Love

Lispector’s “Love” is a rather odd story.  While it was not exactly surreal, it was so exaggerated that it at times felt surreal.  It was also a pretty depressing story.  As the story went along I couldn’t help but be disheartened by the constant disappointments in Anna’s life.  Not necessarily because what Anna was disappointed about was so important, but because these disappointments seemed to mean so much to her.  At one point Lispector describes that Anna “had gradually emerged to discover that life could be lived without happiness” (38).  She goes between panicking over simple things and then accepting these oppressive truths about her life with apathy.

Also, the story is littered with oxymorons throughout.  For example, “that disturbing exaltation she had often confused with unbearable happiness” (39).  Anna seems most afraid of the possibility of being free and happy.

I think a lot of Anna’s issues with her day-to-day life stem from her ambivalence in her role as a wife and mother.  At times she seems relatively content in these roles.  “In exchange she had created something ultimately comprehensible, the life of an adult.  This was what she had wanted and chosen” (39).  It seems like she had sought out safety and consistency and found it when she achieved her “woman’s destiny” (38).  At other times, these roles seem terribly oppressive for Anna.  This seems to come out a little as she embraces her son and considered leaving everything for “the blind man’s call” (45).

Sweat

Before reading this story I was unaware of the breadth of Zora Neale Hurston’s writings and career.  I had only read Their Eyes Were Watching God by her before this, and if I hadn’t known both texts were written by the same author ahead of time I would have never been able to guess that they were.  This is because, as many people have already discussed, Hurston’s use of vernacular in “Sweat.”  Although I think this made it difficult to read, it definitely gave you a feel of the town.  I found this especially true when the men were on the porch discussing Delia.

There was an interesting exploration of gender roles in the story.  In certain ways Delia and Sykes both stuck to their stereotypical gender roles.  Delia is a meek, thin woman.  Sykes is a forceful, sex-crazed, abusive man.  The obvious role reversal is that Delia makes all the money for the two of them, and doesn’t depend on Sykes economically, or emotionally.  Because of this Sykes is constantly reasserting his masculinity.  “Just then something long, round, limp and black fell upon her shoulders and slithered to the floor beside her” (392).  Sykes throwing this phallic whip at her from the beginning of the story sets the theme of him reasserting his masculinity.  There are moments, however, when Delia asserts herself.  In my favorite line of the story Hurston writes: “Delia’s habitual meekness seemed to slip from her shoulders like a blown scarf.  She was on her feet; her poor little body, her bare knuckly hands bravely defying the strapping hulk before her” (393).  I like the idea of her meekness just sliding off of her.

I’m not entirely sure what to make of the ending.  I appreciate the irony of Sykes dying by the thing that he teased/tormented with.  I’m not sure if the snake at this point of the story is supposed to represent a phallic object like the whip did at the beginning of the story.  If it is, this might be a critique of Sykes’ self-destruction by his need to prove his masculinity.

Other Weapons

I think Luisa Valenzuela’s “Other Weapons” is one of the most difficult texts that we’ve had to read all semester.  I’m referring in particular to the rape scene where Roque makes Laura watch the rape in action, but he’s abusive throughout the story and it’s difficult to read.  It reminded me in a lot of ways of the play “Death and the Maiden.”  Perhaps because they both take place in a Latin American country, and deal with rape to make political statements.

The story was also difficult to read because it was told in a third person narration, but the narrator had certain insights into Laura’s mind.  That we are only partially privy to Laura’s thoughts is especially eerie since Laura herself can only access certain parts of her mind.  In that way I think we get a better feel of what it’s like to be Laura.  Laura, however, even has trouble relating to herself.  “It’s the only way she can feel that she’s alive: when his hand caresses her or his voice threatens: move, slut” (117).  This is really sad both because of the sheer fact that the only way she can feel alive is through Roque molesting her, but also because the narration of this point seems kind of nonchalant.  In fact, Laura seems to take everything in stride and maintains this level of detachment throughout the story.

Also, I found Martina’s role in the story very odd and disturbing.  Even though there’s the constant presence of the two men standing outside the door, I found Martina’s role to be the most bizarre.  While the men clearly listen in on the sex, that’s basically where their involvement stops.  Martina, on the other hand, is inside the house and interacts with Laura.  “Martina attends to all her requests.  And she knows that’s her name because Martina herself has told her so, repeating it over and over until she managed to retain the name” (105).  I guess Martina isn’t in a place where she has the power to do anything for Laura, but it’s disheartening when you think that the only other person Laura gets to talk to, and the only woman she talks to, is tolerating Laura’s situation.

Langston Hughes

I’ve read the poem “Harlem” before, but I never knew its title.  For some reason, knowing that the poem is titled “Harlem” makes it even sadder and more real.  Perhaps this is because the poem uses a lot of imagery to describe dying dreams, which is an abstract concept, and my relative familiarity with Harlem makes the poem that much more ‘real’ to me.

I really enjoyed “Theme for English B.”  This poem seemed to have a different tone than his other poems.  It seemed more personal.  I like the idea that this poem was semi-autobiographical.  The concept that he was using his own personal history as well as fictionalizing bits makes me wonder where the two meet, similar to how he discusses where he and his instructor meets.

It was interesting to see how Hughes relates to Harlem. “But I guess I’m what/I feel and see and hear.  Harlem, I hear you: / hear you, hear me – we two – you, me talk on this page” (108). Hughes really defines himself through Harlem.  Right after he says that he says “(I hear New York, too.)” (108).  There’s a fine line between how he relates to Harlem vs. the rest of the city.  Hughes can interact with Harlem; there’s a give and take.  When it comes to New York, however, he only talks about how New York influences him.  He might be referring to the fact that as a black man people will not listen to him in the rest of New York.

While this poem had a message, it also had a sense of humor.  For example, when he says “So will my page be colored that I write?”  Even though Hughes points out some of society’s problems in his poems, “Theme for English B” seems to have a relatively positive perspective of America.

 

Avey

Jean Toomer

 

            I hadn’t heard of Jean Toomer before, so I didn’t know anything about him, but I thought Cane was an interesting idea.  The introduction of Cane says it is a work that isn’t defined—not a collection of poems, or a novel, etc.  I wonder if Toomer did this because he excelled in various forms of writing, of if having these various forms of writings in one collection served a stronger purpose.

            Of the two poems and the short story that were in the packet, I was definitely drawn most to the story.  While the poems had a more harvest/agricultural feel, the short story was perhaps more urban, and more relatable.  I liked Toomer’s writing style in “Avey”; it was straightforward without being bland.  I also got a feeling of evolving with the narrator as he and his relationship (or lack thereof) with Avey developed.

            It seemed liked the narrator’s relationship with Avey was so crucial to the narrator because of how it reflected on him.  That is to say that he didn’t seem to appreciate or fall in love with Avey because of anything Avey did.  If anything, he seemed like he fell in love with her because she showed absolutely no interest in him.  He says that he doesn’t know he “came to love her” (362).  However, the first introduction we get of Avey is when the narrator is watching her with other boys in the neighborhood.  “On the particular night I have in mind, we were waiting for the top-floor light to go out.  We wanted to see Avey leave the flat.  This night she stayed longer than usual and gave us a chance to complete the plans of how we were going to stone and beat that feller on the top floor out of town” (362-363).  Part of his obsession with Avey seems to have started with the other boys.  As the story progresses, it seems like he becomes more obsessed with Avey the more indifferent she becomes.  Her indifference peaks when he takes her to his spot and she falls asleep on him.  The story ends with “I hated to wake her.  Orphan-woman…” (367).  Although he sounds like he is pitying her, I’m not entirely sure.  Avey never seems to change throughout the story, and I think that this is the narrator’s problem.  He fell in love with his own image of Avey that she never can meet, and she doesn’t want to anyway.      

Things Fall Apart (Chaps. 1-6)

In the first six chapters of Things Fall Apart we get to see how basically every move Okonkwo makes is the opposite of what his father would do.  Where Unoka was lazy, a debtor, and a dreamer, Okonkwo is a hard working man who is working towards a goal of greatness.  Achebe states from the beginning of the text that everything Okonkwo has achieved has been in spite of his father: “Fortunately…a man was judged according to his worth and not according to the worth of his father.  Okonkwo was clearly cut out for great things” (8).  Unoka even brought shame as he died and had to be buried in the Evil Forest.

I think these first six chapters are used to lay out the Ibo society, and the relationships within it.  Readers begin to get an understanding of the structure of society, their rituals, importance of the Yam crop, their spiritual beliefs/the Oracle, and so on.  It seems to be a fairly cohesive unit, because when Ikemefuna is brought to the village Okonkwo says “‘He belongs to the clan’” (14).  At the same time, there must be a good number of people within the society because Ikemefuna and the virgin that he’s brought over with never see each other again.  Clearly women are regarded as property, with the number of wives a man has an indicator of wealth.  What I didn’t understand was why we don’t know the name of Okonkwo’s first wife.  She is generally referred to as “Nwoye’s mother,” being defined by the men in her life.  We do, however, learn the names of Okonkwo’s other two wives, which is what I find odd.  The first wife is supposed to be given the most respect, so I’m not sure why she doesn’t have a name.

I can’t be sure, but there seemed like there was a moment of foreshadowing in the third chapter.  Achebe details this horrendous failure of a harvest that happened when Okonkwo was just starting out, but that Okonkwo had survived.  “‘Since I survived that year,’ he always said, ‘I shall survive anything’” (24).  Unoka, however, tells him “‘Do not despair.  I know you will not despair.  You have a manly and a proud heart.  A proud heart can survive a general failure because such a failure does not prick its pride.  It is more difficult and more bitter when a man fails alone’” (25).  Although Unoka has many failings, this seems to show that he has an understanding of his son.  Okonkwo is extremely proud, and I could see him toppling because of something that attacks this pride of his.

Gogol/Lu Xun

While Lu Xun and Gogol’s stories were similar in certain respects, they also seemed very different in others.  It seemed like the main character in each story was suffering from schizophrenia, but each appeared to have a different manifestation.  Whereas Lu Xun’s madman had a more paranoid outlook on life, Gogol’s madman exhibits delusions of grandeur.  I’m on the fence as to whether I think that the different manifestations of madness matters.  That’s partially because I don’t know the context of when and why Gogol wrote his story.  I think his character’s obsession with positions and bureaucracy is somehow a reflection or critique of Gogol’s society at the time he wrote the story.  In fact, aside from the glaringly obvious connection of madness between both stories, I almost saw more connections between Gogol’s story and Ah-Q.  Just as Poprishchin obsesses over officials and being of aristocratic birth, the society in the Ah-Q story obsesses over officials, such as “Mr. Provincial Exam.”

Lu Xun’s madman also seemed, in a way, fairly coherent. Poprishchin is hard to follow, and seems ‘crazier’ than Lu Xun’s madman.  Gogol spends a fair amount of the story detailing Poprishchin’s discussion with a dog.  On the other hand, Lu Xun’s madman seems much more rational—at least he has a train of thought that you can follow.  In fact, if the preface hadn’t warned that the brother was sick, I think I might have believed what he was saying.

Both stories also end on a similar note.  Gogol’s ends “Mother, mother, have pity on your sick child! And do you know that the Bey of Algiers has a wart under his nose?” and Lu Xun’s ends “Are there children who have not yet eaten human flesh? Save the children…” (31).  In Lu Xun’s story the madman turns away from his mother, as he believes that she knew they were eating the madman’s sister.  Lu Xun’s ending looks for a break from the past, which is perhaps why he doesn’t turn to his mother.  Poprishchin, on the other hand, turns to his mother.  I think in this case the mother could be his country, and Poprishchin is hoping that the country can repair its people.  Perhaps that the story ends on Poprishchin saying something crazy means that Gogol doesn’t have much faith in the country’s ability to change.

 

Billy Budd/Claggart

When I first considered Meville’s personification of good/innocence and evil/lack of innocence, especially through the roles of Billy Budd and Caggart, I thought it a clear answer.  It seemed that Melville draws a defined line between good/innocence and evil/lack of innocence that is directly personified through Billy and Claggart respectively.  The more I thought about it however, the less sure I was about good and innocence being intertwined.  Or, at the very least, I was less sure that one’s goodness comes out of one’s innocence.

Claggart is unwaveringly evil.  Melville describes Claggart as innately evil.  In chapter 11 the narrator describes, at length, the philosophical and natural basis of Claggart’s evil.  The narrator says that within Claggart “was the mania of an evil nature, not engendered by vicious training or corrupting books or licentious living, but born with him and innate, in short ‘a depravity according to nature’” (chapter 11).  To a point, innocence or the lack thereof doesn’t really inform the person, as the narrator believes that people are born with certain defined traits.  Just as Claggart was simply born into the world evil and didn’t become evil due to his experiences, Billy was born into the world with an agreeable nature.  These innate traits seem to be set traits.  It’s possible, however, that Claggart’s lack of innocence inflames his innate evil.  Claggart’s experience or intelligence makes him more aware of these natural conditions. Claggart knows he’s evil: “With no power to annul the elemental evil in him, tho’ readily enough he could hide it; apprehending the good, but powerless to be it” (chapter 13).  It seems that his intelligence and understanding that he can’t be good in turn makes him more evil.

Perhaps Claggart’s ironic use of “Handsome is as handsome does” also sheds some light on the connection of good/innocence and evil/lack of innocence.  I think this phrase infers that Billy maintains his innocence because he was born that way.  When the narrator is explaining Claggart’s beliefs about Billy’s spirit, he says that it “had in its simplicity never willed malice or experienced the reactionary bite of that serpent” (chapter 13).  It seems that being born good/innocent begets innocence.

Billy Budd and The Rime of the Ancient Mariner

I was having difficulties making connections between these two works.  While they both take place on the seas, and are about sailors, they seem very different.  Billy Budd seems much more realistic than The Rime of the Ancient Mariner.  There does, however, seem to be a somewhat mythical or Jesus feel that surrounds Billy.  When Billy walks around he carries this positive energy that seems to make all the men get along better, be more productive, and be happier.  On the other hand, the Ancient Mariner is doomed to walk around telling people his very heavy, depressing story.  Now that I think about it, maybe that’s one of the key differences between Billy and the Mariner.  Billy has no real knowledge of himself.  “Of self-consciousness he seemed to have little or none, or about as much as we may reasonably impute to a dog of Saint Bernard’s breed” (chapter 2).  As unaware as Billy is of himself, the Mariner seems to be almost hyperaware of himself and his surroundings throughout the poem.  Also, after hearing the Mariner’s story, the Wedding-Guest wakes the next morning “a sadder and a wiser man.”  I’m not sure if there’s any meaning to this, but it seems that in these texts when one brings self-awareness, he brings negativity.

One other possible similarity is the idea that God has created everything even if it is flawed or evil.  For instance, it was when the Mariner saw the beauty of the water-snakes and “blessed them unaware” that he was able to pray and that the Albatross fell off of him.  Billy seems in most ways perfect except for when he feels strong emotion he exhibits “more or less of a stutter or even worse” (chapter 2).  This stutter interferes with Billy’s perfection but seems like each human is subject to some flaw.

 

Themes of time/place/memory in Wordsworth’s “Lines Composed a Few Miles above Tintern Abbey on Revisiting the Banks of the Wye during a Tour. July 13, 1798”

It seems that Wordsworth is revisiting the banks of the Wye for the first time in five years, and reflecting on the change that has occurred.  Although he hasn’t physically been to the banks of the Wye in five years, he has carried the memory of them with him.  Wordsworth states that “But oft, in lonely rooms, and ‘mid the din / Of towns and cities I have owed to them / In hours of weariness, sensations sweet” (25-27).  Wordsworth thinks of the images of the banks in his daily life, and turns to his memory of these images to console him with feelings of “unremembered pleasure” (31).   I’m not exactly sure what he’s saying, but it appears that Wordsworth is saying that although he might not remember all the things he’s done, he remembers the joy that being in nature provides him.  Perhaps that it doesn’t matter where he is, because no matter where he is physically, nature is within him. Moreover, it is not just his memories of the banks that influence Wordsworth, but that it is nature itself that is “The anchor of my purest thoughts” (109).  It seems like both his memories as well as his thoughts in general are enhanced by nature.

It seems in the beginning of the poem when Wordsworth is encountering the scenery for the first time in five years, he is almost taking it in in the same way he would have five years prior.  The way he describes the landscape, “These waters, rolling from their mountain-springs” (3) and “these steep and lofty cliffs” (5), is done in a very excited, youthful manner.  As Wordsworth winds his way through his walk, however, as well as the poem, time seems to become more transcendent, like nature itself.