Monday, May 10, 2010
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Schedule Update
- On Thursday, we will discuss postcolonial theory as planned. Please make sure to read the chapter in Critical Theory Today. I will also be scheduling conferences and saying some things about your presentations.
- On Tuesday (4/20), I will be meeting with students individually in my office while there is a peer review happening in the classroom. I will also have conference times available on Monday (4/19) and Wednesday (4/21). The peer review is optional, but it is strongly recommended. Even if you are conferencing with me on that day, that conference will only last for 10 minutes. You can still participate in peer review.
- I am cancelling the discussion of Unaccustomed Earth. It is a long story, and I don't want to overburden you over these last several class periods. But do please read it when you get a chance. It is really worth your time.
- The final paper is now due at the time of your presentation. This means that your paper will be handed in on either 4/22 or 4/27.
- I have posted a revised schedule to the documents site. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Battle of Intersectionality
I believe Packer made Troop 909 a special needs group to make it evident that Arnetta was lying in order to exercise her believed power over the white girls. The mere possibility that Arnetta is telling the truth is squashed when we read one of the girl's response, "That's a BAD word! We don't say BAD words!" (23). Troop 909 has been taught to be kind and generous, and to use social graces - despite race or any other differences. We see this exemplified when Laurel narrates, "My restroom group had passed by some of the 909 girls. For the most part, they deferred to us, waving us into the restrooms, letting us go even though they'd gotten there first" (7).
This experience, coupled with Laurel's remembrance of her father and the Mennonite family stir up questions about what race really means in the world. She becomes truly aware that there is "something mean in the world [she] could not stop" (31). This sense of awakening allows Laurel to start on a new path as an "emergent woman" - 'creating a new life and new choices for herself' (Tyson, 390). And I just have to say, the tender interaction between Daphne and Laurel is a beautiful tale of friendship, change, and growing up.
Color
Brownies
Brownies
She made this statement because even though she and the other girls didn't want to fight, at least they felt wanted and apart of something for a change rather than being made fun of.
The idea that when you have been wronged you wrong others is such an interesting idea that has been put in these young girls minds. The troop leader as they said would have stopped the girls and told them to do good unto others.. so where did this hatred and idea of righting the wrongs that the "whites" or others come from? Most likely their parents... who sure probably deserve to say those things... they were wronged and hurt themselves... but when does it end?? I mean they were going to try and kick the asses of mentally disabled girls!! If for one second they stopped to look at who these girls were from troop 909 rather than their skin things would have been different?
Why is it that justice is served with vengence. society has taken something from us whether we are white, black, red, blue... whatever.. that is what Daphene ends the story with "Just to be nice."
"Borwnies"
I also find it interesting that even though there is a girl with the echolalic disability, which would have been an easy out for the accusing girls, Arnetta still claims it was another girl. But she blames the girl that is the smallest of the bunch. She seems to be trying to pick on the "weakest" of the bunch, which is exactly what she does with the girls in her own troop, like Janice, Laurel and Daphne.
Snot is Assimilated
In the last section we find out that Laurel did not feel good about her father's decision to make the Mennonite's paint the porch because it would be the only time a white person would labor for a black person. I think Laurel didn't like it because she did not posses ill feelings towards white people, and therefore was somewhat assimilated.
Brownies
Monday, April 12, 2010
Brownies
How often do we ridicule or put down people who are different from us, especially those whose differences are visible and physical? How much of that is human nature and how much of that has been taught to us by society? As Tyson says, “racial categorization doesn’t reflect biological reality but rather the current beliefs about race at different times” (372). It is something constructed by the society surrounding us. I felt that the girls in this story had been greatly influenced by society and their parents to believe certain things about race and racism. Arnetta and Octavia have learned from society that race can be used as a weapon. They use the term “Caucasian” to condemn someone who acts differently: “The word took off from there, and soon everything was Caucasian. If you ate too fast you ate like a Caucasian, if you ate to slow you ate like a Caucasian” (4). Laurel and her fellow troop members aren’t even around whites at home: “When you lived in the south suburbs of Atlanta, it was easy to forget about whites. Whites were like those baby pigeons: real and existing, but rarely seen or thought about” (5). Their impression of whites comes from images on the TV and what their parents have taught them: “We had all been taught that adulthood was full of sorrow and pain, taxes and bills, dreaded work and dealings with whites, sickness and death” (19), “‘My father and I were in this mall, but I was the one doing the staring…He said…it was the only time he’d have a white man on his knees doing something for a black man for free’” (29-30), “When you’ve been made to feel bad for so long, you jump at the chance to do it to others” (31). Similarly, the girls of Troop 909 would only have learned the word “nigger” from their parents: “‘I mean, not all of them have the most progressive of parents, so if they heard a bad word, they might have repeated it. But I guarantee it would not have been intentional’” (26).
There are also signs of internalized racism in the story: “The ten white girls…with their long, shampoo-commercial hair, straight as spaghetti from the box. This alone was reason for envy and hatred. The only black girl most of us had ever seen with hair that long was Octavia…The sight of Octavia’s mane prompted other girls to listen to her reverentially” (5). Octavia receives her power from her long hair, a characteristic she shares with the white girls. She is respected by the other girls in her troop because she is like the white girls, thus encouraging the psychological programming that white is inherently superior. It seems that Laurel’s positive descriptions of the girls prove that she has internalized white superiority: “their complexions a blend of ice cream: strawberry, vanilla” (1), “the way all white girls appeared on TV—ponytailed and full of energy, bubbling over with love and money” (7). The internalized racism is further solidified by Laurel’s negative descriptions of “most of the girls in the troop”: “they’d be bunched-up wads of tinfoil, maybe, or rusty iron nails you had to get tetanus shots for” (18).
In the end, Laurel shares the story about the Amish family and discovers that there is a big problem in the world. This is an experience in her life that has caused her to open her eyes to existing problems. She seems to be disturbed by it and is on her way to becoming an emergent woman. In discovering the racism problems that exist in the world, Laurel now has the ability, as an emerging women, to make a difference through improved choices. She can now make a difference.
Friday, April 9, 2010
Prompts for "Brownies"
After reviewing page 390, which term would you use to describe the narrator, Laurel ("Snot")? Is she a "suspended woman," an "assimilated woman," an "emergent woman," or a "liberated woman"? Use specific examples from the story.
"Brownies" obviously takes place in the 1980s (the cultural references reveal this). If these girls are about 10 years old at this time, what does that tell us about their parents? What did they live through? How does that inform the story?
How much time do you think has passed between when the story happened and when it is being told? How old is the narrator? What clues does the story give you? (For example, look at all the overt references Laurel makes to language, literary devices, and grammar; why are those in the story?)
Do you think Arnetta really heard one of the girls in Troop 909 use a racial slur? Is it at least a possibility, or are we meant to believe Arnetta is lying?
Interpret this passage: "No one talked about fighting. Everyone was afraid enough just walking through the infinite deep woods. Even though I didn’t fight to fight, was afraid of fighting, I felt I was part of the rest of the troop, like I was defending something. We trudged against the slight incline of the path, Arnetta leading the way."
Why do you think Packer makes Troop 909 a special needs troop? How would the story be different if the girls did seem to conform more closely to the cliches at the beginning of the story (Disney characters, shampoo-commercial hair, etc.)?
I hope these questions are helpful. Don't feel obligated to answer any of them. Just be sure to use the vocabulary. See you on Tuesday.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
EROS APTEROS
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
timothy Liu
These words from Timothy Liu stood out the most to me while reading his interview. This sentence helped me to look at his poems from a different lens. Knowing that all of the things that Timothy Liu is associated with is only a part of what his poetry brings to us the reader. Because I would say I have more homophobic tendencies, I was a little afraid on my own biased opinion or outlook on the poetry knowing that it's material was mostly a gay perspective, what I then learned was that I could look at the poems differently and not have a bias outlook on the poetry itself. The format of the three poems are so different but I think that all three have a language and rhythm that create beautiful and natural images of experience in the poems. I find the natural instincts the poem create quite refreshing. Take the first couple lines of More than Half The Leaves Already Down "Dragging that plastic sheet across the lawn like a canoe filled with the season's last leaves"... already you are set up with a image that captures you. instead of relating everything back to homosexuality in the poems I seemed to focus on the fact that Timothy Liu is a remarkable poet no matter if he is gay or not.
Timothy Liu Poems
I feel that all three poems speak of a secret love. The first, about the leaves, tells of being able to enjoy a secret and longed for experience, which I assume is being able to love his partner unrestrained by societies judging gaze. The experience is made metaphor by the raking of fall leaves, discovering something beautiful in the middle of a mundane chore. Later, away from work and everyone else, that love is quietly rekindled in a boat on the waters. I think this poem speaks to everyone who has had a first love, or enjoyed a secret love, despite their sexuality.
The Other poems speak of the pain of secret love, of the fear of judgment, and the guilt of conscience. All of us are imperfect and have felt the pangs of harboring some secret, or feeling that we are on the outside looking in, or perhaps something that we love is condemned by the surrounding majority.
I also think that for those of us who are heterosexual, reading this kind of poetry can help us appreciate what it feels like to feel forbidden love more poignantly, just as we can read other literature to try and gain some perspective on the feelings of any marginalized group of people.
LGBT reading of "The Quilt"
The patchwork of the quilt shows these lives as patchy and held together by a simple thread, yet they are all working together (as he works to save these victims as a nurse) to find a cure for the disease, as well as the heterocentrism apparent in society. Minoritizing views, or helping others understand gay and lesbian experience and their minority state, are shared in this piece. We see that they are a marginalized group, not receiving the help they need, and the acceptance as well. It was also interesting to read that the government was not willing to help with AIDS research until the disease threatened heterosexual people as well as homosexuals. (p.331). Liu writes "...but we will go on loving, embracing our own grief..." This particular criticism has helped me view this group in a slightly different way, as a marginalized group of people with different backgrounds and beliefs who do not particularly "fit in" to a patriarchal society, or "the social norm".
Eros Apteros
Liu
So how does knowing Liu is gay affect my reading of “More Than Half the Leaves Already Down”? Well, despite knowing that and despite trying to read the poem through an LGBT lens, I see no evidence of homosexuality in it. The speaker and the addressed could be male or female, gay or straight. And only a few phrases, “such romantic / foreplay” and “This was the dance I had always wanted,” indicate an erotic relationship between the two characters. Without those, the poem could just as likely be describing a homosocial or heterosocial relationship as it could be referring to an erotic one. Well, I guess some of the words in the canoeing images have sort of erotic connotations: “sudden tenderness. . . . [E]ach stroke suspended . . . our bodies leaning.” Again, though, the genders of the characters are undefined, and inconsequential, as far as I can tell. Gender and sexual preference don’t seem to matter much to the poem, which appears to me to be about finding joy and love in spite of death and hardship.
(Unrelated to LGBT theory, here’s something I really like about “The Quilt”: it has some great line breaks. For instance, take a look at the last four stanzas, how the line breaks add so much depth to a single sentence. If the sentence were prose, it would read, “That story has not changed, but we will go on loving, embracing our own grief, our lives split open like a book where the names are written.” But with line breaks, “That story // has not changed, but we will” becomes “but we will / go on loving, embracing,” which becomes “embracing // our own grief, our lives.” Very cool.)
Gay Criticism
The Quilt brough back memories of one friend in particular, my friend Joey. We grew up together in Southern California and at 28 Joey died from complications of AIDs. Joes was a loving talented singer. Listening to him was like listening to an angel in a choir. He was so talented and warm and loving. His choices were different than mine, but we were still friends. When he died, the world lost a wonderful human being and this is what I feel Liu is trying to tell the world with this poem. These are real people dying from a terrible disease. They deserve the dignity we would give any man who is breathing his last breath. The world is losing talented, courageous and loving human beings and their story is worth telling and listening to. They may be gone but they will always be remembered, "where their names are written" is in our hearts.
Monday, April 5, 2010
The Quilt
In class, we discussed how we are more apt to attach someone’s sexuality to their identity if they are outside of the “norm” of heterosexual society. We probably wouldn’t think to ask Liu how his sexuality affected his writing if he was a heterosexual man. I feel that we’re only interested in that aspect because it doesn’t fit our heterosexual, patriarchal society. After reading the Q & A, I was able to see that Liu, especially in The Quilt, writes about his experiences just like any other writer would. His homosexuality influences his experiences just like race, religion, gender, etc. would influence anyone else’s writing. While reading Liu’s poems, I was able to see how much heterocentrism influences my interpretations. I felt that Liu’s poems stand in direct defiance of this assumption, showing that there isn’t a “universal norm by which everyone’s experience can be understood” (Tyson 320-21). Whether we think homosexuality is moral or not, there is no denying that Liu’s sexuality influences his poetry.
In The Quilt, Liu shows us that everyone experiences “life and death together” no matter what their sexuality: “The men who die and die in each other’s arms, leaving us their names”, “Each day the quilt spreads out more rapidly, covering the earth’s four corners”, “Who can sleep tonight when beds are soaked with sweat, when bodies are being sponged away”, “consider death without judgement”. My first reading of the poem was difficult because I am definitely influenced by the heterosexual “norm” of society. A reread of the poem, aided by the extra information provided below, helped me to understand this poem better through Liu’s view. I liked how he separated the words in line 5 and 6. The first line, “the men who die” seems to be a separate thought, emphasizing that the individuals dying aren’t just gay men but they are men, human beings. Their sexuality should not deem whether their suffering warrants sympathy and sorrow. They at least deserve a “death without judgement”. Lines 12-15 again emphasize that AIDS is afflicting people worldwide, not just homosexual individuals. The ending was confusing for me but I felt that he was saying that they will go on “loving, embracing” whether they are accepted by the heterosexual community or not.
The Wingless Goddess
Friday, April 2, 2010
Prompts for Timothy Liu
At this point in the semester, I feel like I can ease back on giving you really specific prompts. You have clearly demonstrated your abilities to apply theory in appropriate and exciting ways (even though some of you are not as confident about your abilities as you should be).
For Tuesday, then, I would like for you to carefully read the poetry by Timothy Liu. When I say carefully read the poetry, I mean that you should read the poems several times and give yourselves time to think about them. Annotate them and work your way into the symbolism, metaphor, and sound. Look at the way Liu shapes his lines and arranges words together. Pay attention to the nuances of his rhythms. Don't just read the poems ten minutes before class. Once you are familiar with the poems, write a thoughtful response that incorporates ideas and terminology from LGBT theory. That is as specific as I would like to make this prompt. However, let me give you some things to think about as you read these poems:
1. Liu has explored the AIDS epidemic in America in more detail than most poets. Much of his work, including "The Quilt" rises out of his experience as a volunteer working with AIDS patients. While we of course know that AIDS is not a "gay" disease, Liu's own sexuality clearly informs many of his poems about AIDS and those who have the disease.
2. "Eros Apteros" means "wingless love" or "love without wings." Many classical statues and shrines have missing/broken body parts, and Liu clearly uses this imagery to inform his poem.
3. Here is an excerpt from a Q and A that will give you some insight into Liu's background:
Q: Let’s start with the basics--where and when you were born, where you studied, your greatest poetic influences, work, degrees, favorite teachers, how you came to be a poet, and if any of this background really sticks to your writing.
A: I was born in San Jose, California in 1965 and educated at UCLA, Brigham Young University (B.A. in English) the University of Houston (M.A. in English) and the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. In addition to California, Utah, Texas, and Massachusetts, I lived in Hong Kong for two years as a Mormon missionary and four years in Iowa as an Assistant Professor at Cornell College. I currently reside in Hoboken and teach at William Paterson University in Wayne, NJ. Place always affects my imagination, so these various locales do also pressurize my work. Favorite poets as an undergraduate included Louise Gluck, Linda Gregg, and Jean Valentine. Recent favorites include Gustaf Sobin and Charles Wright. Three mentors in my first decade of writing were crucial to my sense of self as a writer: a Welsh poet named Leslie Norris, the poet Richard Howard, and the writer/editor Gordon Lish. Without their eyes and constant attention, who knows where I would have ended up? On being a poet: the commitment was gradual, like religion or playing a musical instrument. First half an hour a day, and then, years later, five to six hours a day of reading and writing. If not poetry, then surely something else would have come along to equally demand my energies.
Q: Martin Espada has said his subject, identity, and audience exist in concentric circles: Puerto Ricans, Latinos, people of color, the Left, the working class, and anyone who will listen. Mary Oliver, in A Poetry Handbook, suggests poems be written for some stranger in a distant country hundreds of years from now. Who and where is the audience for which you write as an Asian, as a Mormon, as a gay man?
A: I would start with readers of contemporary poetry. There are so many great books written in prose about the various identities that I occupy, so to me, that is not the point. The point is poetry, the experience of reading it and writing it. My Asianness, my Mormon roots, my homosexuality, are but a part of my being and therefore but a part of my poetry. Therefore, in addition to those identities, there are countless others. None of the poets I have previously mentioned (Gluck, Gregg, Sobin, Valentine, Wright) share with me the identities that you mention. Now what are we to make of that?
Q: How has the work of other gay writers affected your own work?
A: The work of other gay writers has helped to make my own work possible. My debt to Allen Ginsberg, Adrienne Rich, and scores of others is immense. I am currently editing an anthology of gay American poetry for Talisman House, an innovative press that makes its home in Jersey City. I plan to represent work by over forty poets who have been publishing over the past fifty years. While previous anthologies have been loyal to representing “gay experience,” my anthology seeks to complicate the relationship between one’s sexuality and one’s textuality. Collecting poems that span the gamut from traditional to radical forms, I hope the need to label a poem or poet as gay is brought into question.
Thanks. I am looking forward to reading your responses and talking about them. Please do justice to the poetry and to the theory.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Past, Present, and Future
Are we the same?
This makes me wonder if I should be sad about the times we live in or think we are just being to over paranoid. Our parents and grandparents didn't have all these things and they turned out ok. Is it the times we live in? Are we living in a much more dangerous time than the times before us?
I personally think its a little of both. We do live in a time when things have happened that have helped to make us more paranoid or cautious about things. I do however think we are in many ways very similar to the people in the story. We get so caught up in being safe and avoiding the "dangers" in life, we forget to live and enjoy the good things.
Trauma Plate
The desolate parking lot by their store and the unsuccessful businesses around them made me think of the recession and all the businesses that have had to close and shut down. Even though it was written before the huge mess of the economy took place, it still might apply.
Trauma Plate
Johnson also draws from a scene in many communities, especially rural communities like ours, of small chains giving way to large big box stores, how that changes the face of the landscape and the community, and the sense of loss and abandonment that creates. In my own home town of Kaysville, One can get that same sense of Post Apocalyptic sadness when seeing the empty windows of shops in the older parts of town. And with familiar names like Kmart and Godfathers pizza, he brings the setting right next door.
Living with Fear
title
Jane is the easiest to pick out in this regard, her narrative full of only regret. Her jealousy of her daughter and contempt for her husband are only the beginning. When she wanders into the Armour Emporium, obviously not the first time, she is committing a betrayal to her family and the bond they share. While not cheating sexually on her husband, she commits an emotional infidelity that is equally as adherent. It's clear by the language she uses when talking about her husband (intercourse is "fine with her") that she's going through the motions while avoiding the break which might bring her happiness or fully participating in the family. Even her daughter believes she "checked out."
Concerning Ruthie, she feels little or no connection to her parents at all. Since twelve, she's been hanging out in an abandoned Kmart doing basically whatever she felt. As the situation worsens, she only plans for escape. This disinterest isn't so harmful, as she never engaged enough to disengaged.
Bill may be the most pitiful, dutifully, in every permutation of the story, trying to construct the emotional bonds necessary to build an working family. He also the only one to think protectively about others, worrying about his daughter and her protection, or trying to cheer up his wife. But through his effort, he is the one the story mocks, the cuckold and the dreamer. All he does is futile against the future, the closing of his shop, the wife who will drift, the daughter who will leave for California. He even seems to know his actions are futile and ridiculous, but why does he do them? Some precieved obligation? Macho determinism? nothing else to do? When there is nothing to fight for, why fight?
Monday, March 29, 2010
To Truly Live
In this story, you see Jane's change from supportive and believing in her husband, along with what he stands for, into a lonely, dazed, stuck-in-time lady who is clinging to her known and trusted repetition. "Wandering, she strolls along the grit-worn sidewalk, stares at stars through holes in the Kmart awning. This way it all looks black up there, the occasional star the rarity" (pg 88). A picture of what her life has become, Jane wonders when a 'star occasion' will happen to her. When will life stop revolving around fear of the unknown?
When she finds her daughter flirting with Hector, fear is absent in her reaction. "This is a careless spirit Jane Has forgotten. As she sees them whisper, she remembers a time before Bill, and tries to read her daughter's lips" (pg 89). I would challenge to say that 'careless' is really the actual living of life and risk and possibilities. She probably was that girl who could do anything and was afraid of nothing. But then she met Bill, who most likely convinced her of the terrifying state of the world and led to a boxing-up of adventure and true hope of what could be. Instead, she became a woman who feared until fear let her down for the uneventful present could not be as happy or calming as her past. She is downright depressed and needs something or someone to yank her out of this nightmare of boredom.
Ruth, on the other hand, is ahead of her mother. She is pondering the what-ifs and asking hard questions. Maybe a bit slow-moving, but definitely more of a fire about her. I see the following two lines to be a description of her own life = "Stupidly waiting under the Styrofoam-coat hanger model of the solar system you reach up and set it in motion. But the hand-colored planets swing too smoothly it seems to you, too safely Halverson would say, and plucking Pluto from the mix sets the model wildly spinning" (p 95).
When it all comes down to it, Jane and Ruth's want to truly LIVE life is in fact their need and desire for real relationships full of vulnerable love and open hearts. Ultimately they (we; all Americans; all human beings) desire relationships that are more than just habits and sex, but that knowing the honest hopes and dreams of another - and opening up to them about yours - can be the fulfilling adventure that brightens and livens one's life.
Trauma Plate
I am most definitely not a New Historicist but I felt that Jane’s character could be seen as a comment on the current narratives about the American Dream. In my opinion, the American Dream is seen with an air of cynicism today. There isn’t really much hope in the American Dream. I think this can be reflected in the story by Bill and Jane’s failing mom-and-pop bulletproof vest rental shop—surrounded by a “closed-down Double Drive In”, a long-gone Kmart, and a bankrupt pizza place (79). There is no hope for the “little people” in the shadow of the 24-hour Body Armor Emporium. Success and hope is reserved for the rich and the powerful.
I also think that Jane’s character reinforces this cynical outlook on hope. She spends much of the story dwelling in the worn-down memories of her youth. She and Bill spend their evenings cruising around the town where they grew up. At one point in the novel, Jailhouse Rock plays behind her, reminding her of their “liberal-arts dreams, their own let’s put on a barn dance notion of being their own bosses” (86-7). She thinks, “This is the place we are at, around the corner from the drive-in theater where she and Bill spent their youth, a place she won’t even look at because these days, even worse than hope, nostalgia is her enemy” (87). She is surrounded by reminders of the dreams of her youth, dreams that will never come true because they have reached “a moment near the end of things” (86). I think this is why she dwells so much on the past. It was a time of hope and of happiness, a time when her dreams—the American Dream—was still possible.
When Jane sees Ruth with a boy, her reaction is completely different from Bill’s reaction. She seems jealous of her daughter because she is living in that time of hope and possibility, the time that Jane can’t seem to escape nor grasp. She watches her daughter laugh and drink and dance. “This is a careless spirit Jane has forgotten…I want my Monte Carlo back, Jane thinks” (89-90). Her car stands as an example of her inability to let go of the past, too. Whenever she would ride in it with Bill, she would swivel the chair backwards “to see it all disappear behind her” (90). She has “come to be on intimate terms with her blind spot,” constantly looking behind her to see the dreams of her youth (86). One final example can be her multiple rendezvous to the Emporium. “She feels safe in the arms of the enemy…For a moment, there are no blind spots and she is at ease” (90). The Emporium is the ultimate symbol in the novel of power, success and progression. No matter how she clings to the dreams of the past, they will not come true. The Emporium fills her with the hope she has lost since her youth and she no longer has to look to her “blind spots” to see some kind of hope in life. I feel that her actions throughout the story only solidify the cynical narrative of the American Dream. Success, happiness and security that inhabit the American Dream is not possible for little mom-and-pop stores. These things are only possible if you become a customer of the powerful and the wealthy.
Parenting never changes
The other is a bit more obvious in that she is talking to a member of the opposite sex and the text makes it clear that the pizza boy is physically attracted to her. The same comment about “where’s your protection” holds true, this time referencing parents who talk to their children about sexual protection. It is easy to see why a parent would get upset over this. They try to teach their children and hope they listen, but they find themselves constantly reminding them of their guidance. So in this world that Adam Johnson has crafted, we see that the circumstances are different, but all in all human nature remains the same.
Friday, March 26, 2010
Prompts for New Historicism and "Trauma Plate"
1. What does the reception of Johnson's work suggest about the circulation of power and ideologies in our present century? What issues are raised in the text that both shape, and are shaped by, that circulation and exchange? Please use specific examples from the reviews.
2. In what ways do the characterizations of Ruth, Jane, and Bill reproduce, comment on, or question current narratives about national security, adolescence, relationships, sexuality, the American Dream, parenting, or iconography? (or any other narrative you see shaping/being shaped by the text).
3. How has "Trauma Plate" been shaped by the 21st-century American culture in which it was written? In answering this question, I would expect you to pull in cultural examples, i.e. socio-political, scientific, and economic events of our time (or examples from pop culture, many of which are referenced in "Trial of the Century"). In other words, use extra-textual examples, part of a thick description, as well as textual ones.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Deconstruction of The Things They Carried
On the contrary, however, perhaps the narrator focuses on the seemingly smaller aspects in a logical attempt to preserve not only his, but the lives of the men around him for which he is responsible. Perhaps, instead of going over details as a way of distraction, the narrator is demonstrating the troop's protection method, a constant review of a mental inventory list, if you will. As stated in the text, "the carried all they could bear, and then some, including a silent awe for the terrible power of the things they carried." From this, it's possible to derive a sense of caution, as well, from the men, as they realize and remind themselves of what they are capable of, what their environment is capable of. Also, in another fortification of their defensive mental walls, the narrator states that their "imagination was a killer." If they allowed themselves to focus on the big picture, one that revolves around dying, they'd surely kill themselves before the enemy had a chance to do so.
Identities
From a deconstructive aspect I think that it is important to remember that our identities are never concrete--they are always evolving. Within the text it is evident to see that these soldier's feelings, attitudes, emotions, baggage,--tangible and intangible--are always changing and effecting them in different personal ways. As never being a concrete "whole" person, and having an ever changing identity, this will effect the way different people deal with circumstances. For example, when Ted Lavender is shot Kiowa keeps on talking about it--expressing the only way he can comprehend his grief--with unbelieving and repetitive memories being verbally expressed. The others around him feel and grieve differently, thus, telling him to "shut-up" or digging a hole and weeping (even if weeping for more than one thing). Our experiences, influences, and circumstances all play a part in the altering of our ever changing identities--or lack of.
Deconstruction
The binary opposite or deconstruction of this presentation would have to be expressed with the emotional state that is presented to the soldier. O’brien presents this connection with this text; “To carry something was to hump it, as when Lieutenant Jimmy Cross humped his love for Martha up the hills and through the swamps (626) .” This text has a connection with the sexual prowess of Lieutenant Jimmy Cross and his wife with carrying a back pack up the hill. The things they carry are also significant when dealing with the emotional tragedies that had to of occurred in this country. Death was very imminent, and there was surely a feeling of insecurity being thrown into a situation that many did not agree with.
You're Wrong and Right, and I Am, Too
Although “The Things They Carried” seems to contradict itself in the ways some of you have noted, I think those contradictions are intentional and integral (my brain is too weary to elaborate). However, I am probably misunderstanding the story and the ideas you have shared; I question my interpretations because I’m filtering everything through fatigue. But even if I were comprehending what the posts and comments below are saying, I would be surprised if they fully express how their authors read the story.
And isn’t that a problem deconstruction says all writing has? Even when the writing is refined (and blog entries rarely are; at least mine aren’t), it’s just an attempt to organize thoughts and feelings that are changing as and because they are put into words. And regardless of how well a given piece captures its author’s intent, its readers will assign their own meaning to it. Which makes reading frustrating and exciting, and writing frightening.
"The Things They Carried"
A contradiction or deconstruction of this theme would be that, through most of this story, Lieutenant Cross has Martha on his mind and little else. He puts his emotional needs above not only his safety, but the safety of those around him, resulting in the death of a soldier. Actually, all of the soldiers contradict this theory. "They would often dicard things along the route of the march".. The things they threw away were rations or weapons, showing a disregard for the things that kept them alive so that they would have more strength the carry the emotional burdens.
The things they carried
Cross however, makes the choice to no longer be defined by his dreams and imaginations. In the end, I think it actually shows that we can break free of those definitions that are set by other people, ourselves and our environment.
THE THINGS THEY CARRIED
Deconstructionism might disagree with this and say that the real emphasis is on what the soldiers carry because they are at war. The real intent of this story is to point out what the men once carried, and what they now carry. Kiowa carried his New Testament. This tells us the man he used to be, and what he used to carry. He used to be a sensitive man who lived according to the word of the Bible, and carried a love for God and his children. The war has lead him to carry a vulgar mouth and an ill sense of humor which displays his insensitive thoughts toward death and man; all he carries now is the shell of what used to be his New Testament. This is one example of what the war leads men to carry. Lieutenant Cross is in the process of becoming a product of the war. What he once carried, pictures, letters, and memories of Martha, are slowing dissolving and getting swallowed up by the war. What he is starting to carry is a regret for the many thoughts he's had about Martha.
JImmy
One may argue that the fantasies are actually making him deranged. He has been so distracted with Martha that he has not been able to focus on the troops and what really is important. The emotional baggage he carries because his relationship with Martha will never progress is killing his troops. Through the text, Cross, has been able to put the war behind him by fantasizing about Martha. At the end, the text contradicts itself and switches role that the letters and pictures play. They used to be something that kept the Lieutenant going, but in the end they pulled him down. Without burning the letters and pictures he would not have been able to keep going and would go insane. Instead of focusing on something that was impossible to attain, he needs to focus on the war right in front of him.
Deconstructing "The Things They Carried"
As we analyze this story through Deconstruction Theory, we realize that another person reading this piece of literature from a different background of understanding may not recognize those intangibles. Through Deconstruction Theory, we begin to see literature from other angles. Every community has their beliefs and systems of language that shape the way they see the world. If a child were to read this piece of literature, they might picture in their minds actual ghosts sitting on the backs of the soldiers working on weighing them down, making their packs heavier. Without the experiences of life behind them, they may not understand that this is a metaphor to help the reader recognize the soldier's fears. Just as a child might not see the same meaning in this language structure, a person from another culture with different language structure might have a hard time coming up with the same interpretation of the text. Deconstruction Theory teaches us that there are many different perspectives to the same texts and interpretation depends on a person's logocentrism.
Monday, March 22, 2010
They story is meant to help us see how hard those emotional and physical burdens are on the soldiers. However it seems to contradict itself at the end. "It was very sad, he thought. The things men carried inside. The things men did or felt that they had to do. Instead he went back to his maps. He was now determined to do his duties firmly and without negligence." This exerpt is towards the end of the book when Leutenant Jimmy Cross burned Martha's letters and pictures. He overcame those emotional burdens and focused on his duties. It seemed to me the story contradicted itself at the end because it infered that soldiers could eliminate those emotional burdens. It says that they were doing things that they thought they had to do, but those things were not necessarily what they really had to do.
The Things They Carried
One of the themes I got from Tim O’Brien’s The Things They Carried is that love and attachment is just a distraction and the only way to be productive and stay focused is to become numb. Several times throughout the story, Lieutenant Jimmy Cross gets distracted by his feelings for Martha. He spends much of his time “pretending”, “[imagining] romantic camping trips” and carrying her pebble in his mouth: “…he carried the pebble in his mouth, turning it with his tongue, tasting sea salt and moisture. His mind wandered. He had difficulty keeping his attention on the war. On occasion he would yell at his men to spread out the column, to keep their eyes open, but then he would slip away into daydreams, just pretending…” (628). Because he is distracted by his feelings for Martha, Cross blames himself for Lavender’s death: “He felt shame. He hated himself. He had loved Martha more than his men, and as a consequence Lavender was now dead, and this was something he would have to carry like a stone in his stomach for the rest of the war” (632). He burns her letters and photographs and plans to dispose of the pebble. He then decides that he will be more productive because “his obligation was not to be loved but to lead. He would dispense with love; it was not now a factor” (636). He spends a paragraph explaining how he isn’t going to be distracted anymore but he’s going to take charge and his men are going to “police up their act…keep it together, and maintain it neatly and in good working order” (636). Their purpose in Vietnam only begins to be shaped when he has destroyed his emotional attachment to another reality: “Heretofore, when he thought about Martha, it would be only to think that she belonged elsewhere. He would shut down the daydreams. This was not Mount Sebastian, it was another world, where there were no pretty poems or midterm exams, a place where men died because of carelessness and gross stupidity” (636).
This interpretation can be deconstructed by the text itself. Cross’ men are already numb throughout most of the story. O’Brien spends an entire paragraph discussing the futility of their day-to-day activities under the leadership of the love struck Cross: “The moved like mules. By daylight they took sniper fire, at night they were mortared, but it was not battle, it was just the endless march, village to village, without purpose, nothing won or lost. They marched for the sake of the march. They plodded along slowly, dumbly, leaning forward against the heat, unthinking…no volition, no will…They searched the villages without knowing what to look for, not caring, kicking over jars of rice, frisking children and old men, blowing tunnels, sometimes setting fires and sometimes not, then forming up and moving on to the next village, then other villages, where it would always be the same” (631). They also work extremely hard to block all emotions: “They were afraid of dying but they were even more afraid to show it. They found jokes to tell. They used a hard vocabulary to contain the terrible softness. Greased they’d say. Offed, lit up, zapped while zipping. It wasn’t cruelty, just stage presence. They were actors. When someone died, it wasn’t quite dying, because in a curious way it seemed scripted…and because they called it by other names, as if to encyst and destroy the reality of death itself” (634). They have completely blocked love and emotional attachments and yet they are still not productive. Lavender is a perfect example of this: “They told stories about Ted Lavender’s supply of tranquilizers, how the poor guy didn’t feel a thing, how incredibly tranquil he was” (634). He is symbolic of being numb to all feeling and yet he is killed during the war. Cross also stands as an opposition to this interpretation. Even after burning the letters and photos, he is haunted by the memory of Martha: “He realized it was only a gesture. Stupid, he thought…Besides, the letters were in his head. And even now, without photographs, Lieutenant Cross could see Martha playing volley ball in her white gym shorts and yellow T-shirt. He could see her moving in the rain…He hated her. Yes, he did. He hated her. Love, too, but it was a hard, hating kind of love” (635-6). He is still distracted by her whether his feelings towards her are positive or negative.
Friday, March 19, 2010
Prompts for Deconstruction and "The Things They Carried"
One of the most important things deconstruction can do is remind us to be skeptical of "accepted" or "acceptable" interpretations of literature. Most texts have been analyzed and discussed to the point that there are a few generally accepted, or canonized, interpretations (these are the kinds of standard interpretations you can find on websites like Wikipedia and Sparknotes). Deconstruction does not assert that these are necessarily bad, or inaccurate, interpretations; rather, it reminds us that they, like all interpretations, are ultimately unreliable and have only been given prominence, or privilege, by the ideology of the culture that produced them.
As a literary critic, you will always have ideas about what a text means and the truths it contains; indeed, this is why most of us read literature in the first place - to discover some truth about ourselves or about the world. The value of deconstruction, however, is that it shines a light on the circumstances that lead us to find truth in a text and teaches us what ideology is shaping our truth-seeking and truth-making. It tells us much more about ourselves and our culture than about the text we are reading. Some students do not like deconstruction because they feel as though it invalidates their responses, and I suppose it does in a way, but I prefer to think of it as a tool to understanding our responses. Knowing that what I see in a text is in fact created by me--by the play of signifiers that are uniquely mine, by differance, and by the ideologies I favor--does not make me value them less; in fact, it helps me understand them more. Socrates said that "the unexamined life is not worth living," and for me, deconstruction asserts that the unexamined interpretation of text is not worth possessing or believing in.
I would like your response to "The Things They Carried" to be two paragraphs long. The first paragraph should be a close reading and interpretation of the story. Look for what you think is its main theme, and use supporting details from the text to illustrate that theme. You will probably find many themes in the story, and you can discuss these, but try to distill these into a single interpretation, the one you feel most comfortable with. Your interpretation will be rather New Critical in this way.
Your second paragraph will be a deconstruction of this interpretation, or rather, an explanation of how "The Things They Carried" itself deconstructs this interpretation; you will demonstrate this by finding textual examples that do not agree with, or live up to, the interpretation that seems to be favored. As part of this analysis, you might look at the binary opposites that exist in the text and decide which are favored, or given privilege, but then show how other parts of the text do not favor those same opposites. If your first paragraph is a decision about what O'Brien is doing in "The Things They Carried," then your second paragraph is a discussion about how the text undermines what he is doing and ultimately proves that the meaning of the story is ultimately undecidable. You might also discuss how this process of deconstruction helps you understand the ideology that helped to create the text.
Have fun with this! Enjoy your spring break, and I will see you on Tuesday.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Birdland = Disjunctive Structure
The Blond traveling from New Hampshire to Elbow is another example of the Disjunctive structure, and she even departs at the end of the story, only to return once again. She travels as she follows the parrots around Elbow.
The football season, always arriving each year with renewed hopes of conquest and departing at the end of the season fits this structure as well. As you can see, this entire story is structured in this fashion, and it makes it easy for the author to keep the story rolling. I sure hope that I understand this structure correctly. It would seem that the Disjunctive would be the no brainer option.
The Mythos of Spring in “Birdland”
Birdland
I felt that there was some kind of organizing structure that had to do with looking to the past to define the future. Several of the characters seem to follow this structure. Mayor Dillard and Lookout Mountain Coley look to their past to maintain their friendship. Lookout “will not run against his friend…Too much has passed between them” (19). Mayor Dillard continues to stake Dillard Does It Better signs all over the little town each election term. Driven by his superstitions, “he visits each of his constituents in person, bribes us with hard cider and the promise of a brighter future here in Elbow” despite the fact that he runs unopposed as he has for the last eleven terms. He simply continues to do what he has always done.
Similarly, much of the town’s future is based on the past of its football team. The entire town comes together to watch every football game at Dillard’s Country Store. They get very worked up over it. They live in the glory days of the “great Bear Bryant” and “Lookout’s punt return”. The narrator wishes he could “call all the broadcasters in New Jersey who have forgotten how great we used to be, how we won a dozen National Championships, how Alabama lost only six games in the first ten years of my life” (13). The story has more of a happy tone at the end, mirroring the hope the town has when their team starts winning again. The success of the football team defines the future of the town.
Archibald, the original bird-keeper, follows this structure as well. We find out that when he died, he “was deep in Alzheimer’s by the time of his death and was unable even to recognize his own children when they visited” (8). I find it interesting that because he no longer had a past, he couldn’t have a future.
The Blonde’s character is a little different but she still follows the basic structure. She wants to return to New Hampshire. She tells the narrator (Raymond) several times that she can’t stay in Elbow with him (“‘This is not my baby,’ she says. ‘This is not my life.’” (17)). Elbow is not her past so it cannot be her future. Eventually, Elbow does become a part of her past, especially once she becomes pregnant. Like the narrator said, “You can get used to anything, given time” (9). Now her past consists of both Elbow and New Hampshire and both influence her future: “We have reached an acceptable compromise: spring in Rhode Island, fall back here” (19).