The style of this novel makes it difficult to read (there are few commas and punctuation in general, nor is the dialogue seperated from the text and there are no chapters or other break signifier) but enhances the novel at the same time. McCarthy writes in a very primitive style writing that, paired with the content of the text, gives the impression of hasty journal entries. The reader is placed into the desperation of the situation by the very rawness fo the writing style itself. The overall effect is creepy and truly sends the reader into the world of the novel. In a time where all hope seems lost who wants to spend time writing correctly?
Another effect of the writing style is to blend the sense of time, place and event into one general action. With no separation of chapters the readers feels as though he is trudging along the road along with the father and the son. Time holds no real place in this novel, the only importance is the events.
Another way that McCarthy emphasizes this is the lack of separation between text and conversation. The readers feels as though conversation with other human beings is almost impossible in this post apocalyptic environment. In fact the novel gives the reader a sense of desperation that intertwines with the growing insanity of the characters. One doesn't know if the characters are actually talking to another being or if they are talking to themselves.
When looking at the actual storyline of the novel, the most interesting element is the contrast between the father's lack of real faith and the son's innocent and almost destructive faith. The father, as the last remains of the pre-apocalyptic world, hopes to only save his son. He battles with his own death and the death of his ideals daily. While the father seems to be stubbornly hanging onto his dying ideals, the son has learned nothing but these ideals.
By being born into this dead world the son knows no other way of life. The son has taken what his father has taught him and has decided to truly beleive in it. Since he has nothing to compare his current situation to, he takes what his father falsely believes and applies it to his environment. In this time and place though helping others can very likely get you killed or worse.
This novel illustrates not just the death of old ideals, but really the death of the beleif in those ideals. The end of the novel illustrates that there is possibly still hope left for those that will beleive in it, while the father dies of his desperation.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Monday, November 24, 2008
week 13: Steve Daveport
Uncontainable Noise is a book of poetry that seems to span three relationships. Daveport's wording is powerful and moving; he uses strong words that are full of images and emotions. The reader feels as though they are living the poems themselves as they happen. Indeed the poetry seems less a narrative of these relationships so much as the actual and tangible relatioship, right there on the page infront of the reader.
Davenport's writting style is very alive. Not only does he use powerful words and strong imagery, but he also plays with the notion of literature itself. He makes up his own words to create a sound behind the poems. At times the reader feels as though he is actually standing there in the room with the lovers as they meet, quarrel, make love and part again.
Davenport's short story is quite the same thing as his poetry. In fact this story seems to be poetry as well. He uses a semi-stream-of-concious style to suck the reader in. Davenport also uses a third person point of view to make the reader feel as though they are the ones that lived this story, instead of Daveport. He has an omnipotent knowledge of the events so that, even as the reader believes that they are the ones being narrated about, makes it impossible to discount the narrator as uninvolved in the story.
The writing style of the novel throws the reader into the middle of the plot and then makes him swim out with very little assistance. In this way, the reader feels a constant sense of confusion that mirrors real life. At times the confusion lessens and then Davenport throws the reader back in again; just as though the reader was the one to actually live this story.
Through both his narratives and poetry one can see that Daveport is a skilled writer that enjoys playing with the common (mis)conceptions of literature. Equivalent to many writers of this time and age, literature has become a way of expressing oneself instead of simply entertaining or enlightening the reader. One can expect many more interesting developments on the "modern" idea of literature.
Davenport's writting style is very alive. Not only does he use powerful words and strong imagery, but he also plays with the notion of literature itself. He makes up his own words to create a sound behind the poems. At times the reader feels as though he is actually standing there in the room with the lovers as they meet, quarrel, make love and part again.
Davenport's short story is quite the same thing as his poetry. In fact this story seems to be poetry as well. He uses a semi-stream-of-concious style to suck the reader in. Davenport also uses a third person point of view to make the reader feel as though they are the ones that lived this story, instead of Daveport. He has an omnipotent knowledge of the events so that, even as the reader believes that they are the ones being narrated about, makes it impossible to discount the narrator as uninvolved in the story.
The writing style of the novel throws the reader into the middle of the plot and then makes him swim out with very little assistance. In this way, the reader feels a constant sense of confusion that mirrors real life. At times the confusion lessens and then Davenport throws the reader back in again; just as though the reader was the one to actually live this story.
Through both his narratives and poetry one can see that Daveport is a skilled writer that enjoys playing with the common (mis)conceptions of literature. Equivalent to many writers of this time and age, literature has become a way of expressing oneself instead of simply entertaining or enlightening the reader. One can expect many more interesting developments on the "modern" idea of literature.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Week 12: On Beauty
In this week's discussion I'd like to focus on the cultural background of the novel. One of the most interesting characteristics of this novel is the way it indirectly parallels Zadie Smith's own life and background. It has also entered a sense of humor in the "race wars" of current culture in America and, because Smith is from Britain, she has the ability to write from an outside perspective.
Smith was born in britain to an English father and a Jamaican mother, not exactly the same as her English born children with an African American mother, but the cultural resemblance is still largely there. This mixed cultural background has similar effects on both families. While Zadie Smith was given her humorous approach to race, the Belsley's have become liberal, unlike the Kipps family, and each are able to express themselves individually, also unlike the Kipps family. This is well demonstrated by Jerome's stint as an intern in the Kipps household.
Because Smith grew up in a large household, which invariably led to her more laid back thinking style, she understands how "crazy" life can get and she gives that quality to the Besleys. With each their own thoughts and dreams, the Besley household may seem at times like they don't get along--and indeed sometimes they don't--but when it counts they all stick together. As a contrast, the Kipps family seems to work well on the outside, but inside it seems as though it may fall apart at any second.
What Smith does with On Beauty is exemplify the differences between white and african-american cultures--exemplified by Howard's occasional incomprehension of his son Levi and vice versa--while making them humorous at the same time. What Smith does is point out the differences while making them seem normal by using a mixed culture family, of which Smith has plenty of experience.
By being an English novelist writing about a largely american family, Smith removes herself from the realm of "serious" writing and into the realm of humor. She is able to write accurately about this family from her own stint in America, which lends a sense of reality to the book. This family, while being humorous, wins the hearts of the readers with it's internal struggles and has, therefore, become a wonderful example of a family instead of a collection of races. Smith has done her job well.
Smith was born in britain to an English father and a Jamaican mother, not exactly the same as her English born children with an African American mother, but the cultural resemblance is still largely there. This mixed cultural background has similar effects on both families. While Zadie Smith was given her humorous approach to race, the Belsley's have become liberal, unlike the Kipps family, and each are able to express themselves individually, also unlike the Kipps family. This is well demonstrated by Jerome's stint as an intern in the Kipps household.
Because Smith grew up in a large household, which invariably led to her more laid back thinking style, she understands how "crazy" life can get and she gives that quality to the Besleys. With each their own thoughts and dreams, the Besley household may seem at times like they don't get along--and indeed sometimes they don't--but when it counts they all stick together. As a contrast, the Kipps family seems to work well on the outside, but inside it seems as though it may fall apart at any second.
What Smith does with On Beauty is exemplify the differences between white and african-american cultures--exemplified by Howard's occasional incomprehension of his son Levi and vice versa--while making them humorous at the same time. What Smith does is point out the differences while making them seem normal by using a mixed culture family, of which Smith has plenty of experience.
By being an English novelist writing about a largely american family, Smith removes herself from the realm of "serious" writing and into the realm of humor. She is able to write accurately about this family from her own stint in America, which lends a sense of reality to the book. This family, while being humorous, wins the hearts of the readers with it's internal struggles and has, therefore, become a wonderful example of a family instead of a collection of races. Smith has done her job well.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Week 11: On Beauty
Perhaps the most striking feature of Zadie Smith's novel On Beauty is it's parallel to Howard's End. There are quite a few differences, of course, but On Beauty seems to be a modern version of Howard's End.
The novel is more political in it's nuances; what I mean to say is that both families are quite distinctly liberal and conservative, rather than "feminin" and "masculin". And whereas before there was quite a lot of emphasis on the gender of the characters, in On Beauty the emphasis is put more on their personalities.
The number of characters have changed to reflex a more modern family and the characters, instead of being predominantly white, are predominantly black. This skews the entire original novel's plot from it's previous sexual baseline to a new political baseline. This underlines the shift in modern thinking away from gender and towards racism.
That is perhaps the most interesting part of this novel, in my opinion. The differences between Howard's End and On Beauty serve as a timeline. They define the populace's wants and needs as time progresses, and to me, that is the true genious of writing. The ability to acurately define a specific time and place for future readers is a singular gift.
The novel is more political in it's nuances; what I mean to say is that both families are quite distinctly liberal and conservative, rather than "feminin" and "masculin". And whereas before there was quite a lot of emphasis on the gender of the characters, in On Beauty the emphasis is put more on their personalities.
The number of characters have changed to reflex a more modern family and the characters, instead of being predominantly white, are predominantly black. This skews the entire original novel's plot from it's previous sexual baseline to a new political baseline. This underlines the shift in modern thinking away from gender and towards racism.
That is perhaps the most interesting part of this novel, in my opinion. The differences between Howard's End and On Beauty serve as a timeline. They define the populace's wants and needs as time progresses, and to me, that is the true genious of writing. The ability to acurately define a specific time and place for future readers is a singular gift.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Week 10: White Noise
Again, please excuse the tardiness. Things piled up and it took a while for me to catch up.
The main theme, or rather the entire "plot" of White Noise is death. While death is an accepted norm to life and is eternally present, this novel is fixated on it. The main character, Jack, not only fears his death, but also manages to make the reader feel dread in his everyday life as well. Throughout the novel Jack feels the white noise of consumer-driver life, which he defines as death, or, more specifically, the death of reality.
Modern life has taken on a false key in this novel. Jack's life is represented by his day to day actions which are seemingly ineffective and shallow. The beginning of the the novel has little to no plot, representing Jack's inability or refusal to cope with the reality of death. He hides inside the white noise of the supermarket or the television and only really feels silence in the presence of the dead. And while Jack yearns for an understanding of death to present itself while in the graveyard; free of white noise, he is incapable of finding it.
Jack hides behind his Hitler studies persona in order to lend strength to his life. He uses the German to lift himself up and when he ultimately abandons his German lessons the reader can perceive his movement closer to death, though he is still unable to recognize it. It's around this point in the novel that a plot begins to form. Death becomes more of a tangible reality than a foreign terror with the arrival of the black cloud of Nyodene D and climaxes with the drug Dylar.
While the plot (representing Jack's ever growing comprension of the pervasity of death) solidifies it seems that Jack's life falls apart. This juxtaposition between the reality of Jack's life and the reality of death symbolizes modern humannity's inability to cope with death. At the final climax where Jack shoots Willie, Jack has recognized that he himself has made a plan (to kill Willie) and has therefore accepted the presence of death in his life.
Though the ending of the novel seems to be a let down, the reality is that Jack can now, if not understand, at least comprehend the inevitability of his death. While life can still be heroic and meaningful, the sunsets are still mysterious and death is still looming in the future.
The main theme, or rather the entire "plot" of White Noise is death. While death is an accepted norm to life and is eternally present, this novel is fixated on it. The main character, Jack, not only fears his death, but also manages to make the reader feel dread in his everyday life as well. Throughout the novel Jack feels the white noise of consumer-driver life, which he defines as death, or, more specifically, the death of reality.
Modern life has taken on a false key in this novel. Jack's life is represented by his day to day actions which are seemingly ineffective and shallow. The beginning of the the novel has little to no plot, representing Jack's inability or refusal to cope with the reality of death. He hides inside the white noise of the supermarket or the television and only really feels silence in the presence of the dead. And while Jack yearns for an understanding of death to present itself while in the graveyard; free of white noise, he is incapable of finding it.
Jack hides behind his Hitler studies persona in order to lend strength to his life. He uses the German to lift himself up and when he ultimately abandons his German lessons the reader can perceive his movement closer to death, though he is still unable to recognize it. It's around this point in the novel that a plot begins to form. Death becomes more of a tangible reality than a foreign terror with the arrival of the black cloud of Nyodene D and climaxes with the drug Dylar.
While the plot (representing Jack's ever growing comprension of the pervasity of death) solidifies it seems that Jack's life falls apart. This juxtaposition between the reality of Jack's life and the reality of death symbolizes modern humannity's inability to cope with death. At the final climax where Jack shoots Willie, Jack has recognized that he himself has made a plan (to kill Willie) and has therefore accepted the presence of death in his life.
Though the ending of the novel seems to be a let down, the reality is that Jack can now, if not understand, at least comprehend the inevitability of his death. While life can still be heroic and meaningful, the sunsets are still mysterious and death is still looming in the future.
Week 9: The Handmaids Tale
I apologize about the lateness of this post, I wanted to take my time reading this book. I thought it was absolutely fascinating.
Perhaps the most striking aspect of this novel is not the language or composition--as so much contemporary literature is--but the content. I found this novel fascinating in so many different ways that I can't even begin to list here (I think I'll be changing my thesis soon). The impact is made in this book through the fine line of reality. This is one of those novels that makes you think, "What if this were true? Could it come true?". And the scary answer is, yes.
Modern society is so held up on the small details of life such as political correctness and the interpretation of laws. One can see the echo of this radical new society in life today, and that I find entirely too frightening. Just like any modern concept that becomes a revolution, or evolution into something new (which may not necessarily be better), this new society was born slowly into reality.
Margaret Atwood did a marvelous job when she wrote about human nature. She progresses through fear of the unknown just as one has seen it happen in history. Atwood has done such a concise job, in fact, that one can read this novel as a history book. To back all of her splendid writing up, Atwood even includes a futuristic event as the final chapter. This last chapter cements the events of the novel into reality by making the "Handmaid's Tale" a document of the past that has been unearthed by "modern" scientists.
This novel holds one of the scariest aspects of human nature, our ability to be persuaded and to follow. It has happened before, in the enslavement of the African peoples and in Hitler's regime. What makes the deconstruction of modern life so hard to believe? It's a natural reaction to focus on the "novelties" of the past when faced with the difficulties of the present. In this case, the "objectification" and independence of modern woman. The older generation will always reject the newer on the basis of impropriety. Change, even in the younger generations, is almost automatically rejected at first glance. One must really question change to accept it.
The problem is that most people don't really question change or even what they do on a day to day basis. Therefore it seems like child's play to insert new laws and restrictions onto a society that isn't really paying attention, or are too scared to really contemplate the consequences. Therefore, this novel can be seen as a warning to all humankind. One must truly think about the aspects of ones life to truly live in it. Otherwise you are just an outsider looking in.
Perhaps the most striking aspect of this novel is not the language or composition--as so much contemporary literature is--but the content. I found this novel fascinating in so many different ways that I can't even begin to list here (I think I'll be changing my thesis soon). The impact is made in this book through the fine line of reality. This is one of those novels that makes you think, "What if this were true? Could it come true?". And the scary answer is, yes.
Modern society is so held up on the small details of life such as political correctness and the interpretation of laws. One can see the echo of this radical new society in life today, and that I find entirely too frightening. Just like any modern concept that becomes a revolution, or evolution into something new (which may not necessarily be better), this new society was born slowly into reality.
Margaret Atwood did a marvelous job when she wrote about human nature. She progresses through fear of the unknown just as one has seen it happen in history. Atwood has done such a concise job, in fact, that one can read this novel as a history book. To back all of her splendid writing up, Atwood even includes a futuristic event as the final chapter. This last chapter cements the events of the novel into reality by making the "Handmaid's Tale" a document of the past that has been unearthed by "modern" scientists.
This novel holds one of the scariest aspects of human nature, our ability to be persuaded and to follow. It has happened before, in the enslavement of the African peoples and in Hitler's regime. What makes the deconstruction of modern life so hard to believe? It's a natural reaction to focus on the "novelties" of the past when faced with the difficulties of the present. In this case, the "objectification" and independence of modern woman. The older generation will always reject the newer on the basis of impropriety. Change, even in the younger generations, is almost automatically rejected at first glance. One must really question change to accept it.
The problem is that most people don't really question change or even what they do on a day to day basis. Therefore it seems like child's play to insert new laws and restrictions onto a society that isn't really paying attention, or are too scared to really contemplate the consequences. Therefore, this novel can be seen as a warning to all humankind. One must truly think about the aspects of ones life to truly live in it. Otherwise you are just an outsider looking in.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
week 7/ Lolita
There is strong motif of cruelty that runs through Lolita. Not only does Nabokov himself use cruelty in regard to his characters, but also manages to make his characters do cruel things themselves. While this may seem the same thing, and sometimes is in Lolita, Nabokov manages to separate this fine line. His characters cruel actions seem only to echo their pathetic and meaningless lives, made all the more potent by Nabokov's exemplar prose.
My first example comes from the almost comic relief of Claire Quilty's presence in this novel. His entire life seems to be based on the comic opposition, or emphasis, of Humbert Humbert's sexual deviancy. Quilty is depicted as a pedophile of undaunted means and rather than struggling with his illicit tendencies as Humbert does, he revels in them. Even his death is comical and surreal. Quilty seems to be present in this novel only to juxtapose Humbert character.
Nabokov tends to play with his characters. Not only is Quilty seen as a supporting comic character, but Humbert's entire plight--which is the basis of the book--is used as a playground for Nabokov's imagination. In several interviews he has stated that his characters don't take on a life and personality of their own, they are simple playthings for him to manipulate.
Humbert as a character is cruel not only to Lolita, but also his first wife Valeria, and his second wife Charlotte. Though his cruelty isn't seen as just that because the novel is written from his point of view, the facts are that Humbert was not a nice person. He struggled with his pedophelia, yes. He had a moral code that he tried to stick to, yes. But as a person, Humbert Humbert was not a nice person. Nabokov simply enhances this aspect of his personalty to turn Humbert into a manic and obsessive lover, to the point that Humbert ends up killing Quilty for the same crime that he, himself, has performed on Lolita.
Life, and the meaning of death, are ridiculed to the point of being almost meaningless in this novel. Annabel dies before they can really even consumate their relationship, Valeria ends up dying in a lab mishap, Charlotte gets run over after she becomes useless, Quilty gets shot out of revenge and Humbert himself dies meaninglessly. The only real tragedy in this entire book is the shattered life of Lolita, and thoguh her life has been forever marred by Quilty and Humbert, she manages to forgive them both.
Not only did Nabokov play with the morals of his characters, but he also humiliated them. Their most improtant morals, customs, beleifs and even their lives are used to tell this tragic tale.
My first example comes from the almost comic relief of Claire Quilty's presence in this novel. His entire life seems to be based on the comic opposition, or emphasis, of Humbert Humbert's sexual deviancy. Quilty is depicted as a pedophile of undaunted means and rather than struggling with his illicit tendencies as Humbert does, he revels in them. Even his death is comical and surreal. Quilty seems to be present in this novel only to juxtapose Humbert character.
Nabokov tends to play with his characters. Not only is Quilty seen as a supporting comic character, but Humbert's entire plight--which is the basis of the book--is used as a playground for Nabokov's imagination. In several interviews he has stated that his characters don't take on a life and personality of their own, they are simple playthings for him to manipulate.
Humbert as a character is cruel not only to Lolita, but also his first wife Valeria, and his second wife Charlotte. Though his cruelty isn't seen as just that because the novel is written from his point of view, the facts are that Humbert was not a nice person. He struggled with his pedophelia, yes. He had a moral code that he tried to stick to, yes. But as a person, Humbert Humbert was not a nice person. Nabokov simply enhances this aspect of his personalty to turn Humbert into a manic and obsessive lover, to the point that Humbert ends up killing Quilty for the same crime that he, himself, has performed on Lolita.
Life, and the meaning of death, are ridiculed to the point of being almost meaningless in this novel. Annabel dies before they can really even consumate their relationship, Valeria ends up dying in a lab mishap, Charlotte gets run over after she becomes useless, Quilty gets shot out of revenge and Humbert himself dies meaninglessly. The only real tragedy in this entire book is the shattered life of Lolita, and thoguh her life has been forever marred by Quilty and Humbert, she manages to forgive them both.
Not only did Nabokov play with the morals of his characters, but he also humiliated them. Their most improtant morals, customs, beleifs and even their lives are used to tell this tragic tale.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)