
Vale (and I would like the make it a point now to clarify that I may use this word, "vale", which in Spanish is "okay", frequently without noticing it. This is just a forewarning.) I really liked this quote, not because there is an owl (although this is an added bonus), but because of the metaphor within it. I enjoy using metaphors in my writing, especially when dealing with something from nature. In this passage, as O'Brien is thinking about escape, I believe the owl is a symbol of freedom. As Jesus gave freedom to all sinners in His death, this connects to the freedom with which the owl has to fly where it would like. I believe since it is stated that the owl is Jesus, I believe the owl also symbolizes the freedom that is nature. Thus, Jesus is nature and in nature, O'Brien might find freedom. By crossing the river he can come into a new land, like Heaven, and be free, though he will have to travel through nature to get there. It is a bit difficult to explain my thought process with this metaphor, and only the author could say whether or not it is true. I wonder if there are not other interpretations of the quote, but this is just how I see it.
Tone = Reaction
"This one story I've never told before. Not to anyone. Not to my parents, not to my brother or sister, not even to my wife. To go into it, I've always thought would only cause embarrassment for all of us, a sudden need to be elsewhere, which is the natural response to a confession. Even now, I'll admit, the story makes me squirm." (p. 37)
As a reminder, this is the chapter in which O'Brien discusses his running from the draft. The tone is much different in this story than it is in most of the other chapters. As O'Brien is speaking about himself, his tone seems to be more humble, and to me it also seems to beg forgiveness while refusing to apologize for what he did. In a way, it is difficult to explain exactly what emotion I feel is expressed in his tone. His description and imagery express that this is one memory that has not and will not leave his mind, and from this one can take a tone of bitter-sweetness. In the sentence above, it is true that O'Brien has a tone of embarrassment about telling his story, but I think he also expresses longing to cleanse it from his system. In such a way, one is led into the chapter with ears more open to hearing what is to be said. No excuses are made, which makes understanding a natural response to the story. I think it is interesting how the author is able to use his tone to receive certain emotions from the reader, as well as definite reactions. I believe this is one writing tool with which I need to work more in my own writing.
As a reminder, this is the chapter in which O'Brien discusses his running from the draft. The tone is much different in this story than it is in most of the other chapters. As O'Brien is speaking about himself, his tone seems to be more humble, and to me it also seems to beg forgiveness while refusing to apologize for what he did. In a way, it is difficult to explain exactly what emotion I feel is expressed in his tone. His description and imagery express that this is one memory that has not and will not leave his mind, and from this one can take a tone of bitter-sweetness. In the sentence above, it is true that O'Brien has a tone of embarrassment about telling his story, but I think he also expresses longing to cleanse it from his system. In such a way, one is led into the chapter with ears more open to hearing what is to be said. No excuses are made, which makes understanding a natural response to the story. I think it is interesting how the author is able to use his tone to receive certain emotions from the reader, as well as definite reactions. I believe this is one writing tool with which I need to work more in my own writing.
Checkers & War Rules
"I remember Norma Bowker and Henry Dobbins playing checkers every evening before dark, It was a ritual for them. They would dig a foxhole and get the board out and play long, silent games as the sky went from pink to purple. The rest of us would sometimes stop bu to watch. There was something restful about it, something orderly and reassuring. There were red checkers and black checkers. The playing field was laid out in a strict grid, no tunnels or mountains or jungles. You knew where you stood, You knew the score. the pieces were out on the board, the enemy was visible, you could watch the tactics unfolding into larger strategies. There was a winner and a loser. There were rules." (p. 31)
I love how this passage summarizes the soldiers' emotions about the war they are fighting. Often before I have heard checkers and chess used as a metaphor for war, but never have a seen it displayed as the perfect war, so perfect it can hardly be considered war. I like how these few sentences also provided the author with a chance to describe the general terrain which the men faced. The line that struck me the most while reading this though was; "There were rules." I know it is a small sentence, but it carries a lot of power. The basic concept of war being winner takes all, I do not believe that a thought such as rules in war ever crosses an everyday person's mind as a convenience. It makes me wonder if soldiers of today's wars also wish for simple rules, if they believe that this would simplify war. When I think about war with rules, I think about the way wars used to be fought in England when one side would take turns shooting at the other, but for the most part neither side really hated the other. I wonder what type of war we could have today if such rules were in place, or if war would even be possible.
I love how this passage summarizes the soldiers' emotions about the war they are fighting. Often before I have heard checkers and chess used as a metaphor for war, but never have a seen it displayed as the perfect war, so perfect it can hardly be considered war. I like how these few sentences also provided the author with a chance to describe the general terrain which the men faced. The line that struck me the most while reading this though was; "There were rules." I know it is a small sentence, but it carries a lot of power. The basic concept of war being winner takes all, I do not believe that a thought such as rules in war ever crosses an everyday person's mind as a convenience. It makes me wonder if soldiers of today's wars also wish for simple rules, if they believe that this would simplify war. When I think about war with rules, I think about the way wars used to be fought in England when one side would take turns shooting at the other, but for the most part neither side really hated the other. I wonder what type of war we could have today if such rules were in place, or if war would even be possible.
Narration
"Many years after the war Jimmy Cross came to visit me at my home in Massachusetts, and for a full day...." (p. 26)
"You can tell a true war story by the questions you ask." (p. 78)
Throughout this novel, O'Brien uses First Person Point of View. I find it interesting how, although the entire novel is in 1st person, there are several forms of storytelling O'Brien uses within the 1st person form. For example, in the first example, O'Brien is telling the story, giving description and detail, but the tone is different than that of the second quote. In the second quote, much more emotion is expressed and the phrasing within the passage following it gives less detail and more opinion. Now, looking back at the very first chapter, O'Brien yet again uses another form of point of view. Throughout the first 3 pages of the first chapter, O'Brien uses omniscent point of view. For example, "The things they carried were largely determined by necessity (p. 2). " In this quote, O'Brien cuts himself off from his fellow soldiers, giving a distanced, yet connected perspective. These different forms of perspective provide sufficient detail while keeping the novel moving and helping the reader to sift through the plentiful information provided by the author.
"You can tell a true war story by the questions you ask." (p. 78)
Throughout this novel, O'Brien uses First Person Point of View. I find it interesting how, although the entire novel is in 1st person, there are several forms of storytelling O'Brien uses within the 1st person form. For example, in the first example, O'Brien is telling the story, giving description and detail, but the tone is different than that of the second quote. In the second quote, much more emotion is expressed and the phrasing within the passage following it gives less detail and more opinion. Now, looking back at the very first chapter, O'Brien yet again uses another form of point of view. Throughout the first 3 pages of the first chapter, O'Brien uses omniscent point of view. For example, "The things they carried were largely determined by necessity (p. 2). " In this quote, O'Brien cuts himself off from his fellow soldiers, giving a distanced, yet connected perspective. These different forms of perspective provide sufficient detail while keeping the novel moving and helping the reader to sift through the plentiful information provided by the author.
Tunnels
"..whoever drew the number 17 would strip off his gear and crawl in headfirst with a flashlight and Lieutenant Cross's .45-pistol. The rest of them would fan out as security. They would sit down or kneel, not facing the hole, listening to the ground beneath them, imagining cobwebs and ghosts, whatever was down there - the tunnel walls squeezing in - how the flashlight seemed impossible heavy..." (p. 10)
At first glance, the passage about the tunnels seems to be about one more job that the men must complete while on duty, nothing more, nothing less. However, I believe that this passage has more symbolism than what is first seen. No one really wants to go down in the tunnel, it is full of darkness, an instinctual fear that we all carry at some point in our lives. These men have been through war, gunfire and bombs, yet they carry this simple fear of the darkness, of not knowing. To me, this shows the essentially human side of the soldiers. They are heroes and as such, often we think of soldiers as being almost superhuman, sacrificing their lives for others. This passage helps to remind the reader that though the soldier may sacrifice, he is nothing more than human, and he carries the same flaws, the same fears. This reminder allows the reader to connect with the men in the novel, drawing them farther into the novel, helping them to feel as the soldiers feel, and to walk their paths.
At first glance, the passage about the tunnels seems to be about one more job that the men must complete while on duty, nothing more, nothing less. However, I believe that this passage has more symbolism than what is first seen. No one really wants to go down in the tunnel, it is full of darkness, an instinctual fear that we all carry at some point in our lives. These men have been through war, gunfire and bombs, yet they carry this simple fear of the darkness, of not knowing. To me, this shows the essentially human side of the soldiers. They are heroes and as such, often we think of soldiers as being almost superhuman, sacrificing their lives for others. This passage helps to remind the reader that though the soldier may sacrifice, he is nothing more than human, and he carries the same flaws, the same fears. This reminder allows the reader to connect with the men in the novel, drawing them farther into the novel, helping them to feel as the soldiers feel, and to walk their paths.
The Things They Carried
"First Lieutenant Jimmy Cross carried letters from a girl named Martha (p. 1)... The things they carried were largely determined by necessity (p. 2)...they carried everything they could. (p. 9)"
O'Brien's use of anaphora throughout the entirely of the first chapter expresses, to me, a sort of desperate tone. It is as if he is attempting tot show not only how much physically the men must carry each day, but also their emotional and physical burdens as well. This repetition also represents the rhythm of their traveling: day to day is much the same as the last, as sentence to sentence the meanings are similar. I believe the use of "carried" also allows O'Brien to introduce not only the uniformity of the characters as a group through their possessions, but also their individuality. From weapons and other standard equipment to personal items such as pictures, a unique personality is capable of being seen. I also found it interesting that within the first three pages some form of "carry" was used over 15 times, further exemplifying its importance. Everything listed in this chapter, as everything that occurs in every first chapter is vital, will continue to have an impact towards the end of the novel. I do wonder if the use of "carry" will not reappear later in the novel, perhaps in an end statement.
O'Brien's use of anaphora throughout the entirely of the first chapter expresses, to me, a sort of desperate tone. It is as if he is attempting tot show not only how much physically the men must carry each day, but also their emotional and physical burdens as well. This repetition also represents the rhythm of their traveling: day to day is much the same as the last, as sentence to sentence the meanings are similar. I believe the use of "carried" also allows O'Brien to introduce not only the uniformity of the characters as a group through their possessions, but also their individuality. From weapons and other standard equipment to personal items such as pictures, a unique personality is capable of being seen. I also found it interesting that within the first three pages some form of "carry" was used over 15 times, further exemplifying its importance. Everything listed in this chapter, as everything that occurs in every first chapter is vital, will continue to have an impact towards the end of the novel. I do wonder if the use of "carry" will not reappear later in the novel, perhaps in an end statement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)