So here we are at the end of another book. I enjoyed Their Eyes Were Watching God very much, which is possibly why I don't agree with Wright's criticism of the novel. I'm not exactly sure how I'm going to wright/format this post, so bear with me.
One of Wright's main criticisms of the novel was the lack of theme, causing the novel as a whole to not have any significance and just become a book for "a white audience whose chauvinistic tastes she knows how to satisfy." Huston's book is not a politically charged protest novel that outwardly addresses racial struggles (and I guess that's what Wright didn't like about it), but I don't think this means it lacks significance. This may not be correct, but I feel like Their Eyes Were Watching God not being specifically about race in a way made it be more about race. That was confusing so I will try to explain. I saw the book as a story for everyone. It's not meant for only one race, unlike Native Son. The content of Native Son seems to isolate it, which makes me think that Their Eyes Were Watching God is more effective when handling racial barriers because it promotes equality.
Something I like about Hurston's book is the subtlety of the themes (which we talked about in class today) that don't slap you in the face and force you to think in a certain way, but rather allow you to form your own ideas throughout Janie's story. To me, this is better than Wright's method of establishing a theme because throughout Their Eyes Were Watching God, I found myself just noticing things like gender and race.
Lastly, we talked about this in class as well, but I think Wright's is a bit hypocritical when saying Hurston promotes stereotypes. I don't think I will elaborate on this too much because it's something we already discussed, but I think that Native Son and the character of Bigger Thomas showcase negative stereotypes more so than Hurston.
Or maybe I'm just biased.
~~~
Wednesday, October 29, 2014
Tuesday, October 14, 2014
Pear Trees?
We talked in class today about how Janie's relationships and I thought I would try to organize a few of my thoughts. (they probably won't be organized)
Someone said today that Janie's experience with the pear tree translated into her thoughts about relationships, which I thought was interesting. I've thought about it a bit, and I see the relation. I think her grandmother pushing her into her first marriage definitely affected her as well, and these two things together caused her to have more...unconventional (?) thoughts about marriage and relationships and that kind of stuff.
I wonder what would have happened if Janie had stayed with Logan. She clearly wasn't happy with her marriage, but very shortly after she meets Joe, she leaves with him, and then quickly starts becoming unhappy with their marriage. Her ideals and hopes for love seem to blind her into leaving Logan and going with Joe. I feel bad for Logan because he wants Janie to love him but he basically embodies everything she isn't looking for, since the land and the mule don't appeal to her. I suppose if she had stayed with him, she just would have remained unhappy. At least going with Joe gave her a short lived sense of freedom? Also I think she's going against her grandmother's wishes for her, and I kind of understand her reasoning, but I'm still not sure how I feel about that.
Maybe her opinions about love are too romanticized, which is a burden? I don't know, but at this point I just want to meet Tea Cake.
~~~
Wednesday, October 8, 2014
Final/Initial Thoughts
Those 500 pages of Invisible Man went by faster than I expected. Probably because I kept telling myself I would write a post about the book, and now we've finished it. Oops.
I very much enjoyed the narrator's story and I think Ellison's writing style is very interesting. At times, I felt like there was too much symbolism, though I like how it all fit together and reinforced the theme of invisibility. Interpreting the lines became easier (kind of) and I got more used to trying to find a deeper meaning. I especially liked the first part of the book, I enjoyed reading the narrator's story and background, however the ending seemed to be a bit rushed. He's in a cab, and then Ras is on a horse trying to kill him, and while escaping finds himself in a hole. It was interesting seeing how all of the narrator's experiences led him to his 1,369 lightbulbs, but the ending wasn't quite what I expected. With this being said, I still very much enjoyed Invisible Man (I wish we knew what happened to the narrator after the book ended, or his name, but those are smaller thoughts).
I just finished reading the first three chapters of Their Eyes Were Watching God and it's pretty different from Ellison. I kind of like the vernacular dialogue that Hurston used, which I find a bit strange because I'm usually not a big fan. I'm pretty excited to read more of the book because I'm finding Janie's story very easy to read and intriguing (also the name Tea Cake is cool).
Maybe I'll like this book more than the other two. But then again, the book has only just started though, so maybe my opinions will change.
~~~
I just finished reading the first three chapters of Their Eyes Were Watching God and it's pretty different from Ellison. I kind of like the vernacular dialogue that Hurston used, which I find a bit strange because I'm usually not a big fan. I'm pretty excited to read more of the book because I'm finding Janie's story very easy to read and intriguing (also the name Tea Cake is cool).
Maybe I'll like this book more than the other two. But then again, the book has only just started though, so maybe my opinions will change.
~~~
Friday, September 26, 2014
Beverly Hills, Chicago
I had a difficult time picking a poem for my poetry reading because I'm very indecisive and liked so many of the ones I read, but I ultimately went with "Beverly Hills, Chicago" because I liked the vivid imagery (like what someone said in class, I really got the sense that I was in the car with them) and I thought that the tone/overall idea would work well for discussion. And it did so that's cool.
This poem isn't particularly ambiguous to me. Gwendolyn Brooks tells a story about a group of people driving by a rich neighborhood in a car. However, I think there's a lot going on that adds to the overall idea of the poem. Like Kavi said in class today, the way the poem is recited has an impact on how it's interpreted. I considered reading it more sarcastically because I'm quite a sarcastic person so it wouldn't have been all that difficult, but I chose to read it in a more subdued way because I took the second half of the poem as conveying more longing and slight jealousy rather than pure anger. The last stanza especially gives me a sense that the feelings of those in the car is more All the people in this neighborhood still have problems, their trash is trash, they're all still people, but at the same time, by the end of the poem, the mood changes in the car and there is the sense that something is not quite right. But, I definitely see how reading it slightly differently can completely change the meaning. This is something that I like about the poem. Despite being pretty straightforward (at least in my opinion), it can still be interpreted in so many ways, and I like this versatility.
The story itself is also something I found kind of interesting. I think all the emotions evoked just from driving by a nice neighborhood really emphasizes economic tension, though it's not quite as pronounced. This could relate back to the idea about the slightly jealous tone of the poem, but again, it depends on how the poem is actually read.
Overall, I just really like this poem. Brooks did a great job of giving a lot to think about and analyze but not making it so there are too many things to take in.
~~~
This poem isn't particularly ambiguous to me. Gwendolyn Brooks tells a story about a group of people driving by a rich neighborhood in a car. However, I think there's a lot going on that adds to the overall idea of the poem. Like Kavi said in class today, the way the poem is recited has an impact on how it's interpreted. I considered reading it more sarcastically because I'm quite a sarcastic person so it wouldn't have been all that difficult, but I chose to read it in a more subdued way because I took the second half of the poem as conveying more longing and slight jealousy rather than pure anger. The last stanza especially gives me a sense that the feelings of those in the car is more All the people in this neighborhood still have problems, their trash is trash, they're all still people, but at the same time, by the end of the poem, the mood changes in the car and there is the sense that something is not quite right. But, I definitely see how reading it slightly differently can completely change the meaning. This is something that I like about the poem. Despite being pretty straightforward (at least in my opinion), it can still be interpreted in so many ways, and I like this versatility.
The story itself is also something I found kind of interesting. I think all the emotions evoked just from driving by a nice neighborhood really emphasizes economic tension, though it's not quite as pronounced. This could relate back to the idea about the slightly jealous tone of the poem, but again, it depends on how the poem is actually read.
Overall, I just really like this poem. Brooks did a great job of giving a lot to think about and analyze but not making it so there are too many things to take in.
~~~
Friday, September 12, 2014
Dentures and Such
A lot happened in chapter 10. There was a lot of discussion in class. Here is a blog post. (more of an extended question I guess)
There was so much symbolism in chapter 10, from the paint to Kimbro to the union. I could write so much about just the paint scene and Kimbro, but I'll save that for later. It was a lot to take in, but I feel like the amount of symbolism corresponds to the development of the narrator as an individual. Especially with the Optic White paint, it seemed like the narrator was becoming more aware and all the details given made us more aware as well. It seemed like quite a dramatic change, from the breakfast scene earlier.
And then there's the dentures. Overall, I found the scene quite humorous and somewhat anticlimactic, but I still enjoyed reading it. However, it also raised some questions. In class, there were many comments about how the narrator fighting Brockway really showcased his development as a character. I don't doubt that we see changes in the narrator at this point (see previous paragraph for thoughts on that), but I can't help but wonder: if the narrator was still as submissive and innocent as in chapter 1, what would he have done? Would he have defended himself against Mr. Brockway if put in this situation at an earlier stage in his life? Or would he have just allowed Mr. Brockway to hurt him? The narrator believed that Mr. Brockway was stabbing him, so I have a hard time believing that he would have just stood there and allowed it to happen. Thoughts in the comments?
~~~
There was so much symbolism in chapter 10, from the paint to Kimbro to the union. I could write so much about just the paint scene and Kimbro, but I'll save that for later. It was a lot to take in, but I feel like the amount of symbolism corresponds to the development of the narrator as an individual. Especially with the Optic White paint, it seemed like the narrator was becoming more aware and all the details given made us more aware as well. It seemed like quite a dramatic change, from the breakfast scene earlier.
And then there's the dentures. Overall, I found the scene quite humorous and somewhat anticlimactic, but I still enjoyed reading it. However, it also raised some questions. In class, there were many comments about how the narrator fighting Brockway really showcased his development as a character. I don't doubt that we see changes in the narrator at this point (see previous paragraph for thoughts on that), but I can't help but wonder: if the narrator was still as submissive and innocent as in chapter 1, what would he have done? Would he have defended himself against Mr. Brockway if put in this situation at an earlier stage in his life? Or would he have just allowed Mr. Brockway to hurt him? The narrator believed that Mr. Brockway was stabbing him, so I have a hard time believing that he would have just stood there and allowed it to happen. Thoughts in the comments?
~~~
Wednesday, September 3, 2014
Invisibility
Time for another blog post? (If you can't tell, I haven't quite figured out how to start these posts yet. Maybe I'll get it eventually)
Today in class, someone said something in class that I would like to explore more. I can't remember who it was because I have terrible memory and also 9 am is very early, but it had to do with the blindness of the narrator, and kind of went something like this:
During chapter 1, the narrator had on a blindfold and was participating in this battle royal and not once questioning the morality of what was happening, and was blind in the sense that he both had on a blindfold and also in general was not seeing what was wrong with what was happening and blindly accepting the events that were occurring. (Sorry that wasn't as good of an explanation as I expected, but hopefully it kind of made sense) At the end of the chapter, when he received his scholarship, he had his blindfold off and saw what was happening, but then seemed to happily put on another blindfold and go to college.
This got me thinking. Is this blindness more because of ignorance or just following the words of his grandfather? I think throughout the book it's both, but in chapter 1 maybe more ignorance (especially because these battle royals weren't atypical) and more following his grandfather in chapter 2. I found that I was extremely frustrated with the narrator in chapter 1. Seriously, he didn't react at all to being thrown in a ring and made to beat up other people when he was supposed to be giving a speech. I understand that a battle royal was likely not a new thing that the narrator encountered, but I don't think he was so blind as to not even acknowledge this blatant racial divide.
In chapter 2, I wasn't quite as frustrated with him. The narrator was less blind (?) but it seemed to me that he wanted to be blind as a way to fulfill his grandfather's wishes. Was that paradoxical? I got the impression that he would rather be blind so he could please Mr. Norton and as a result in a way do what his grandfather wanted and please white people and fight oppression by being subservient. But then again, maybe being blind would be a way to forget his grandfather's last words that have haunted him for so long? I guess what I'm trying to figure out is if in these beginning chapters (before the sarcastic, light bulb hoarding "version" of the narrator from the prologue) blindness is necessarily a negative thing?
Just some thoughts.
~~~
Today in class, someone said something in class that I would like to explore more. I can't remember who it was because I have terrible memory and also 9 am is very early, but it had to do with the blindness of the narrator, and kind of went something like this:
During chapter 1, the narrator had on a blindfold and was participating in this battle royal and not once questioning the morality of what was happening, and was blind in the sense that he both had on a blindfold and also in general was not seeing what was wrong with what was happening and blindly accepting the events that were occurring. (Sorry that wasn't as good of an explanation as I expected, but hopefully it kind of made sense) At the end of the chapter, when he received his scholarship, he had his blindfold off and saw what was happening, but then seemed to happily put on another blindfold and go to college.
This got me thinking. Is this blindness more because of ignorance or just following the words of his grandfather? I think throughout the book it's both, but in chapter 1 maybe more ignorance (especially because these battle royals weren't atypical) and more following his grandfather in chapter 2. I found that I was extremely frustrated with the narrator in chapter 1. Seriously, he didn't react at all to being thrown in a ring and made to beat up other people when he was supposed to be giving a speech. I understand that a battle royal was likely not a new thing that the narrator encountered, but I don't think he was so blind as to not even acknowledge this blatant racial divide.
In chapter 2, I wasn't quite as frustrated with him. The narrator was less blind (?) but it seemed to me that he wanted to be blind as a way to fulfill his grandfather's wishes. Was that paradoxical? I got the impression that he would rather be blind so he could please Mr. Norton and as a result in a way do what his grandfather wanted and please white people and fight oppression by being subservient. But then again, maybe being blind would be a way to forget his grandfather's last words that have haunted him for so long? I guess what I'm trying to figure out is if in these beginning chapters (before the sarcastic, light bulb hoarding "version" of the narrator from the prologue) blindness is necessarily a negative thing?
Just some thoughts.
~~~
Wednesday, August 27, 2014
Final Thoughts on Native Son
Our class discussion on Native Son is coming to an end, and I have yet to blog about the book. Better late than never?
When I first began this post, I attempted to write about the entire book to make up for my lack of posting. I quickly realized that I just have too many things I want to say, and it would take forever if I tried to write about every aspect of Native Son. However, this book has left a lasting impression on me and I feel like I need to put at least some of my thoughts out there. I'm not entirely sure of where I'm going with this, but here we go.
Something that was mentioned a lot and that really stuck with me from class discussion is Richard Wright's characterization of Bigger Thomas as a product of his environment, and it's something that I've kept in my mind throughout the discussion of the book. I think Wright really tried to push this idea through the entire book, and it helped me to think about the character of Bigger and to decide if I feel sympathetic towards him.
Bigger grew up impoverished and confined, unable to do what he desires because of racial barriers. He wants more for himself but he can't have it. He has to watch his family struggle, and he really can't do much to ease their suffering. He likes to have control of his own life, but in many cases he can't have. This is the environment he came out of, that has shaped him, and for that, I feel sympathy for him.
It's not that I pity Bigger because of the rough life he has had, but more that I can see how this affects his reasoning and personality. His strong opposition to this way of life greatly contrasts with that of his family, who accepts this lifestyle more than he does. For his entire life, Bigger has been trapped. Not only is he physically confined, but he's also emotionally confined, as he can't express his ideas to those around him because they don't really get it like he does, causing him to often times be misunderstood. He is walking around in a world with social norms that aren't just, but have to be accepted, and it worries, maybe even frightens, him. He has to hide behind his tough exterior because it's the only way he knows how to deal with this oppression.
Knowing this about Bigger makes me sympathetic towards him. I wouldn't go so far as saying that this excuses his actions, but I think that Wright telling us things about Bigger that even Bigger doesn't know (or maybe knows and refuses to acknowledge), and this idea of being a product of his environment provides us with more reasoning for Bigger's actions and emotions.
~~~
When I first began this post, I attempted to write about the entire book to make up for my lack of posting. I quickly realized that I just have too many things I want to say, and it would take forever if I tried to write about every aspect of Native Son. However, this book has left a lasting impression on me and I feel like I need to put at least some of my thoughts out there. I'm not entirely sure of where I'm going with this, but here we go.
Something that was mentioned a lot and that really stuck with me from class discussion is Richard Wright's characterization of Bigger Thomas as a product of his environment, and it's something that I've kept in my mind throughout the discussion of the book. I think Wright really tried to push this idea through the entire book, and it helped me to think about the character of Bigger and to decide if I feel sympathetic towards him.
Bigger grew up impoverished and confined, unable to do what he desires because of racial barriers. He wants more for himself but he can't have it. He has to watch his family struggle, and he really can't do much to ease their suffering. He likes to have control of his own life, but in many cases he can't have. This is the environment he came out of, that has shaped him, and for that, I feel sympathy for him.
It's not that I pity Bigger because of the rough life he has had, but more that I can see how this affects his reasoning and personality. His strong opposition to this way of life greatly contrasts with that of his family, who accepts this lifestyle more than he does. For his entire life, Bigger has been trapped. Not only is he physically confined, but he's also emotionally confined, as he can't express his ideas to those around him because they don't really get it like he does, causing him to often times be misunderstood. He is walking around in a world with social norms that aren't just, but have to be accepted, and it worries, maybe even frightens, him. He has to hide behind his tough exterior because it's the only way he knows how to deal with this oppression.
Knowing this about Bigger makes me sympathetic towards him. I wouldn't go so far as saying that this excuses his actions, but I think that Wright telling us things about Bigger that even Bigger doesn't know (or maybe knows and refuses to acknowledge), and this idea of being a product of his environment provides us with more reasoning for Bigger's actions and emotions.
~~~
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)