A Truly Evil Creation

"It is well. I go; but remember, I shall be with you on your wedding night" (Shelley, 123). This is a pivotal line in Mary Shelley's novel Frankenstein. Victor believes that the creature hopes to bring him misery through the prospect of his own death. However, the attentive reader concurs that the creature will continue his previous path of destruction through the murder of Victor's loved ones, in this case, Elizabeth. The creature is clearly an intellectual being, for he knows that Victor no longer values his own life. Rather, Victor's concern is for the well-being of his loved ones. Nothing causes Victor more pain than to see the death of his friends and family at the hand of his own creation. Victor blames himself for these deaths, and thus brings unprecedented misery upon himself. Just as the creature hoped to counter the pain of the lack of a loving father by killing who he thought was Victor's son, so to does he hope to counter the pain of the lack of a companion by killing Victor's bride-to-be. The creature seeks revenge.

Slave vs. Master .... Who is who?

Throughout the Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, we see an ironic reversal of roles. The novel presents the motif of slave vs. master. Often, the reader has to ask himself who, Victor or the creature, is acting as which role. For instance, at the beginning of the novel, one can argue that Victor acted as the master, for he was very obviously in control of the creation process, and if not for him, the creature would not exist. On the other hand, one can also argue that Victor was a slave to his obsession with the creation. Here, we see the first instance of the creature controlling Victor.
As the story continues, however, the role reversal is more apparent. As the creature reaks havoc in the life of his creator, Victor most certainly falls slave to his creation. Worse than the simple fact of this reversal, however, is the creature's recognition of his control. "Slave, I before reasoned with you, but you have proved yourself unworthy of my condescension. Remember that I have power; you believe yourself miserable, but I can make you so wretched that the light of day will be hateful to you. You are my creator, but I am your master; --obey" (Shelley, 122)! The creature realizes that compared to Victor, he has nothing to lose in life. Thus, out of his bitterness, he feels no remorse in ruining the life of the one whom he blames to have made a miserable life for himself. Victor's agony epitomizes that control of his life that he has completely lost.

Theme

Mary Shelley's Frankenstein presents the theme of one's inability to control fate. Victor originally created the monster with the intention of conquering death and sickness; Victor was trying to control destiny. However, though both are aspects of life and fate that are unavoidable. The consequences of his attempt at altering fate are amplified by the utter destruction the creature causes in Victor's life. Though, in the absence of the creature, death and sickness would have inevitably continued to cause distress in Victor's life, the magnitude of that caused by the creature is incomparable. Victor realizes this and expresses his regret saying, "Why did I not die? More miserable than man ever was before....But I was doomed to live" (Shelley, 130). Here, Victor expresses that he would gladly accept death, the very thing he was trying to avoid. Moreover, Victor finally accepts fate by recognizing that he was "doomed to live." Thus, Shelley develops the theme that our destiny is beyond our control. Moreover, she emphasizes that as hard as we try to avoid sadness and unfortunate events in our lives, we will inevitably experience them at some point, and we are better off accepting life as it is.

A Bad Omen for Clerval (and Walton)

Before Clerval's death, Mary Shelley strategically foreshadows his doom. When Clerval and Victor meet up once more, Victor notices a change in Clerval. Clerval now aspires for extraordinary achievement, is eager for knowledge, and has a fascination for nature. Sound familiar? "But in Clerval I saw the image of my former self; he was inquisitive, and anxious to gain experience and instruction....He was also pursuing an object he had long had in view" (Shelley, 115). How about now? Yes, Clerval was headed down Victor's path. Just as Victor aspired for extraordinary accomplishment, so does Clerval. Just as this aspiration brought destruction upon Victor, so will it bring death upon Clerval. Altogeher, these parallel situations represent the ruin that scientific inquisitiveness can cause in one's life. Moreover, this adds a third parallel to Walton's life....DUN DUN DUNNNNN.

Further Characterization

In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, Victor is predominantly characterized as an obsessed and distraught man. Throughout the story, he rarely finds happiness, and if he does, it is only for a short period of time. Omnipresent, however, is Victor's selflessness. For instance, Shelley first produces this characterization of Victor after the death of William when Victor contemplates suicide but decides against it to save his family the grief. He selflessly opts to deal with his own agony, as well as keep the cause of his distress a secret, in order to spare his family. Shelley further amplifies this character trait after the creature tells Victor, "I shall be with you on your wedding night" (Shelley, 123). Victor believes that the creature is intending to kill him; however, instead of fear for his own life, he immediately thinks of Elizabeth. "The prospect did not move me to fear; yet when I thought of my beloved Elizabeth,--of her tears and endless sorrow, when she should find her lover so barbarously snatched from her,--tears, the first I had shed for many months, streamed from my eyes, and I resolved not to fall before my enemy without a bitter struggle" (Shelley, 123). The only motivation Victor has to preserve his life is that of Elizabeth's happiness and well-being. Victor, despite his agony and unaccepting nature toward the character, exemplifies selflessness multiple times throughout the novel.

A New Perception of the Monster

In Chapter X of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, the reader sees a new side to the monster. In Victor's previous encounter with the monster, immediately after it was created, the monster was characterized as a baby. He was inarticulate and socially inept. However, in Chapter X, Victor speaks to the monster once again. The monster says at one point, "Thus I relieve thee, my creator; thus, I take from thee a sight which you abhor. Still thou canst listen to me and grant me thy compassion. By the virtues that I once possessed, I deamand this from you...." (70).  The monster's educated manner of speaking is both shocking and confusing. Somehow, in the two years that passed since the creation, the creature obtained some sort of education and learning that enabled him to communicate properly. Moreover, this confirms the fact that Victor truly created a human being capable of functioning in society. Just as a human progresses in education from the time he is an infant to an adult, so has the monster. This shines a new light on the science Victor utilized in his creation; not only was he able to create life, but along with it, he created intellect.

Irony

In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, death plays a significant role in Victor Frankenstein's life. For instance, the death of his mother's father is the reason his parents were married, death was the reason the family adopted Elizabeth, and the death of Caroline ultimately stimulated Frankenstein's desire to conquer death. Thus, death inspired the creation of the creature. Frankenstein was able to bring life into a lifeless being. This achievement seemed to be the peak of his accomplishments and the answer to his problems. However, as the story continues, an ironic situation unfolds that may disprove this notion. Death enters the story once again with the death of William, bringing Victor to tears. When he returns home, Victor visits the site of the murder where he has an unexpected an encounter. "A flash of lightning illuminated the object, and discovered its shape plainly to me; its gigantic stature, and the deformity of its aspect, more hideous than belongs to humanity, instantly informed me that it was the wretch, the filthy daemon to whom I had given life....He was the murderer!" (Shelley, 50). Frankenstein concludes that the creature he created was William's murderer. Thus, irony exists between Frankenstein's intent and the outcome of the creation of the monster. Though he had intended to conquer death through his achievement, his monster actually held responsibility for increasing the death in Frankenstein's life.

Caroline as an Archetype

In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, Victor's mother Caroline is the archetype of a selfless and caring mother. Evidence for this claim is found in each instance that Frankenstein speaks of his mother. For instance, when Victor first introduces Caroline, he recounts how she cared for her ailing father prior to her marriage with Victor's father. Frankenstein describes Caroline's hard work and dedication to her father saying, "She procured plain work; she plaited straw, and by various means contrived to earn pittance scarcely sufficient to support life" (15). Here, as a young woman, Caroline epitomizes altruism by giving up her own liberty in order  to improve the quality of life and health of her father. Moreover, Caroline further proves as an archetype of a caring mother through her care for the poor in Italy as well as her willingness and eagerness to take care of the orphan Elizabeth. Naturally, because of the love and care Caroline offered to all she encountered, but especially to her children, Victor grew increasingly attached. Thus, her death left a significant void in his life. This sparked Frankenstein's obsession to find a way to raise the dead. Caroline's love brought Victor immense love during her lifetime, and her absence ultimately brought him unfathomable despair.

A Foreboding Tone

Before the Frankenstein even begins to recount his story in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, the reader perceives a foreboding tone through his diction and appearnce. However, with with knowledge of the folklore, this may be shocking for the reader. Prior to reading Shelley's novel, one assumes that the monster's creator would find great excitement and achievement in bringing life to his creature. However, one quickly realizes that the original story does not fall in line with such popular notions. For example, Frankenstein describes his destiny as "utter and terrible destruction" (Shelley, 23). This provides one of the first intimations of the ominous tone that laces the story he has to tell.
Furthermore, even before Victor begins to communicate with Walton, one also gleans a sense of the ominous tone of his tale through Victor's appearance. For instance, upon seeing him for the first time, Walton describes Frankenstein as "...dreadfully emaciated by fatigue and suffering. I never saw a man in so wretched a condition" (9). Once again, if Frankenstein had been satisfied with his creation, he would not appear this way. Thus, a foreboding tone is set for the story to come.   

Robert Walton vs. Victor Frankenstein

Mary Shelley draws many parallels between the characterization of Robert Walton and Victor Frankenstein in her novel Frankenstein. For instance, both men share a unique and loving relationship with their sisters. As both men pursued their life goals, they maintained close relationships with their sisters, of all people. Moreover, both men are self-motivated and have an obsession with achieving their goals. Most importantly, however, both men are similar in their desires to have extraordinary achievements. This particular similarity is illustrated in Walton's first letter to his sister when he says, "I shal satiate my ardent curiosity with the sight of a part of the world never before visited, and may tread a land never before imprinted by the foot of man," (Shelley, 1). This statement draws an explicit parallel to Frankenstein's creation of the monster, also a revolutionary accomplishment for mankind.
This parallel characterization serves a high purpose, however. The similarities between the men are a means of foreshadowing Walton's life. Frankenstein recognizes this saying, "You seek for knowledge and wisdom, as I once did; and I ardently home that the gratification of your wishes may not be a serpent to sting you, as mine has been" (Shelley, 13). Because of the deeply caring relationship that has developed between the two men, Frankenstein hopes to deter a seemingly grim future for Walton by recounting the story of the creation that ultimately brought despair and destruction to Frankenstein's life.

Miss Brill

In Katherine Mansfield's short story Miss Brill, Miss Brill is characterized as a woman who is not truly a participant in society, but rather a mere spectator. "Oh, how fascinating it was! How she enjoyed it! How she loved sitting here, watching it all! It was like a play" (Mansfield, 184). Here, Miss Brill's life is compared to watching a play. Moreover, Mansfield continues this characterization with the line, "She had become really quite expert, she thought, at listening as though she didn't listen, at sitting in other people's lives just for a minute while they talked around her" (Mansfield, 184). Here, the reader gleans the notion that Miss Brill is not necessarily socially awkward, but rather deliberately chooses not to partake in society or build relationships with others. This choosing of Miss Brill's in itself is characterizes her as someone who does not feel connection to society.  She is not emotionally attached to any person, and thus, she feels no need to build relationships. She lives within herself and for herself. This is supported by the only connection she seems to make at all, which is the fur she talks to. This is, in a way, just another part of herself.

Human Nature

In APO 96225, author Larry Rottmann presents the theme of the tendency of humans to ignore unpleasant reality. This theme is illustrated more than once, and through more than one character. For instance, when the mother continues to beg her son to provide in his letters more detail of his activities, he ignores her with responses such as, "Wow! You ought to see the funny monkeys" and "The sunsets are spectacular!" (Rottmann, 846). These are examples of the son's attempt to ignore the reality of his life as a soldier; the false cheer he protrays is an attempt to escape what he knows is real. The next example of a character's attempt to escape reality comes at the end of the poem when the father responds to his son's last descriptive letter saying, "'Please don't write such depressing letters. You're upsetting your mother" (Rottmann, 846).  Here we see the mother who would rather believe that her son is not partaking in such brutal and violent action. Likewise, in life, sometimes we attempt to convince ourselves that our problems do not exist. For instance, when I have a lot of homework, I attempt to ignore it by finding anything else to occupy my time, such as cleaning, sports, or often napping. This is my attempt to ignore reality. Such actions are not not healthy, but hard to avoid nonetheless.

Conformity at its Finest

Emily Dickinson's Much Madness is divinest Sense  presents a theme about the negative view society and leaders often hold for dissenters of opinion. "Assent-and you are sane-Demur-you're straightway dangerous" (Dickinson, 830). This quote presents the idea that society does not like change or disruption; rather, those in power prefer likeminded thinking so as not to disrupt their rule or order. These ideas remind me of the theme of Lois Lowry's The Giver. In this novel, citizens of  the city live completely by the laws of the rulers without question. Doing so, however, leads to the blind acceptance of possibly inhumane practices, such as the killing of the babies at the end of Lowry's novel. Another example of the result of failing to question tradition is presented in last unit's short story The Lottery. Dickinson is attmepting to warn against such tragedy with her extreme diction near the end of the poem. By using the phrase, "handled with a chain" (Dickinson, 830), Dickinson hopes to bring to light the extremely disapproval some societies have for the questioning of authority, and in turn, she hopes to call the reader to action.

Crazy Crazy Crazy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In Emily Dickinson's I felt a Funeral, in my Brain, Dickinson makes an extended reference to the brief moments of insanity that normal humans suffer from. Firstly, she produces profund and loud imagery through her speaker's description of the activity in his mind. "Kept treading-treading-till it seemed that sense was breaking through-and when they all were seated, a service like a drum-kept beating-beating-till I thought my mind was going numb-" (Dickinson, 776). These couple of lines produce the feeling of being franitc, nervous, and altogether mentally tortured. The speaker seems to be affected dramatically by whatever happened in his life. He seems to be disconnected from life, and traveling farther and farther away as he become more frantic until he "dropped down-and hit a World, at every plunge, and Finished knowing-then" (Dickinson, 776). Thus, without explicitly stating it, Dickinson uses imagery to present the subject of the poem to the reader. Moreover, because her descriptions are so loud and extreme, one may believe that Dickinson is attmepting to describe the mindset of a truly mentally insane person. However, she is merely hoping to relate to the reader throught the description of moments when one's mind turns frantic, such as before a big athletic event, a speech before a big crowd, or anticipating the outcome of a trip to the dean's office for tweeting mean things about a rival school. Everyone has these experiences, right?

Pathos Party of Two

Near the beginning of Bartleby the Scrivener, Herman Melville uses the narrarator to evoke pathos for Bartleby. "My first emotions had been those of pure melancholy and sincerest pity....I might give alms to his body, but his body did not pain him; it was his soul that suffered, and his soul I could not reach" (Melville, 658).  As summarized by this quote, this pathos is predominantly the result of the apparent loneliness and detachment of Bartleby.What is more, the fact that Bartleby's problems go further than physical sickness but possibly to mental sickness or disorder, intesifiees this pathos. The reader sympathizes with Bartleby for his inability to conduct himself socially and altogether indifference to life. However, as the story continues, the same pathos is evoked for the narrator because the reader begins to see the parallels between the two characters. For instance, the parallels between the characters are initially drawn when the reader realizes that both men are passive and simplistic in their dealing with other people such as Nippers, Turkey, and Ginger Nut. Moreover, at the end of the story, the reader realizes that the fact that Bartleby used to work in  a Dead Letter shop might be a possible cause for his behavior. With the parallels already drawn at this point, this acts a foreshadowing of the narrarator's possible future, for he too works in a job that lacks major purpose. Thus, pathos is evoked for the reader as well.

Underlying Religion

John Donne's poem Death, be not proud refers to one of my favorite bible quotes from John 11:26 that reads "...and whoever believes in me shall not die, but have eternal life." This quote is Jesus conquering death. Jesus is saying that even though humans die a natural death, they will continue living on in heaven. Donne alludes to this quote near the end of the poem writing, "One short sleep passed, we wake eternally, and death shall be no more; death, thou shalt die" (Donne, 972). On earth, all humans eventually die. Thus, it may seem as if death is the victor over all. Both Donne and Jesus Christ believe differently, however; death brings about its own demise. Death leads one to eternal life, thus giving what it takes away. Though on earth death may be the apparent conquerer, in the end in heaven, life is victorious. With faith in Christ and through one's inability to escape death, he in turn is unable to escape the gift of life in heaven.

Seize the day!

William Shakespeare's poem That time of year is a reiteration of the saying, "You don't know what you have until it is gone." Both the poem and this quote challenge the reader not to take anything for granted, especially transitory elements of life, such as one's youth. In fact, Shakespeare challenges the reader to value more those things that are short-lived. He presents this challenge in the last two lines of the poem stating, "This thou perceivest, which makes thy love more strong, To love that well which thou must leave ere long" (Shakespeare, 967).  Shakespeare's message is strengthened by the content of the beginning of the poem as well. He describes the fall and winter as a ceasing of the life of spring. He describes the leafless trees as "bare ruined choirs where late the sweet birds sang" (Shakespeare, 967). The beauty and pleasantry brought by spring is only short-lived. Therefore, one must take advantage of it and see the value in it while he can. Likewise, he must do so not only with his youth, but with life itself, for one day, death will come to take it all away.

For a poem about death, this is actually pretty inspirational.

The heavy symbolism utilized by Alfred, Lord Tennyson in his poem Crossing the Bar, actually makes for a pleasant read. This was a nice respite after enduring the morbidity of A Rose for Emily and The Lottery. Each stanza of the poem represents a different view related to God and heaven. For instance, the line "And one clear call for me!" (Tennyson, 886) symbolizes the speaker's dedication to God and desire to live solely for His will. In the second stanza, the lines "Turns again home" and "When I embark" in the third stanza (Tennyson, 886) represent the death of the speaker, and his journey back to the Lord or to heaven.  Moreover, the line "I hope to see my Pilot face to face when I have crossed the bar" (Tennyson, 886) refer to the speaker's desire to face the Lord in heaven after his life is over. The symbolism is confirmed by the capitalization of "Pilot"; the reader can assume this is referring to a higher being. Though this story is also about death, it presents a different viewpoint. The poem portrays death in a positive light. Furthermore, Tennyson presents life not as something that one should fear to lose, but rather something that one should utilize to ensure a greater eternity; he presents death as a journey and death and heaven as the desitination.

Decompose for Emily

The point of view from which William Faulkner's A Rose for Emily is told affects the reader's ability to determine what realy trasnpires. The story is told from a first person plural point of view. Through analysis of the events that are recounted in the story, such as Emily's encounter with the town authorities about her payment of taxes (Jackson, 283), we can assume that the narrators are the residents of the town. The residents seem to be piecing the story together from the town gossip because the story is not told chronologically. For instance, the second section of the short story refers to a stark smell. After finishing the story, the reader can assume this was the decomposition of Homer's body; however, "the smell" is referred to before the reader even meets Homer (Jackson, 283). Thus, concluding that the story this told on the basis of gossip, the reader must be aware that his conlusions about the outcome depend on the trust he places in the validity of the events recounted. On the other hand, interesting would be reading the story from the point of view of the Negro servant. Because he was present with Emily throughout the entire story, the reader would know that the information would be factual and accurate. I am also curious to know how much he knew or was aware of the death of Homer and Emily's possible role in that. However, from the point of view of the town residents, the reader will never know.

Irony Bodes Irony

Shirley Jackson's The Lottery, epitomizes situational irony. This is proven most obviously through the irony of the outcome of this village's lottery. Instead of a positive and joyous outcome for the "winner" and in turn an improved lifestyle, he loses his life altogether (or she in this case, I suppose). In fact, in this case, the "winner" can be considered a loser.
The irony of the entire story, however, is foreshadowed through Jackson's more subtle use of situational irony earlier in the stroy. For instance, Jackson describes Mr. Summers as the "official" (Jackson, 266), implying that he should dress and act in a formal manner. However, Jackson writes, "...in his clean white shirt and blue jeans, with one hand resting carelessly on the black box" (Jackson, 266). In the same sentence, Jackson utilizes more irony as he goes on to write, "...he seemed very proper and important" (Jackson, 266). Jackson referes to Summers numerous times as an "official" and as "important", but the description of Summers implies otherwise. This irony prefaces the situational irony of the story as a whole.

Some Situational Irony

Finally, Laura opens lets loose a bit! However, this concession of her shyness was to no avail. As Jim got Laura to attempt to dance and talk and as he began to compliment her, I thought all was heading toward a blossoming love. "In all respects-believe me! Your eyes-your hair-are pretty! Your hands are pretty! ....I'm talking to you sincerely" (Williams, 1283). The man complimented her hands! At that point, I was sure the two were star-crossed lovers.

Unfortunately, I was wrong; enter: irony.

One would think that the man who could make Laura feel comfortable, the one who could see beyond her crippling, the one who appreciated her for who she was, would be the one she would marry. In turn, Amanda would be satisfied, Tom could leave to pursue his dreams, and Laura would be cared for. Yet, at this point, I figure we should know better than to expect a happy ending. 

Laura: The New Amanda

Though Amanda seems genuinely concerned about the future of her children, she is actually hoping their achievements will bring her satisfaction with her own life. In other words, Amanda is living vicariously through her children, more specifically her daughter Laura. On more than one instance, Amanda extensively recounts her past successes and happiness in direct comparison with those of Laura. "My callers were gentlemen-all! Among my callers were some of the most prominent young planters of the Mississippi Delta..." (Williams, 1238). Here Amanda goes on to explain in detail all her gentleman callers and their fates. She does this in response to her own disappointment in the lack of gentleman callers for Laura. Amanda can not bear to watch Laura grow up with a poor future just as her own turned out to be. Thus, for her daughters happiness, but predominantly for her own, she goes to every extent to find her daughter a worthy husband. Amanda's vicarious nature is illustrated again when she resurrects her old courting dress for Jim O'Connor's visit. She is reliving her own youth along with Laura.

Symbolism of the Fire-Escape

Clearly, the blatancy of the fire-escape as a part of the set and the entrance to the apartment proves that the structure holds a deeper meaning. This is further supported by the stage direction sin scene one that state, "The apartment faces an alley and is entered by a fire-escape, a structure whose name is a touch of accidental poetic truth, for all of these huge buildings are always burning with the slow and implacable fires of human desperation" (Williams, 1235). Thus, because the symbolism is explicitly stated, we must discern the extent of the symbolism by paying attention to the instances when the fire-escape is used. At the end of scene four, Tom storms out of the apartment in anger and frustration at Amanda's requests:

"TOM (stamping to door). Oh, my go-osh!
 AMANDA Will you? (He opens door. Imploringly) Will you? ....
TOM (calling back). YES!" (Williams, 1254).

Just as a fire-escape is used to escape the burning and suffocating danger of a real fire, so Tom is escaping the metaphorical fire of his conflicts with Amanda. His poor relationship with his mother is what is causing his misery. Moreover, by leaving the home, he is also able to forget about his responsibility to financially care for his family, another suffocating aspect of his life.
However, permanent safety is achieved by using a fire-escape in a real fire. On the contrary, Tom can only temporarily escape the "flames of human desperation" (Williams, 1234); he subjects himself to the fire once more each time he re-enters his home. Nonetheless, the fire escape stands as a symbol of refuge for the characters in Tennessee Williams' The Glass Menagerie.

Like Father Like Son

Though the father is not present in Tennessee Williams' The Glass Menagerie, he nonetheless has a tremendous impact on the story. More importantly, the absent father has a special influence on Tom. Throughout the story, Amanda continually compares Tom's actions to those of his father, stressing her utter disapproval of any that fall in line. Despite Amanda's vehemence, however, the attentive reader can pick up on hints of Tom's admiration and jealousy of his father throughout the story. For instance, Tom comes home in complete awe of a magic trick he saw one evening. He says, "...But the wonderfullest trick of all was the coffin trick....But who in hell ever got himself out of one without removing one nail? (As if in answer, the father's grinning photograph lights up)" (Williams, 1249). Tom's complete admiration of the magic trick can translate into his complete admiration of his father's ability to escape his situation. Dealing with Amanda's controlling nature and the pressure to provide for the family, one can assume that Tom is currently in an entrapping situation similar to his father's. Thus, looking for guidance, Tom at times considers his father's decisions. Will Tom escape his responsibilities like his father did? If the conflicts continue, this is a well-founded fear.

Tom's Real Motivation

Tom clearly works hard to provide for his small family; both his mother and daughter depend on him for survival. However, as one reads Tennessee Williams' The Glass Menagerie, he sees a change in Tom's true motivation. Amanda asks Tom, "What right have you got to jeopardize your job? Jeopardize the security of all of us? How do you think we'd manage if you were-" (Williams, 1247). Clearly, Amanda assumes that it is Tom's responsibility as a member of the family to provide. However, Amanda soon realizes that Tom, though he loves his family, is not entirely devoted to working hard simply for the sake of providing for the family. Moreover, he frequently comes home intoxicated with hopeless feelings about his own future. Thus, Amanda says later on, "Oh, I can see the handwriting on the wall as plain as I see the nose in front of my face! ....I know what you're dreaming of. ....Very well, then. Then do it! But not till there's somebody to take your place" (Williams, 1253). Amanda knows that Tom will not be motivated to help find Laura a husband unless he knows that he would be granted "freedom" for his efforts. Amanda, however, does not fight this realization. Though Tom is motivated by what she deems "selfish reasons", she is nonetheless achieving her goal of attaining a gentleman caller for Laura.

Appreciation

In Those Winter Sundays, author Robert Hayden is invoking his audience to appreciate their parents and that they do. Many times, the small things one's parents do for us go unnoticed. For example, laundary, cooking, cleaning, the paying of bills, and more are all things that most don't think twice about or parents taking care of. However, if one day they were to stop doing so all together, one would notice immediately. Therefore, through his poem, Hayden urges the reader to offer his appreciation to his parents for the small things. For instance, the line "No one ever thanked him" (781) is a lucid example that draws the underappreciation of parents to the readers attention. Moreover, the lines "Speaking indifferently to him, who had driven out the cold and polished my good shoes as well" (782) clearly juxtaposes the phrase "speaking indifferently" with the kind gestures the father performed for his son.  This evokes pathos in the reader. One can clearly see that the narrarator's "indifferent" behavior toward his father is in no way justified in sight of what his father has done for him. This brings the reader to the realization that one should take notice of the care of his parents and be grateful.

There's a Hole in My Bucket, Dear Liza, Dear Liza..

Did the anonimously written poem Edward remind anyone else of the children's song "There's a Hole in My Bucket"?! Only paragraph in, after reading "'Your hawk's blood was never so red, Edward, Edward, Your hawk's blood was never so red'" (977), I automatically began reading the rest of the poem to the tune of that children's song. I was astounded at how similar the structures of these two works are. The repitition almost matches perfectly. Check it out!This mental connection proved extremely distracting, however, for I was too caught up in the joy of my realization that I could hardly concentrate on the meaning of the poem!
Alas, after some intense focus, I have to admit that I am still partially confused. Why did this young man kill his father? Why is his mother so calm upon this realization? Her initial reaction was to ask her son, "'And what penance will ye do for that, Edward, Edward...." (978). Did the mother encourage her son to kill his father? This thought crossed my mind upon reading the last line: "'The curse of hell from me shall ye bear, such counsels you gave to me, O'" (978). Did this woman advise her son to commit such a horrific act?! Is that why she will bear the curse of hell?! Who knows......

 I bet Costello does.

Never Give Up

Eudora Welty presents the theme that one should "never give up" in her short story A Worn Path. Phoenix Jackson is charactarized as an old and tried woman who walks with a cane and may be slightly senile. Despite these obstacles, however, Phoenix trecks through the woods climbing over logs, through thorn bushes, and passed a hunter who points a gun to her face. Nonetheless, through all of this, Phoenix trecks on. Thus, Welty elucidates the theme "never give up." In addition to through Phoenix herself, Welty uses syntax to present this theme. With phrases such as "On she went" (223), "'Now comes the trial'" (224), "'I wasn't as old as I thought'" (224), "In the furrow she made her way along" (225), "Then she went on..." (225), and "'I bound to go to town mister'" (227), Welty shows Phoenix's resiliency. Welty makes a point of beginning each new section of the journey with a phrase such as "On she went" (223) to show that despite the obstacles Phoenix faced in the previous part of the journey, she chooses to continue on. Moreover, each of these phrases are short and "to the point" and thus, more impactful. The reader is able to grasp the theme more easily through the structure in which Welty presents it.

A Twist of Drunken Irony!

In Frank O'Connor's The Drunkard, there is a bout of irony within the unfolding events of the plot. The father, having abstained from alcohol for a couple of months, has an itching desire to drink after the funeral of his friend. Throughout the story, the narrator hints that his father has a history of excessive drinking, though the father was reluctant to face such facts: "By the time he had taken the first he already realized that he had made a fool of himself, took a second to forget it and a third to forget that he couldn't forget, and at last came home reeling drunk" (344). Simultaenous with his desire to drink is his desire to escape reality for just a little while; while drunk, he did not have to face his problems. However, when his son drinks his alcohol, he is ironically forced to face his problems; his son's behavior opens his eyes to his own problem. The father is able to see how embarassing it is to be drunk in public. Thus, after dealing with his drunken son throwing up, inability to walk, and shouting of obscenities to the neighbors, the father exclaims, "Never again, never again, not if I live to be a thousand!" The father is swearing that he will never drink again for the rest of his life. His eyes are opened to the inconvenience and problems facilitated by alcohol. Thus, instead of escaping his problems, he is forced to face them, ultimately doing him more good than his own consumption of the alochol could have done.

One Cannot Avoid the Unavoidable

The short story Once Upon a Time by Nadine Gordimer presents a theme that one cannot avoid what is unavoidable; therefore, he must not fear it. This is a recurring theme throughout the story, beginning with the narrator lying frightened in her bed. Upon hearing the noise in the middle of the night and contemplating all the terrible possibilities of its source, she says, "I have no burglar bars, no gun under the pillow, but I have the same fears as people who do take these precautions...." (231). Here, the author is implying that those who have burglar bars and guns have not eliminated their fears in doing so. Taking such precautions will not prevent intruders or murderers from breaking in, though they may offer potential victims momentary solice. Such misfortune is predominantly unavoidable. Later, the author goes on to say, "But I learned that I was to be neither threatened nor spared. There was no human weight pressing on the boards, the creaking was a buckling, an epicenter of stress. I was in it" (232). She is implying that people jump too quickly to the worst-case scenario when signs of danger are present, while most of the time, the apparent danger is something completely harmless. Thus, we must not live life worrying about all the misfortune that can befall us, for in doing so, we may bring it upon ourselves.
This theme of the impossibility of avoiding the unavoidable is presented again later on in the story when the young boy dies as a result of his parents' paranoia and over-caution.  Despite all the measures the family took to protect themselves from harm, destruction eventually found its way. In fact, the family made the situation and outcome worse through their excessive fears. Once again, we in life, we must accept the things we cannot change and stop trying to avoid the unavoidable reality of danger.

Mama vs. Walter

At one point in Lorraine Hansberry's play A Raisin in the Sun, Walter is clearly a foil character to Mama, and vise versa. Hansberry directly juxtaposes their ideas and beliefs. Mama even explicitly states that she doesn't recognize the person Walter has become. "No...something has changed. You something new, boy. In my time we was worried about not being lynched and getting to the North if we could and how to stay alive and still have a pinch of dignity too...Now here come you and Beneatha-talking 'bout things we ain't never even thought about hardly, me and your daddy....You my children-but how different we done become" (74). This difference is partly caused by the generation gap between Walter and Mama; the two hold different values. Mama's satisfaction with freedom in the north is equal to Walter's would-be satisfaction with becoming a wealthy business man. However, Mama sees this mindset of Walter's as ungrateful and uncharacteristic of how she and Mr. Younger raise their children. Thus, two have conflicting views. Hansberry reveals this to the reader through the above excerpt where Mama clearly juxtaposes the two viewpoints. This part of the story sets up for Walter's transformation later on in the story, which proves to bring he and Mama back together.

A Dramatic Change for Walter

Throughout Lorraine Hansberry's A Raisin in the Sun, we see a dramatic change in Walter Lee. Near the beginning of the story, Walter was purely motivated by his own dreams and menas of escaping poverty; he was predominantly blind the needs of others, even ignoring his own wife's pregnancy and consequential thoughts of aborition. Mama says to Walter, "Well...Well-son, I'm waiting to hear you say somehting...I'm waiting to hear how you be your father's son. Be the man he was...Your wife say she going to destroy your child. And I'm waiting to hear you talk like him and say we a people who give children life, not who destroys them-I'm waiting to see you stand up and look like your daddy and say we done give up one baby to poverty and that we ain't going to give up nary another one...I'm waiting" (75). Walter responds with silence. This shows that he is completely blinded with his frustration with Mama buying the house and not allowing him to pursue his dream of entrepreneurship to the point where he can't even stand up for a life he created. Moreover, Mama repeatedly compares Walter to his father here; Walter's silent response confirms the fact that he and his father, at this point, are two very different people.
However, near the end of the story Walter undergoes a dramatic change. In the face of disaster, after the money he invested was stolen by Mr. Harris, Walter is finally able to see needs of his family members. He realizes that being with his family and making a comfortable life for them is what is truly important. He lets go of his desire to become wealthy. "And we have decided to move into our house because my father-my father-he earned it for us brick by brick....We don't want your money" (148). In this short excerpt, Walter both compares himself to his father as well as denounces a large amount of money, something that would have been extremely difficult for him to do earlier in the play. This shows a 360 degree difference in Walter Lee's mindset. He is able to lead the family into a new chapter of their lives motivated by the happiness he knows it will bring each member, rather than his own potential achievement.

Metaphoric Title

The title of Lorraine Hansberry's play, A Raisin in the Sun, is metaphorically revealing in light of the events that transpire throughout the stroy. Referencing Langston Hughe's poem A Dream Deferred, a raisin in the sun is an already weakened dream that has been left in the sun to "shrivel up" even more. This analysis can be directly applied to Walter Lee and his aspirations and feelings toward them. "I want so many things that they are driving me kind of crazy....Sometimes it's like I can see the future stretched out in front of me-just plain as day. The future, Mama. Hanging over there at the edge of my days. Just waiting for me-a big, lookng blank space-full of nothing. Just waiting for me. But it don't have to be" (75). This excerpt clearly shows Walters frustration with his dreams. For a few moments in time, they seem attainable. However, after the money, his apparent salvation, arrives and he is still unable to chase his dream of becoming a successful business man, he is even more pained. The close proximity can be compared to a raisin being left out in the sun; an already dried fruit continues to shrivel up with every passing minute. This is how Walter feels about his dreams. With the means of acting on them so close but the inability to utilize them, his visions for the future seem as hopeless as ever.

Characterization Through Dialogue

Lorraine Hansberry defines the personality and background of her characters in A Raisin in the Sun predominantly through dialogue and the manner in which each speaks. For example, in reading just a few pages of the play, we are able to discern the more-educated from the less-educated.
On page twenty five, Ruth's use of jargon and poor utilization of grammar in her first line reveal to the reader an uneducated aspect of her personality: "What you mean out? He ain't hardly got in there good yet" (25). Walter's lines and manner of speaking serve a similar purpose: "Ain't nobody bothering you" (26). On the contrary, Beneatha would never make such poor use of grammar. One can immediately recognize the gap in the education between Beneatha and the rest of her family members simply through analysis of her word choice, syntax, and adhearance to proper grammar. I first noticed the difference with the line, "God hasn't got a thing to do with it" (50). If it were Ruth or Walter speaking, this line would have undoubtedly read "God ain't got a thing to do with it." This simple adjustment is very revealing on behalf of Beaneatha's character. This difference in Beneatha's manner of speaking is symbolic of her overall desire to be different from her family, to reap a different fate. She does not want to feel trapped, and thus must work hard and attend school to make a life for herself and achieve great things. To do this, she must set herself apart.

No Setting No Story

Lorraine Hansberry's A Raisin in the Sun is almost completely centered around the setting that is the small urban apartment shared by the five family members. The plot is driven by the problems that the close quarters cause for each individual member. Most profound, however, is the effect of the living conditions on our beloved happy couple Walter Lee and Ruth Younger.
"And I'll pull the car up on the driveway...just a plain black Chrysler....Rich people don't have to be flashy....And I'll come up the steps to the house and the gardener will be clipping away at the hedges and he'll say, 'Good evening, Mr. Younger....'" (Hansberry 108-109). Here, Walter's rant to Travis about the future he has envisioned once Mama allows him to use the extra money for his business transaction clearly shows how Walter see's life in the small apartment. He is a man who wishes to be respected by society and simply does not see this happening unless he resides in a respectable abode. Walter has more superficial motives for escaping the apartment in comparison to his wife Ruth.
"Oh Walter...a home...a home" (Hansberry 91-92). Here, we see Ruth's motives for escaping the setting; she desires to have a home in which to properly raise her family. She wants a place to call her own, where she can establish a life for Walter, Travis, and the baby to come. Thus far, she has been dependent on Mama, living in the same apartment in which Walter was raised. Therefore, a change in setting would be a new chapter in life, a long-awaited beginning.

A Rhetorical Explosion!

In Langston Hughes' Dream Deferred, Hughe's uses rhetorical questions all throughout the work. Initially, he asks the reader, "What happens to a dream deferred?" (Hughes).  Hughes offers his own response to this question in the form of other rhetorical questions. All of these rhetorical questions offer imagery to the poem as well. Together, the rhetorical questions and imagery help develop both mentally and visually the answer to the initial question posed. However, no answer he offers is positive. Thus, this the reader to believe that a "dream deferred" can bring no good. Ultimately, he suggests that a "dream deferred" will "explode" (Hughes). Although he does not identify what this explosion is, the reader can assume that it is representing an ultimate negative outcome. As I read the poem, I envisioned the explosion as a fire and a final destruction of my dreams, left with only useless ashes.

Conquering Amiguity

In M. Carl Holman's Mr. Z, the initial situation of the main character is rather ambiguous. The poem jumps directly into a description of the life of Mr. Z at a young age. The inattentive may easily skip over important revealing details within the diction of the poem. However, have no fear! Ambiguity of characterization is no match for the analytical reader! In the first line alone Holman drops hints that the source of Mr. Z's life struggles are the result of his race. Holman states, "Taught early that his mother's skin was the sign of error" (Holman). Moreover, as the poem continues, more clues are left. Holman alludes to "jazz" and "spirituals", both activities characteristic of the African American race. As the poem continues, however, Holman becomes more direct with phrases such as, "Whatever ground was Anglo-Saxonized" (Holman) and "race" (Holman). Once the reader understands the situation of Mr. Z, he can then proceed in his analysis of the rest of the poem. Now that I reread this blog post and the poem itself, however, I realize that the race issue really was not all that ambiguous...but I will admit, I was confused.

Change in Character

At the begining of Jhumpa Lahiri's "Interpreter of the Maladies, I did not really care for Mrs. Das. She seemed selfish, superficial, and disinterested in anyone but herself. During the car ride to the Sun Temple, Mrs. Das decides to paint her finger nails instead of embracing the culture around her. When her daughter asks if she will paint her nails as well she responds "Leave me alone. You're making me mess up"(Lahiri). Her attitude seems selfish and snobbish, as though she cares for no one but hereself, not even her own daughter. However, later in the novel I started to see Mrs. Das is a more vulnerable light. When she reveals to Mr. Kapasi that she had an affair and that Bobby was not Raj's child, I felt a little bit of sympathy for her. Although what she did was wrong, she still feels horrible about her actions. She tells Mr. Kapasi "I feel terrible looking at my children, and at Raj, always terrible. I have terrible urges, Mr. Kapasi to throw things away" (Lahiri). We see a change in the character now. She seems vulnerable and unstable, needing a friend to talk to. Before she appeared unwelcoming and stand-offish, but now she seems broken and needy. Her change in the novel evokes pathos to the reader and allows her character to become more open to the reader.

This is intriguing because it seems to be the exact opposite change in character of the narrator of "Everyday Uses"....

Revealing Diction

In Hazel Tells LaVerne, Howd Machan's use of diction is rather revealing. The jargon and "slang talk" used such as "so I goes ta flushm down" (Machan) initially reveals personality and other aspects of the character, whom I am guessing is Hazel. This use of laid back language shows that Hazel is uneducated and seemingly carefree as well. The two women are most likely close friends because Hazel makes little effort to speak in a sophisticated manner whatsoever. The lack of any punctuation or capitalization in the poem supports this further. Additionally, Hazel's use of language creates humor within the work. Reading this poem brings to mind two women conversing over enthusiastically and most likely over-exaggerating a story. Also, simply the poor use of grammar is humorous to me. A poem written in slang as such allows the reader to feel as if the storyteller is speaking directly to him. Therefore, after studying this work, I truly felt as if I had connected with Hazel's character, and found myself identifying with her emotions. This was all a result of Machan's choice of language.

A Metamorphosis of Character

In Everyday Use, author Alice Walker creates a narrator who undergoes a dramatic change of character in a relatively short period of time. The teller of the story, mother of Maggie and Dee, initially comes off as a woman who has had to work for the little she has in life. She dreams of a life where she is prettier, more wealthy, and sought after by attractive men. However, she returns to reality stating, "In real life I am a large, big-boned woman with rough, man-working hands" (Walker). Furthermore, the narrator recounts her rough times when she refers to the fact that she does not have an education passed the second grade and that her own daughter has to read to her. For me, these excerpts are Walker's attempt to characterize the narrator as an insecure and sad woman who has always "rolled with the punches." Moreover, when the narrator describes her encounters with white men saying, "It seems to me I have talked to them always with one foot raised in flight, with my head turned in whichever way is farthest from them" (Walker), Walker was implying that she was a character who avoided conflict at all costs and may even be somewhat of a pushover.
Nonetheless, at the end of the story, the narrator undergoes a change in character. When Dee asks for the old quilts, it seems at first that, though resistant, her mother will concede. However, upon seeing the sadness and defeat in Maggie's face, the mother quickly changes her mind and absolutely refuses to give Dee the quilts. "When I looked at her like that something hit me in the top of my head and ran down to the soles of my feet" (Walker). This stark description of a change in the narrators mood is Walker's attempt at showing a permanent metamorphosis of character.

Interpreting Poetry Like a Champ

I really enjoyed Perrine's article on how to properly interpret poetry. I have often asked myself wether or not poets write poems with specific inspiration and interpretation in mind, or if they write with purposeful ambiguity to allow the reader to use his imagination. Perrine does state, "He (the poet) cannot say, 'What I really meant was...' without admitting failure, or without saying something different (and usually much less) than what his poem said" (Perrine). This line of the article supports my latter thought. However, reading on, I am intrigued and enlightened by Perrine's  "criteria" for proper interpretation. Though I have never interpreted a poem in this manner, these rules seem fail-proof. Using these criteria, a reader is forced to think deeply about a poem's meaning for the guidelines rule out half-thought interpretations that one may have gotten away with before reading this article. Despite the deeper thinking that is required, Perrine's criteria actually make discerning the true meaning of a poem easier, for a reader can be confident in his analysis.
I am anxious to use Perrine's advice this year in AP Lit. Poetry and the interpretation of have never been a strong point of mine; however, in learning to account for all details as well as to avoid assumptions, I am presented with a challenge that will ultimately lead to success in my discernment of meaning as well as improvement in my analysis skills. Moreover, I am anxious to see how our AP Lit class as a whole works with Perrine's criteria. If we are able to follow the guidelines for the most part, then we will produce universal interpretations. That would be neat! However, would it eliminate our in-class discussions over the meanings of certain works? I hope not-I quite enjoy those!

AP Lit Picture Contest (for real this time) :)

Just reading some classic American literature on the anchor of the USS Chicago at the end of Navy Pier! BEAT THAT.

AP Lit Reading Picture Contest

Goodbye Gatsby!  ;)

....OOPS! Wrong picture.

Is Gatsby Really Great?

The Great Gatsby
Final Reflection

"Only Gatsby, the man who gives his name to this book, was exempt from my reaction-Gatsby, who represented everything for which I have unaffected scorn" (Fitzgerald, 2).

After finishing F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby, I thought once more of this sentence and the title of the book in general. I find myself wondering whether or not Gatsby was really "great." I understand that he was a central character and all, but so were Daisy; Myrtle; and Tom. Why is the book not named after one of them. Marvelous Myrtle has a nice ring to it, don't you agree? What did Gatsby do that was so fantastic that he was worthy of having the entire novel named after him? In my opinion, Gatsby was almost the opposite of "great." He was a loner, a nervous wreck around women, a wife snatcher, partially dishonest, and an accomplice in murder. Yet, the book named after him has gone down in history as one of the greatest pieces of American Literature of all time? I believe Fitzgerald is being ironic with his title choice. Honestly, that is my only guess. I find the matter to be rather intriguing and am curious to hear others' thoughts.
Nonetheless, I enjoyed reading The Great Gatsby. The story was both calmly inticing and "to the point", which I appreciated.  Also, call me sadistic, but the two murders were quite exhilirating. I love when things get heated to the point of death-in fictional novels of course! Reading these two novels this summer makes me excited for American Lit. I can definitely say that I trust Mr. Costello's taste in literature now. Bring it on!

A Death Unknowingly Self-Inflicted

The Great Gatsby
p. 157-180

I was actually surprised by the ending of F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gastby. I did not expect Wilson to actually kill Gatsby, and the fact that Tom directed Wilson to Gatsby's house makes me hate him even more. What a jerk!
Anyway, reading these last chapters, I realized that Gatsby's death was ultimately a result of a chain of events that he predominantly had control of; therefore, could one say his death was self-inflicted? Probably not, but I thought it was an interesting thought. So this is what I am saying: if Gatsby had never met Daisy way back in the day, he would not have died this tragic, young death. His love for Daisy was his cause for moving to Long Island and the reason he reconnected with her. If he had not reconnected with her, they would not have taken the trip to New York City, she would not have been driving his car, she would not have killed Myrtle, and Wilson would not have gone on the bloody vengeful rampage that took his life. Way to go Daisy.
Another piece of the story I found interesting was the concept of Gatsby's "dream." Those who did not know Gatsby on a personal level (sooo mostly everyone...even his dad) thought Gatsby's "dream" was to be successful in business and to make a substantial amount of money (and to throw extravagant parties, of course).  However, Nick knew better. "He had come a long way to this blue lawn, and his dream must have seemed so close that he could hardly fail to grasp it" (Fitzgerald, 180). Reading this sentence out of context, one may think it was referring to Gatsby's hardwork that brought all of his success. However, this sentence is truly referring to his journey and hardwork to reunite with Daisy. Daisy was Gatsby's dream-he simply aquired it by the means of rising to prestige in society, owning a large house in close proximity to hers, and eventually finding a way for their paths to cross once more.

Flashbacks: Both Useful and Confusing

The Great Gatsby
p. 145-156

I find F. Scott Fitzgerald's use of flashbacks both useful and confusing; I guess you already knew that by reading the title of this blog, but there is a requirement of ten sentences on these things isn't there? Anyway, so at times Nick will be narrarating, and he will narrarate straight into a flashback, and before I know it, I have traveled back in time. Sometimes these flashbacks are told directly by another character, but mostly they are communicated through Nick relaying what he has been told. Thus, with the absence of quotation marks to indicate a small anecdote about another character, I often confuse Nick's narrarating of the present happenings with his telling of the past. For instance, on page one hundred fifty, there are two different breaks in the page, yet the entire page and the few surrounding it are Gatsby's flashbacks. After one break, the story picks up again with "He did extraordinarily well in the war. He was a captain before he went to the front, and follwoing the Argonne battles...." (Fitzgerald, 150). The paragraphs above this section discussed Gatsby's love for Daisy, therefore my confusion with this new information was a result of my failure to see the point in knowing it. Flashbacks have been sporadic throughout this novel, forcing me to be alert and contemplative. As I continue to read The Great Gatsby, the flashbacks have all proven useful; however, after my initial reading of most of them, I am usually confused.

Just a Couple of Cowards

The Great Gatsby
p. 133-144

I am about to make a connection here pretaining to The Great Gatsby that may or may not be far-fetched: you have been warned. So, when Myrtle was desperately running out of the gas station, she yelled to her husband, "'Beat me! Throw me down and beat me, you dirty little coward!'" (Fitzgerald, 137).  So, let us fast forward to after Myrtle has been struck and killed by the yellow car and Tom has arrived at the station. He says to Nick, "'The God damned coward! He didn't even stop his car'" (Fitzgerald, 141). These uses of the word 'coward' were only five pages apart-I see this as no coincidence. I believe F. Scott Fitzgerald is trying to make some type of connection here, so I am going to make a guess at what it is. Myrtle's storming out and her exclamation were both a rejection of her spouse. Tom's passionate feeling of anger toward the driver who killed Myrtle along with the detectable tinge of sadness in his diaologue is, also, and indirect rejection of his spouse; he is choosing to pour his feelings into grieving the loss of his mistress rather than loving Daisy. At this point, he is aware that his own wife is in love with another man, yet he is completely consumed with the death of this other woman. Maybe, Fitzgerald is trying to parallel the two rejections? Just a thought.

Gatsby Remains a Mystery

The Great Gastby
p. 120-132 (and a little bit after)

Though I have made significant process in F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby, Mr. Jay Gatsby himself remains a mystery to the reader, mostly because he is clearly still a mystery to Nick. Nick, though he has gotten to know Gatsby, is still unsure of both his past and what to think of him in general. For example, Nick says, "I had one of those renewals of complete faith in him that I'd experienced before" (Fitzgerald, 129). At this point, you would think two close friends would no longer need "renewals of faith" in eachother; they should know eachother better than that. However, Nick still seems unsure. This uncertainty is portrayed again a few pages later when Nick says, "He looked...as if he had 'killed a man'" and "he begain to talk excitedly to Daisy, denying everything, defending his name against accusations that had not been made" (Fitzgerald, 134). With the first quote, Nick is re-analyzing a prior accusation of Gatsby that he thought he had expelled. In the second, Nick almost describes Gatsby of over-explaining himself. These passages, for me, seem to paint a picture of uncertainty, once again, in regards to the real Gatsby. Will we ever know him?

Yet Another Titanic Comparison

The Great Gatsby
I'm not sure which pages....

The story of the Titanic seems to be one of universal relation! Just as Edith Wharton's The House of Mirth sparked a memory of the movie, so has F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby. Certain characters in this book even directly remind me of  specific characters in the Titanic. For example, let us examine the following excerpt:

"'You don't understand,' said Gatsby, with a touch of panic. 'You're not going to take care of her anymore.'
'I'm not?' Tom opened his eyes wide and laughed. He could afford to control himself now. 'Why's that?'
'Daisy's leaving you.'
'Nonsense.'
'I am, though,' she said with visible effort.
'She's not leaving me!' Tom's words suddenly leaned down over Gatsby. 'Certainly not for a common swinlder who'd have to steal the ring he put on her finger'" (Fitzgerald, 133).

Here, picture Tom as Cal, Gatsby as Jack (ironic because DeCaprio played Jack and is he not also playing Gatsby in the new movie?), and Daisy as Rose. Just as Tom see's Gatsby as a "swindler", so does Cal see Jack as a poor and trashy cheepskate. Just as Gatsby and Daisy have a secret love, so do Jack and Rose. Also, the mention of having to "steal the wring he put on her finger" instantly reminded me of one of the final scenes in Titanic before the ship began to sink when Jack was accused by Cal of stealing the Heart of the Ocean Diamond. I believe this comparison is well-founded and I was excited when I made the connection. I don't, however, believe that by making this connection I will be able to better predict the outcome of Gatsby, for there are no ships to sink in this story-only hearts to break. This is getting interesting, so I'm going to read on.

But I think "James Gatz" is a splendid name

The Great Gatsby
p. 97-108

In this next section, the reader learns of Gatsby's choice to change his name. The story behind the change begins, however, with the day on which he changed it from James Gatz to Jay Gatsby. "It was James Gatz who had been loafing along the beach that afternoon...but it was already Jay Gatsby who borrowed a rowboat...." (Fitzgerald, 98). Therefore, the reader has a hard time discerning the reasoning behind the name change. Did James Gatz have a rough childhood that he wished not to identify himself with? We do not know because F. Scott Fitzgerald does not give enough information about Gatz' childhood to be able to draw such a conclusion; however, from what was given, I have not picked up on any bad vibes. Nonetheless, the book does say that Gatsby changed his name "at the age of seventeen and at the specific moment that witnessed the beginning of his career" (Fitzgerald, 98).  Therefore, the name change was indeed a significant milestone in Gatsby's life that may or may not have played a role in his success as an adult. I guess I will have to continue my reading of The Great Gatsby to look for more clues and make a decision myself!

A New Boyish Side of Gatsby

The Great Gatsby
p. 85-96

In these next few pages of F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby, Mr. Gatsby's love for Daisy is clear not only in his words, but his actions as well. He adopts a vulnerability in her presence. This is evident by the boyish nature that comes out when it comes time for Daisy to arrive for tea. When she pulls up, he runs out of the house in fear and embarassment and then turns around and knocks back on the door. "Gatsby, pale as death, with his hands plunged like weights in his coat pockets, was standing in a puddle of water glaring tragically into my eyes" (Fitzgerald, 86). This paints a picture of absolute fear! He is so in love with Daisy that his nerves take an extreme physical toll on him! Until now, Gatsby has been portrayed as a calm, collected, and sophisticated man. This chapter introduces to the reader a new side of him. For me, this side of Gatsby almost makes me uncomfortable and annoyed.
I noticed another sign of Gatsby's true love for Daisy when the two went over to his home. Earlier in the story, Gatsby spent time at his own parties on the phone negotiating business-he never thought twice about it. However, when the phone rang while he was with Daisy, he tells the caller "'Well, I can't talk now....I can't talk now, old sport....'" (Fitzgerald, 93). Gatsby cherishes his time with Daisy so much that he would ignore a business call for her! My oh my, the man is in love.

A Past Foreshadowed

The Great Gatsby
p. 73-84

So, in this next section of F. Scott Fiztgerald's The Great Gatsby, one learns that Gatsby and Daisy used to be lovers. I should have figured there would be some type of connection because the story centers around Nick and his friends, and there was no way Fitzgerald could write a story about Nick and have the other main characters not be connected in some way. Up to this point, both Daisy and Tom and Gatsby were equally important, so it only makes sense that they would be connected. So, as always, after learning about this relationship, I decided to flip back to reread the passage in Chapter One in which Gatsby was mentioned in Daisy's presence;  the knowledge of this relationship was clearly foreshadowed: "'You must know Gatsby.' 'Gatsby?' demanded Daisy. 'What Gatsby?'" (Fitzgerald, 11). Daisy was obviously caught off guard at the mention of Gatsby's name. However, when I read this earlier, I did not pick up on Fitzgerald's foreshadowing diction. This is a reason why I find it very interesting to flip back periodically while reading a novel. I believe that by describing Daisy's response as a "demand", Fitzgerald shows that Gatsby played a significant role in Daisy's past. Her inquiry was not simply one of innocent curiosity. I get the feeling that Gatsby was someone of great significance in her life and may be someone that she thinks about a lot. It will be intersting to continue to learn about the couple's history.

A Gatsby Curse?

The Great Gatsby
p. 60-72

At the beginning of Chapter IV, Nick gives a detailed list of all the visitors to the Gatsby mansion during the summer. At first this list seemed long and irrelevant to me; however, as I read on, I noticed a possible trend among the fates of the guests. For example Doctor Webster Cove  "was drowned last summer up in Maine" (Fitzgerald, 61-62), Edgar Beaver's hair "turned cotton-white one winter afternoon for no good reason at all" (Fitzgerald, 62), "Snell was there three days before he went to the penitentiary, so drunk out on the gravel drive that Mrs. Ulysses Swett's automobile ran over his right hand" (Fitzgerald, 62), "Muldoon who afterward strangeled his wife" (Fitzgerald, 62), "and the young Quinns, divorced now" (Fitzgerald, 63), and Henry L. Palmetto "killed himself by jumping in front of a subway train in Times Square" (Fitzgerald, 63). All of these were guests had extremely unfortunate experiences since attending a Gatsby party. This mentioning of the guests and their lives since that summer can not be simply irrelevant; I believe F. Scott Fitzgerald included this list as either a foreshadowing tactic or to increase the mystery around Gatsby's character. Another question I encountered was whether unlucky/strange guests were all coincidentally attending Gatsby parties, or if this luck was somehow a curse of those who attend the parties? As farfetched as this thought may be, I find it intriguing! I hope these guests are all cursed (sorrynotsorry). A curse would indeed make The Great Gatsby a suspenseful and worthwhile read =)

Nick Loves Who?

The Great Gatsby
p.49-60

I am pretty confused by Nick's relationship status. Early in the book, there was mention of a rumor about Nick being engaged back West. He neither confirmed nor denied the rumor, and on page fifty eight it was mentioned again: "...and I knew that first I had to get myself definitely out of that tangle back home. I'd been writing letters once a week and signing them: 'Love, Nick,' and all I could think of was how, when that certain girl played tennis, a faint mustache of perspiration appeared on her upper lip" (Fitzgerald, 58). This is a direct confirmation by Nick of the fact that he indeed has a lover back home. However, Nick is clearly starting to develop feelings for Miss Jordan Baker. The two seem very compatible. However, it is too early to confirm the status of their relationship. Will this relationship back home stop him developing one with Miss Baker? From the above diologue, the chances of the engagement back home conintuing seem slim, especially if he is letting the superficial matter of unappealing perspiration turn him away from this girl. I hope that if Nick can get himself to break off his relationship with mystery girl, that him and Jordan will form a very happy couple. Oh, the many love tales of F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby.

Wizard vs. Gatsby

The Great Gatsby
p. 37-48

As I continue to read, Fitzgerald is slowly introducing the reader to Mr. Gatsby. However, for the majority of the first two chapters and a portion of the third, Gatsby remains a complete mystery. Many people know of him and frequent his parites; however, very few know him personally. Moreover, hardly any know the true story of his passed. Some believe he was educated in Oxford, others heard he is a veteran of the Great War, while still others believe he is a bootlegger and murderer. Even the guests at his own house party seem to simply be dumbstruck by him: "As soon as I arrived I made an attempt to find my host, but the two or three of whom I asked his whereabouts stared at me in such an amazed way, and denied so vehemently any knowledge of his movements...." (Fitzgerald, 42).
While reading, I could not help but notice that the mystery that surrounds Gatsby's character is similar to the relationship that the people of Oz have with the Wizard in The Wizard of Oz. Just as those who know of Gatsby are in awe of him, so are the people of Oz both fearful and wonderstruck by the Wizard. They know little about him but (...."those who accepted Gatsby's hospitality and paid him the subtle tribute of knowing nothing whatever about him" (Ftizgerald, 61)), nonetheless, crave his presence and wisdom. Similarily, everyone around Long Island wants to attend a party at the Gatsby mansion. Both he and the Wiz seem to be central figures in society, but neither are frequently seen around; they remain a mystery to the people in whose lives they play a significant role. I am anxious to see if this comparison continues to hold through as the tale of F. Scott Fiztgerald's The Great Gatsby unfolds.

Short-Tempered Tom

The Great Gatsby
p. 25-36

In this section of F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby, the reader becomes more aware of the real Tom Buchanan. Both subtly and directly, Fitzgerald reveals Tom's short temper and capricious nature. For example, upon stopping at the gas station and seeing his old friend, Fitzgerald describes Tom as slapping Wilson "jovially on the shoulder" (Fitzgerald, 25). However, within just five lines, Tom's seemingly easy-going mood changes to one of extreme annoyance simply because Wilson bothered him about a car Tom had promised to sell. "'No, he doesn't,' said Tom coldly. 'And if you feel that way about it, maybe I'd better sell it somwhere else after all'" (Fitzgerald, 25). What a quick change of mood! Frankly, Tom is annoying as ever. I wonder if his short temper will get him into trouble later on in the story; I can definitely see it as his downfall.
This analysis was further confirmed when Tom broke Myrtle's nose at the apartment: "Making short of a deft movement, Tom Buchanan broke her nose with his open hand" (Fitzgerald, 37). I do not know if hitting a woman was frowned upon in the early 1900s to the extent that it is today, but this scene still seems rather barbaric. He seems like complete tool, and Daisy can do so much better.

The Depth of "Daisy"

The Great Gatsby
p. 13-24

Throughout these next pages of F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gastby, I have noticed an intriguing relationship between the name "Daisy" and the character herself. When one thinks of the name "Daisy", a sunny and happy image fills the mind; for the first twelve pages or so, the character Daisy seemed to be just as charming. She portrayed a seemingly enthusiastic and bubbly personality. However, when Daisy catches a moment alone with her cousin, she confesses, "Well, I've had a very bad time, Nick, and I'm pretty cynical about everything" (Fitzgerald, 16). I found this very ironic and unexpected. Daisy is clearly a round character, and maybe Fitzgerald is trying to portray the fact that she may seem perfectly beautiful and content on the outside but is hiding a deeper complexity within, similar to a real flower. Moreover, more than once Fitzgerald has directly compared Daisy to a flower; for example, on page nineteen he describes her "opening up again in a flower-like way" (Fitzgerald, 19).  I believe that Fitzgerald has intentionally made a connection between the character Daisy and her name; I am excited to look out for more clues as to his intentions.

Who is the narrartor??

The Great Gatsby
p. 1-12

While reading this first twelve pages, the ambiguous writing style of F. Scott Fitzgerald was clear to me. He begins the story with a narrator that is in no rush to identify himself. For example, on page one, the line "...I was privy to the secret griefs of wild, unknown men" (Fitzgerald, 1) initially made me believe that the narrator was a female. However, reading on to page ten, Tom Buchanan addresses the narrator as "Nick", thus falsifying my assumption.
This ambiguity is continued with the description of Miss Baker. Fitzgerald hints at who she is, but the reader does not learn about her golf talents or relations to Daisy until the end of Chapter One and, I assume, farther into the book. This tactic of Fitzgerald's almost forces the reader to be patient, which I find very frustrating. I do not like to read about characters and their interactions without knowing background information; thus, when I finally do learn more about a character, I find myself flipping back in the book and rereading passages in hopes of further understanding the deeper meaning or further analysis of certain conversations, actions, etc. This should be an interesting read for me. Though I do not particularly prefer this type of style, I am eager to increase my reading experience with F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby.

Can't Say I'm Not Surpised, but...WHAT?!

The House of Mirth (Book II)
Chapter XIV (a.k.a.-the most unsatisfying ending ever)


WHY?! Why did Lily have to die?! I mean, I saw it coming, yes, but I was hoping I would be wrong! After reading the entirety of Edith Wharton's The House of Mirth, working through every overly descriptive passage, and we don't even get a happy ending out of it?! I'm incredibly unsatisfied-not to mention, heartbroken as well. In complete honesty, I found myself tearing up when I read, "It was this moment of love, this fleeting victory over themselves....which in her, had reached out to him in every struggle against the influence of her surroundings, and in him, had kept alive the faith that now drew him penitent and reconciled by her side" (Wharton, 268).  So incredibly heartbreaking is the fact that the couple was unable to find peace until Miss Bart's death-when she was finally able to escape.
Overall, I enjoyed the story. Following the ups and downs of Lily Bart was at times frustrating (mostly the times when she would push Selden away) but suspenseful as well. She was an unpredictable character who always had a secret agenda for herself that she facilitated through her relationships with others. Sadly, this ultimately led to her downfall, which came in the form of suicide. All along, I was hoping Selden would finally step up as her "knight in shining armor" and save her once and for all from the binding and unhappy "society" of the wealthy. If she had simply married him after their encounter at Bellomont near the beginning of the story, she would have learned to live a happy modest life. Apparently this would have been too satisfying for the reader, so naturally, Wharton opted for a life of misery, culminating with death by suicide. Awesome.
I believe I learned to appreciate the writing style of Edith Wharton; to say I learned to enjoy her style, might be getting a little ahead of myself. Her heavy discription and occasional wacko sentence structure was at times to follow, but as I neared the end of the novel, I was breezing through ten pages an hour as opposed to five. But hey, the little victories in life mean the most, right?
I am excited to admit that I do feel more inteligent after reading this novel. I enjoy reading "classics" and exposing myself to new literature. Not to mention, the next time someone at the dinner table wants to discuss the multitude of internal conflicts Miss Lily Bart experienced in The House of Mirth, I will be the first to speak up!! Heck yeah.
I can not say I am not excited to be done with Novel #1, however. I'm definitely ready to see what The Great Gatsby has in store for me. Bring it on, F. Scott Fitzgerald.

Not Liking the Omen

The House of Mirth (Book II)
Chapter XII
In this chapter of Edith Wharton's The House of Mirth, the change in the actions and spirit of Lily Bart are made quite obvious. During her visit with Selden, every move she makes carries with it a sense of weakness and hopelessness. For example, such lines as "Her voice had gathered strength, and she looked him gravely in the eyes as she continued, 'Once-twice-you gave me the chance to escape from my life, and I refused it: refused it because I was a coward'" (Wharton, 250) make the reader feel as if Miss Bart is worn out and alone. She has returned to Selden at a time of desperation, the once person she has always felt a unique connection with.
In this chapter, I could not help but notice the ominous choice of diction that Wharton has chosen. For instance, use of words such as "death-pang" (Wharton, 249) and phrases such as "Something in the truth lay dead between them" (Wharton, 251) and "...the love she had killed in him" (Wharton, 251) all carry a sense of forboding. What is to come next? This chapter has made me realize that Lily is slowly giving up the upkeep of a rich lifestyle. Her lack of sleep is making it difficult for her to even make it through the day, and her relationships are suffering. Despite this result, however, she is still able to connect with Selden, even at such a low point in her life. This is yet another sign of their "star-crossed" love. Nonetheless, I believe it is too late to save Miss Lily Bart, and I dread what comes next.

Lily vs. Gerty

The House of Mirth (Book II)
Chapter VIII

Throughout Edith Wharton's The House of Mirth, the differences between Lily Bart and Gerty Farish have been quite evident: Lily fears a life of poverty; Gerty accepts her less-than-dazzling lifestyle. Lily acts on selfish desires and feelings, always manipulating others for her own achievement; Gerty is selfless and  willing to put her own feelings aside to help others (ie-disregard for her feelings for Selden to console Miss Bart). Lily expects a man to come along to pay her debts and take care of her; Gerty works for a living.
Despite such differences, the women are close friends. Further analyzing this realtionship, I realized that Gerty acts as foil character in contrast to Miss Bart. The two women balance seem to balance eachother out. As I began to form this idea, I came across this passage of the story: "There was something irritating to her in the mute interrogation of Gerty's sympathy: she felt the real difficulties of her situation to be incommunicable to anyone whose theory of values was so different from her own, and the restrictions of Gerty's life, which had once had the charm of contrast, now reminded her too painfully of the limits to which her own existence was shrinking" (Wharton, 213). After read this quote from the novel, my notion was confirmed. The contrasts are so evident! I guess they do say, "Opposites attract!"

An Internally External Conflicting Conflict

The House of Mirth (Book II)
Chapters VII & VIII

In these two chapters of Edith Wharton's The House of Mirth, the reader witnesses a clash between the internal and external conflicts of Lily Bart. One see's Bart attempt to use the motivations of one to solve the other.
At this point in the story, the enmity between Bertha Dorset and Miss Bart is clearly the latter's external conflict. Once again, Mrs. Dorset is spreading horrific stories about Lily; this proves truly damaging to Bart's reputation when she informs Rosedale that she has agreed to marry him. Rosedale says to Lily, "I don't believe the stories about you-I don't want to believe them. But they're there, and my not believing them ain't going to alter the situation....I'm more in love with you than ever, but if I married you now I'd queer myself for good and all, and everthing I've worked for all these years would be wasted" ( Wharton, 207-208). Before this encounter between Lily and Mr. Rosedale, the internal conflict of the former was whether or not to agree to marry Rosedale, George Dorset, or neither. However, due to the aftermath of Lily's external conflict, the decisions she made on behalf of her internal conflict are disrupted, thus creating a new internal conflict that could possibly lead to an advance in her external conflict (that is a lot of conflict :O). To clarify my thought process, now Lily must decide (internal conflict) whether or not she will blackmail Bertha, either with the letters from earlier in the story (that say who knows what?!) or by exercising her power over George Dorset's affection, in order to stop the spread of the strories that have ruined her reputation. Choosing to blackmail would then create new boundaries for the external conflict between the two women. This is appealing to Lily because she would be in control once again, and an improved reputation would cause men like Rosedale to desire to marry her once again. Oh my.

I sure hope Lily choses to blackmail Bertha-that woman is a snob!

The Manipulation Continues

The House of Mirth (Book II)
Chapters V & VI

Near the end of Chapter V of Edith Wharton's The House of Mirth, Miss Bart ponders once more a marriage with Mr. Rosedale. She is well aware of the fact that he strongly admires her. However, she believes that this admiration stems predominantly from the potential she has to raise and strengthen his status in "society." Rosedale claims that a wife is the last piece he needs in order to exploit his new found wealth and social status. Knowing this, Lily, with her instinctual desire to always be in control, contemplates making Rosedale genuinely fall in love with her-"What if she made him marry her for love...."(Wharton, 195). This is just another example of Miss Bart's manipulative manner. Relationships must always stand on her own terms, and if not, she will eventually make them so.
When reading this, I was reminded of the plot of the movie 27 Dresses. In the film, a woman named Jane is "always, always, always a bridesmaid." She longs to fall in love and get married as many of her friends have, but she has trouble finding the right man. That is, until a news reporter named Kevin enters the picture. Jane begins to fall for Kevin; little does she know, however, that Kevin is secretly developing a close relationship with her in order to write an article on her astounding number of appearances as a bridesmaid. At the climax of the movie, Jane is heartbroken at the discovery of Kevin's secret. He had made her fall in love with him for the wrong reason, much similar to the plan Miss Bart is formulating for Mr. Rosedale.

I have decided that Miss Bart's manipulative manner is clearly her hubris. As I predicted earlier, her manipulation has lead to her loneliness throughout the novel, yet she continues to exercise it. Though intially appealing to her, such action has continually lead to her downfall.

A Love Inseperable by the Hand of Fate (awww)

The House of Mirth (Book II)
Just Some Thoughts

So, did anyone else find it a little suspicious that JUST as Lily read about Selden's leaving-"'Mr. Lawrence Selden was among the passengers sailing this afternoon for Havana and the West Indies on the Windward Liner Antilles'" (Wharton, 145)-she happened to receive a letter from the Dorsets requesting her company on a "cruise in Mediterranean" (Wharton, 146)?  I mean, for a while I didn't think anything of it, but then it struck me. The love of Lily and Selden is FATE!
I feel as if this is Wharton's representation to the keen reader that the strong relationship (most likely looove) between the two can not be broken. Even his attempt to leave her and the country itself behind fails. Just when it seems as if the couple will never reunite, fate brings them together. Here are some examples so far:

1. When Lily went to Bellomont at the beginning of the story, and Selden initially declined the invitation but later, mysteriously changed his mind.
2. The example in the paragraph above.
3. While in Europe, the arguement between the Dorsets happened to bring the two together once more.

Those are just a few! This is so clear to me now. I am eager to be on the lookout for more of these clues in Edith Wharton's The House of Mirth. This is destiny.