This may be late, but it's gonna be great.
The story of George Washington and the Cherry Tree is one that will never be forgotten. If you're unaware, the story goes as follows: George was granted a brand new hatchet and was anxious to use it. When walking around, he stumbled upon his father's cherry tree. Even though George knew how much the tree meant to his father, he chopped it down. Later, when George's father asks him what happened to the tree, George responds, "I cannot tell a lie. I cut it!" This story carries the virtue of honesty, which is an ideal that America's beginning was based on. We're not a country based on rulers that earn power through inheritance, but rather through skill and honesty, which is a reason why we're a democracy. We can all benefit and learn from the story of George Washington and the Cherry Tree. And while America was founded on such a virtue, it seems to be one that we may have forgotten lately. Maybe this is a story that should be re-read to the world.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Revolutionary Road & Toni Morrison
"Don't you know? You're the most valuable and wonderful thing in the world. You're a man," says April to her husband Frank.
This idea of the greatness of man is a constant theme in Revolutionary Road. Frank is the dominant white male, which, in the book is seen as the only opinion that matters and everything about him is about being a man. However, his wife, April, in comparison is meek and only used to make him look manlier. April's role of the helpless female is similar to how African Americans are portrayed in books-- mere helpless slaves. Toni Morrison declares that, "America means white, and Africanist people struggle to make the term applicable to themselves..." This is similar to how America perceives males, and Africanist people are similar to a female's role in society, especially in the 1950s which is when Revolutionary Road takes place. In the 1950s, men were given all of the opportunities, similar to how today whites are given opportunities over African Americans.
Frank also declares this dominance of manhood when describing his inner thoughts: "The way for a man to ride was erect and out in the open, out in the loud iron passageway where the wind whipped his necktie, standing with his feet set wide apart on the shuddering...." He also proved this in the way he spoke about his wife: "And it seemed to him now that no single moment of his life had ever contained a better proof of manhood than that, if any proof were needed: holding that tamed submissive girl and saying, "Oh my lovely; oh my lovely," while she promised she would bear his child. Frank's perspective toward his wife described through Yates' novel is precisely how Morrison illustrates American literature looking down on African Americans. How Yates writes Frank's actions toward his wife is also similar to how Morrison describes "the need to portray the faithful slave" in literature. Frank must be seen as above his wife-- similar to the dominance of white over black.
Morrison concludes in "Romancing the Shadow," that "If we follow through on the self-reflexive nature of these encounters with Africanism, it falls clear: images of blackness can be evil and protective, rebellious and forgiving, fearful and desirable-- all of the self-contradictory features of the self. Whiteness, alone, is mute, meaningless, unfathomable..." This nature of writers stays true in Yates' novel, Revolutionary Road. Sure, male is seen as the power, but Frank's character, in the end, is meaningless, and has little to learn from. April's character however, conveys a number of emotions that are intense and true to the common "self." While the difference between man and woman is not as dominant today, especially compared to the contrast of African versus white, it's a contrast in literature that must be brought to attention. Revolutionary Road's portrayal of man versus woman was very similar to Morrison's portrayal of black versus white in her book, "Playing in the dark."
This idea of the greatness of man is a constant theme in Revolutionary Road. Frank is the dominant white male, which, in the book is seen as the only opinion that matters and everything about him is about being a man. However, his wife, April, in comparison is meek and only used to make him look manlier. April's role of the helpless female is similar to how African Americans are portrayed in books-- mere helpless slaves. Toni Morrison declares that, "America means white, and Africanist people struggle to make the term applicable to themselves..." This is similar to how America perceives males, and Africanist people are similar to a female's role in society, especially in the 1950s which is when Revolutionary Road takes place. In the 1950s, men were given all of the opportunities, similar to how today whites are given opportunities over African Americans.
Frank also declares this dominance of manhood when describing his inner thoughts: "The way for a man to ride was erect and out in the open, out in the loud iron passageway where the wind whipped his necktie, standing with his feet set wide apart on the shuddering...." He also proved this in the way he spoke about his wife: "And it seemed to him now that no single moment of his life had ever contained a better proof of manhood than that, if any proof were needed: holding that tamed submissive girl and saying, "Oh my lovely; oh my lovely," while she promised she would bear his child. Frank's perspective toward his wife described through Yates' novel is precisely how Morrison illustrates American literature looking down on African Americans. How Yates writes Frank's actions toward his wife is also similar to how Morrison describes "the need to portray the faithful slave" in literature. Frank must be seen as above his wife-- similar to the dominance of white over black.
Morrison concludes in "Romancing the Shadow," that "If we follow through on the self-reflexive nature of these encounters with Africanism, it falls clear: images of blackness can be evil and protective, rebellious and forgiving, fearful and desirable-- all of the self-contradictory features of the self. Whiteness, alone, is mute, meaningless, unfathomable..." This nature of writers stays true in Yates' novel, Revolutionary Road. Sure, male is seen as the power, but Frank's character, in the end, is meaningless, and has little to learn from. April's character however, conveys a number of emotions that are intense and true to the common "self." While the difference between man and woman is not as dominant today, especially compared to the contrast of African versus white, it's a contrast in literature that must be brought to attention. Revolutionary Road's portrayal of man versus woman was very similar to Morrison's portrayal of black versus white in her book, "Playing in the dark."
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
Criticism: Pankaj Mishra
Pankaj Mishra is a critic, but does not consider himself to be one. He instead declares that he "engages with the author’s worldview" and with the location of the author's history. History is a very large theme that he belives should be heavily in literary critics' minds. He has a similar view to Kavin when he declares that literature was the "primary means of clarifying a bewilderingly large universe of meaning and contexts." Whether it was philosophy or science, Mishra believed that we used literature to explain the world. Similar to Kavin, he also describes literature as being based on a conflict brought up by current events. But what I think Mishra aims to achieve in writing this essay is that we can learn from literature from everywhere and every part of the world, and we should be able to use literary criticism as a means to reveal the imagination and meaning behind the writing. In order for readers to take this away from criticism, Mishra believes that critics must stay close to the texture of social history, while also focusing on aesthetics.
I do agree that literature is a means of understanding the universe we live in from a million different perspectives. I think it's imporant that we read literature from different parts of the world because that it how we achieve an even broader and indepth understanding. If literary critics were to bring these elements into their critiques I think that it would certainly help readers take second looks at the books they're reading and take their reading to another level of understanding. I do, however, somewhat disagree with his statement that the majority of modern literature is based on a social conflict. It's true that we can trace the roots of many books to a social problem, especially most of the books written in Russia during the Cold War (Animal Farm?). But it seems that in literature today, a new level of imagination is being achieved, and its sole purpose is to not represent a conflict in history.
This is extremely important because we can all learn to look into literature as a way to understand the world we live in, and Mishra and Kavin's essay especially help us understand this. Modern literature should represent not simple critiques of the writing but instead focus on the larger theme of the writing and what we can take away from it. I've never read one of Mishra's reviews, but through this essay I imagine that they reveal a complex understanding.
I do agree that literature is a means of understanding the universe we live in from a million different perspectives. I think it's imporant that we read literature from different parts of the world because that it how we achieve an even broader and indepth understanding. If literary critics were to bring these elements into their critiques I think that it would certainly help readers take second looks at the books they're reading and take their reading to another level of understanding. I do, however, somewhat disagree with his statement that the majority of modern literature is based on a social conflict. It's true that we can trace the roots of many books to a social problem, especially most of the books written in Russia during the Cold War (Animal Farm?). But it seems that in literature today, a new level of imagination is being achieved, and its sole purpose is to not represent a conflict in history.
This is extremely important because we can all learn to look into literature as a way to understand the world we live in, and Mishra and Kavin's essay especially help us understand this. Modern literature should represent not simple critiques of the writing but instead focus on the larger theme of the writing and what we can take away from it. I've never read one of Mishra's reviews, but through this essay I imagine that they reveal a complex understanding.
Monday, January 3, 2011
Reflections on Gatsby
I can not get enough of Jordan Baker, and I can't necessarily put my finger on why. She's mysterious in what I perceive to be a unique and alluring way. From her first introduction-- "Jordan Baker came out of the house and stood at the head of the marble steps, leaning a little backward and looking with contemptuous interest down into the garden" (42) -- she casually drew me in. I immediately began asking myself questions about her. Why didn't she end her sentence when saying " I remembered you lived next door to--?" Is she interested in Nick? Is Nick interested in her? Why does she seem so confident? Why does she seem to be so different from everyone else, yet so included in the events and clearly pretty popular herself? But what is most intriguing about her is her dishonesty.
"The bored haughty face that she turned to the world concealed something-- most affectations conceal something eventually, even though they don't in the beginning-- and one day I found what it was." (58) This is describing the "incurable dishonesty" surroundingJordan
"The bored haughty face that she turned to the world concealed something-- most affectations conceal something eventually, even though they don't in the beginning-- and one day I found what it was." (58) This is describing the "incurable dishonesty" surrounding
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)