"The Things They Carried" - Tim O'Brien

This was a remarkable story. Anytime I read about war, it always makes me so grateful to live in America, shielded from any real contact with violence and pain. The soldiers that were in Vietnam were amazing men - to go through all the horrors they faced takes a lot of good, old-fashioned guts. But they did it, and many of them even lived through it.

This story gave a very different way of looking at the war, and the soldiers specifically. By considering the "things they carried," we can learn so much about each man as an individual, and also the more general impressions of what being a soldier is like.

As far as writing style, this is actually similar to Joyce's story - the way dialogue is dealt with, etc. But this is so much more interesting! The quick changes from serious action to a simple listing and describing of the weapons they carry is very effective. Those breaks between the story do not lose our attention, but actually capture it more. I find it all very well written.

Some favorite quotes:

"They were not love letters, but Lieutenant Cross was hoping, so he kept them folded in plastic at the bottom of his rucksack."

"He carried a strobe light, and the responsibility for the lives of his men."

"The typical load was 25 rounds. But Ted Lavendar, who was scared, carried 34 rounds. . . "

"They carried all they could bear, and then some, including a silent awe for the terrible power of the things they carried."

"Vaguely, he was aware of how quiet the day was, the sullen paddies, yet he could not bring himself to worry about matters of security. He was beyond that. He was just a kid at war, in love. he was twenty-four years old. He couldn't help it."

"They shared the weight of memory. They took up what the other could no longer bear. Often, they carried each other, the wounded or weak."

". . . and for all the ambiguities of Vietnam, all the mysteries and unknowns, there was at least the single abiding certainity that they would never be at a loss for things to carry."

"After a moment Norman Bowker sat up in the dark. What the hell, he said. You want to talk, talk. Tell it to me. Forget it. No, man, go on. One thing I hate, it's a silent Indian."

"There were numerous such poses. Some carried themselves with a sort of wistful resignation, others with pride or stiff soldierly discipline or good humor or macho zeal. They were afraid of dying but were even more afraid to show it."

"It was very sad, he thought. The things men carried inside. The things men did or felt they had to do."

"He might just shrug and say, Carry on, and then they would saddle up and form into a column and move out toward the villages west of Than Khe."

This final sentence is not only talking about the group of soldiers, and where they will go physically in the coming weeks. It also refers to Lt. Cross, and what he is going to have to do the rest of his life - tell himself to "Carry on" and continue to move away from Than Khe. This burden is one he will carry for the rest of his life.

"Araby" - James Joyce

First Impression - I didn't really care for this story. It was kind of dry, kind of boring, and kind of pointless. Of course, I read it late at night and was terribly sleep deprived. . . I normally don't enjoy short stories when I do that.
So, good student that I am, I just re-read the story and I still didn't like it much. The way Joyce does dialogue is reminiscient of Hemingway, in "A Clean, Well-Lighted Place" -- very choppy, and hard to follow. He doesn't use quotation marks, but indents the spoken words with a dash before them - not typical, and therefore hard to recognize at first. Also, much of the dialogue we don't actually "hear," and the narrator just tells us about it. It made all the characters (except perhaps the girl) seem rather blah and dry.
It's kind of a nice story, but like I said before, pointless. The boy wants to get a gift for his crush, but makes it to the bazaar too late. Either he does not have enough money, or simply can't bring himself to actually buy something, but he goes back home empty handed. It's not much of a plot. I honestly didn't enjoy this story in the least.

Class Thoughts IV

Nothing to report from Tuesday - Ms. Kolb was sick, and so we simply turned in our essays and had the afternoon off. I took the opportunity to catch up on my reading. Not as interesting as a class discussion, but nice to be able to finish homework without taking any unplanned time. :)

Paper One - First Draft

(This is not only a "first" draft, but also a very rough draft. :)

Opportunity

Nearly every person on this earth holds a prejudice against another type of person. Whether it is an obvious and cruel one, like racism or sexism, or simply a subconscious dislike of a certain group of people, these preconceived notions and beliefs effect everyone. While perhaps simply feeling uncomfortable around a certain type of person may not be wrong, every person who has a prejudice will some day come face-to-face with a situation that challenges that feeling. He will have to either overcome his discomfort and dislike, and in doing so grow to become a better person – or he will act upon his bias, becoming more deeply entrenched in his way of thinking, and most likely hurting the other person. In the short story “Cathedral” by Raymond Carver, the narrator is presented with one such opportunity, and undergoes the beginnings of a remarkable transformation for the better because of it.
The narrator begins the story by revealing his apparent dislike for blind people, particularly this visiting friend of his wife's. The first reason for this is readily seen, and even somewhat excusable – ignorance. He quickly admits that his idea of blind people comes primarily from the movies, and even goes so far as to describe the stereotype he has formed: “In the movies, the blind moved slowly and never laughed. Sometimes they were led by seeing-eye dogs” (Carver 56). This shows that he has never taken the time, or perhaps never had the opportunity, to personally know a blind person – a fact he confirms when he first meets Robert, the blind man who comes to his house. His initial impressions are those one would have with any man, but he soon slips back into his stereotypes, expressing surprise that Robert didn't use a cane or have dark glasses on (60). This kind of ignorance can, in some cases, be excused as a legitimate reason to be prejudiced against someone. However, the fact that Robert has been friends with the narrator's wife for over 10 years, and the narrator has never taken the time to find out more about him or his handicap shows that he has chosen to hold onto this particular prejudice, and to remain ignorant.
A second reason for his dislike of Robert (or “this blind man” as he calls him) is jealousy. As the narrator shares about the close relationship his wife has with Robert, it is hinted at that he himself does not have this closeness with her. Robert has known her for longer than he has, and she seems to share every part of her life with him, the good and the bad. As her second husband, the narrator seems to resent this intimacy, and may even feel that this friendship has caused her to never fully give herself to their marriage or to him. When she and Robert are catching up on life in their living room, he listens “in vain” for his own name to come up, and for her to share about their life together (61). However, although he seems jealous of Robert, the narrator's disinterest in learning more about him shows that his jealousy is two-fold. Not only is he envious of the blind man's intimacy with his wife, but he is also jealous that his wife has someone she can share sher life with. She herself says that he, the narrator, doesn't have any friends (58). As the story goes on, his loneliness becomes apparent when he admits that he doesn't mind Robert staying up with him: “'I'm glad for the company.' And I guess I was. Every night I smoked dope and stayed up as long as I could before I fell asleep. My wife and I hardly ever went to bed at the same time” (63, 64). He is jealous of the fact that both his wife and Robert have discovered this secret to relationships and intimacy with another human, something he doesn't have. Unfortunately, rather than pursuing this sort of bond with his wife, or with Robert, he becomes defensive and responds by creating a barrier between him and Robert, using Robert's blindness as an excuse for his dislike.
But midway through the story, the narrator begins to change. It is subtle at its start – the first indication that he understands Robert's perspective comes when his wife is describing the deceased wife, Beulah. The narrator states, “I felt sorry for the blind man for a little bit” (58). But he quickly moves on to pity for the wife herself, the “normal” one. Then, the real transformation starts to occur. When his wife goes to sleep, the narrator is left alone with Robert. As they sit and watch the TV, he begins to try and describe what is being shown to his blind guest. When he starts talking about the cathedrals, he pauses. It is then that he realizes Robert might not even know what a cathedral is: “I stared hard at the shot of the cathedral on the TV. How could I even begin to describe it? But my life depended on it” (65). He suddenly gets a glimpse of how different the life the blind man leads is from his, and how insensitive he has been toward him. As he continues to describe the images on the TV, he starts to really care, trying his hardest to do a good job. When Robert requests that they draw the cathedral together, the narrator hardly hesitates. He, who only several hours before didn't even want “this blind man” in his house, now willingly sits down by his side. And once they start drawing, their hands interwoven, all else leaves as the narrator allows himself to be entirely immersed in the world of this blind man. He says, “It was like nothing else in my life up to now” (67). This experience of placing himself in someone else's shoes was a new one for him. Robert's patience in leading him to this place was finally rewarded, as he chooses to keep his eyes closed and savor the feeling of releasing his prejudice.
The narrator, in only the course of an afternoon and evening, changes his entire perspective about blind people, and Robert in particular. He is able to do this because he takes a step outside his own experiences and views, and takes the time to see things from another's point of view. That is really the key to overcoming prejudices – putting oneself in the other person's place. Allowing oneself to let go of all preconceived notions and think of the other person first. The blind man presents the narrator with a life-changing opportunity, and the narrator chooses to make a change for the better, by getting rid of his bigotry and learning to accept others.

Works Cited
Carver, Raymond. “Cathedral.” Backpack Literature. X.J. Kennedy and Dana Gioia. New York: Pearson Longman, 2008. 55-57.

"The Story of an Hour" - Kate Chopin

To be perfectly honest (which of course, I ought to be since this blog is simply my thoughts), this piece seemed to be very a stereotypical feminist piece. It mostly reiterates the idea that many women of that era felt trapped by their marriages, and the roles they were expected to play as a wife. Mrs. Mallard seemed very typical in this - she had married someone she did not care for, love (at least not most of the time), or respect. And yet, her greatest complaint is that he (her husband) has authority over her. . . she resents this, and even goes so far as to call it a crime. Because this is how she views things, she is obviously relieved and even over-joyed to hear of her husband's death. That she drops dead upon discovery that he was still alive was a bit melodramatic, but I guess it does add interest. :) It also goes to show just how trapped she felt in this life.

So I'm not entirely sure what I think about this whole mindset. I guess I don't see authority as a bad thing. While a husband should definitely never abuse any authority he has over his wife, for one person to be the leader of the relatioship is only natural. If we look around us, we can see that having people in authority over others is instinctive. It's the only way order in the world can be kept. But as I think about it, the complaint of Mrs. Mallard and feminism in general is not a complaint with authority - it's a complaint that the man is always the one who has authority. I guess I see this as something that is simply part of nature - men have always taken this role. As a Christian, I can see that it's part of how God designed men and women, biologically and emotionally. It doesn't in any way make men better - if anything, it simply highlights the unique differences of men and women, allowing both to be valued for their own strengths. Is there anything wrong with a women being in authority when we are talking about a relationship between a woman and a man? I think so - but don't have the words to justify that.

This was a lot of rambling. . . I'm sure that it will come up again, so I will leave my thoughts as is and add/edit later.

"Happy Endings" - Margaret Atwood

Wow. This was. . . incredibly interesting. I love the sarcasm - it's light enough to not be grating, or biting and yet strong enough to let us know what she really thinks. Her concluding sentences were really sharp, and to the point - I like that. I definitely agree with her claim - everything ends in death. Regardless of how you live your life, you are going to die. Life is just one event after another - however, she challenges us, "Now try How and Why." The story itself was a unique way of presenting this age old question - who are we? why are we on earth? do the things we do here really matter after death?

So many people claim to have the answers to these questions - and of course, they all think that they have the right answers. There are also those who just refuse to think about it, and go on not seriously taking into consideration that, one day, everything will be gone (or rather, they will be gone from everything). Is life truly what the waiter in "A Clean, Well-Lighted Place" stated - "nada y nada y nada. . ."? Or is there something more to it than that?

Have you yourself ever thought about your life, and its meaning - or about death?

You should.

"Dead Men's Path" - Chinua Achebe

I didn't like this story when reading it through for the first time. There wasn't anything terribly interesting that grabbed me, or made me really want to continue reading. However, as I looked at it a little more, my interest was piqued slightly.

I've often wondered about this balance of the values of tradition vs. progress. Obviously, we need to pay close attention to both - but when they come head to head in a direct conflict, which would win out? In some cases, the "old ways of doing things" are so very important. The moment we start to forsake remembering our past, we will cease to improve our future. So in that sense, traditions and old ways can be incredibly useful. However, there are definitely times when "the way we've always done it" has lost any real meaning - it's simply become routine, and obsolete. In those cases, progress does need to happen, perhaps even at the expense of tradition.

Then we can look at progress itself. . . if the progress is truly designed to improve the lives of people, and help things to move forward, then it's normally a pretty good idea. But, when things start rolling, many times the excitement about "progress" causes people to become over-zealous, and begin changing things simply for the sake of changing them. The focus becomes change, not improvement. . . and in those cases, we are probably better off just sticking with the old ways (especially if they are effective).

I think nearly everyone would agree with these above claims and beliefs - and yet, the idea of balance is where things start turning grey. I'm probably unusual as a young person, in that I tend to err on the side of tradition, and keeping things the way they are.

I guess the most important thing to do in these type of struggles is to know yourself. You must be constantly evaluating your motives, and allowing your mind to be open to what others think.

"The Yellow Wallpaper" - Charlotte Perkins Gilman

I read this story for the first time late at night, and had a very hard time following it. Maybe it was the lateness of the hour, but something about it just rubbed me wrong. I enjoyed it at the beginning, and was looking forward to the development of her character, and was waiting expectantly for the plot to unfold. I think I might have missed something - maybe I will figure out what it is when we discuss this in class tomorrow. But it seemed to me like there could have been more of a story about the whole thing - to have her simply go crazy because of the yellow wallpaper was somewhat bland, and predictable.

So I leaving my opinion, and this post, open to whatever changes might occur from our discussion tomorrow.

New thoughts:
So things did get a little more interesting. I had suspected this, but our discussion in class confirmed that she probably hanged herself at the very end of the story. While this certainly is a terrible and morbid thing for me to be excited about . . .I am. It gives the story a whole new purpose. As she felt herself trapped behind the wallpaper, seeing herself as the "woman" who crept about along the wall, thinking about how the finality of her death was the only way she felt she could be "set free" is sobering.

Mental illness is something that no one likes to talk about or have to deal with. Thankfully, in today's world, we do a better job of it then they seem to have done back then. People are treated for chemical and biological disorders, and there is plenty of other help for emotional problems people may face.

However, I think that, especially among Christians, there is still a reluctance to discuss depression and other mental illnesses. It's almost as if we all feel we must keep up appearances - our society trains us to care so much about what those around us think of us. This is seen in "The Yellow Wallpaper" as her husband and brother push aside her concerns, convincing themselves and those around them that it's simply nerves, something easily dealt with. Obviously, this method didn't exactly work - it resulted in her feeling incredibly trapped and unloved, ultimately culminating in her suicide. So how are we to respond when those we love succumb to depression or another mental disorder?

I don't know the answer to that. :) But I suspect that compassion is a big part of it. Also, the patience to listen and genuinely care about the one who is suffering, not simply brushing things aside. Perhaps we also should be careful to not be condescending or haughty towards them, but allow them the "freedom" to still think and participate in society. But how to balance that with caring for and helping them about it a mystery to me. . .

"Harrison Bergeron" - Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.

This was a strange story, but I liked it. The author did a crazy good job of giving a sharp, distinct image of this entire "special little snowflake" mentality our society is trying to cultivate. It's the idea that we all must be brought down so that we are equal to one another, and that we must understand no one person is better than another. The irony is interesting - by making a deliberate effort to "handicap" people, one essentially admits that some people are better than others. However, if we were to simply understand that our differences are what make us equal and really uncomparable, everyone would be more challenged to do well in their own unique area of strength.

I thought it very strange that Harrison himself was so un-likable. I mean, his whole "I am the Emperor. . ." thing was very distasteful - it almost made you glad when he was shot down. I think the author could have done a better job making us more sympathetic to Harrison. His arrogance was just grating - why couldn't he have been a little more humble, and little more confident in some ability he had, rather than just being selfish. That was it - I felt he was more arrogant than confident. I had to really consciously remember that I'm supposed to be thinking "How unfair" when the lady shot him - and recall that she was the bad guy, shooting him because of his individuality, not his annoy-ness.

But yes, other than that - I thought it an excellent story. Hazel and George were such vivid characters. One could almost see them as a very extreme version of people we ourselves know. The whole story made me reminiscent of my speech on the "Teenager Syndrome."

"A Clean, Well-Lighted Place" - Ernest Hemingway

I liked this story. The writing style was very hard to get into - but after reading it through the second time, it realy grew on me. However, I loved the theme of the story itself after only to first time reading it! In our class discussion, everyone was pretty negative about the younger waiter - I really understood him though. He was rude, but haven't we all had moments like that? When our present desires supercede our care for others? Actually - don't we all live like that, for the most part? I guess I was reluctant to judge him, since I know that I live the same way.

1. He's lonely. He dreads the thought of lying awake at night with no one to talk to. And he hates knowing that, when he wakes up in the morning, there still won't be anyone. The cafe represents something, in contrast to the nada he repeated - it's a place that they can both feel they have people who care about them, and something to cling to, and call their own.

We also talked about the strangeness of slipping into Spanish at times - and one thing I thought, but failed to actually speak up and say in class was that often, when someone is bilingual, one of the languages is the one that more clearly expresses things important, or especially emotional. So not only does the use of this foreign language draw our attention to what's being said, it may indicate that what's being said is something the speaker feels strongly about, or something that's coming straight from their heart.

"Some lived in it and never felt it, but he knew it all was nada y pues nada y nada y pues nada."

Is there really anyone who lives in this "nothingness" and never feels it? I believe we all have moments when life feels like nothing - when we ourselves feel like nothing. However, even for those who don't have the comfort that religion, God, or more specifically, a Christian life and personal relationship with Christ might offer, there is always still something or someone to put their hope in. There is always a bright spot, a "clean, well-lighted place" that they can turn to when life gets hard.

Class Thoughts III

It is so strange to think that we've only had 3 classes so far this semester. The snow set us back a lot. Anyways. . .

Yesterday in class we discussed Tone and Style, Theme, and Symbol. I thought it really interesting how she broke down the different types of irony - I've never really heard them all defined quite so well before. Ms. Kolb seemed to be terribly excited about the idea of Symbol in literature - to be honest, I've never really cared for it. The process of finding and interpreting Symbols has always made me wonder - are we reading into the story what the author really, actually meant? Or are we just making up things that make sense to us? Of course. . .I suppose both can be okay. I mean, authors don't write purely so that their own ideas, thoughts, and opinions are clearly known and ingrained in the minds of their readers. There is a certain extent of literature that is very, very subjective. So I guess I will just have to learn to appreciate all that Symbol stuff, and for now. . . trust that Ms. Kolb knows what she's talking about.

We also laid out a rough plan for the next few classes. I realized that I am such a child in many ways - I still love being told exactly what to do, and thrive on deadlines. I suppose I shall have to work on that when I head off to "real" college this fall. But for now - thanks for the planning ahead Ms. Kolb!

learned: minimalists are writers who write in a flat, laid-back, unemotional tone, and with a bare and unadorned style

"Cathedral" - Raymond Carver

2. She was herself tired, and didn't want to be left out of a conversation between Robert and her husband. She probably was uncertain or afraid of what they would talk about - either that her husband would hurt, offend, or be angry at Robert, or that Robert would press his advantage and play up his relationship with her. She wanted to be there to control the conversation. He was uncomfortable with Robert, since he didn't really know him. Robert's response however, caused him to see that Robert wasn't simply his wife's friend, but someone who desired a relationship with him as well. That was a pretty big turning point in his view of blind people.

3. He realizes that Robert can't see it. He starts becoming aware of Robert and his point of view.

7. The wife and Robert are both pretty flat. She is there only to set the scene for the situation. And with Robert, we get the feeling or sense that he has already reached a level of understanding and maturity that our narrator is going to start to reach as well. Robert doesn't really change though.

"A Rose for Emily" - William Faulkner

1. It shows us that she has lain by this man even recently, it wasn't just a one time thing, and then she locked up the room.

4. Since I read this very briefly, during class, I had no idea the end was coming and was totally shocked - I had missed most of the foreshadowing. I guess that's what happens when you skim a story. But as I went back and read it later, the faoreshadowing really caused me to wonder what the outcome would be. They point towards something, but it's something that is so strange, you keep hoping there's some different explanation.

6. They are very different - she is from an old, Southern family, who values honor and regality and being "proper" very highly. He is an uncouth, Northern man, who isn't afraid to swear and cause some trouble. Faulkner makes commentary on the result of trying to combine these two worlds, and especially gives us a good sense of what the townspeople thought about it.

Class Thoughts II

We had class this Tuesday, after having two days off for snow. I had kind of wondered at the fact that we didn't get anything about extra, "make-up" work to do during the week. . .but busyness caught up and I didn't ever get around to e-mailing my teacher and asking her about it.

Needless to say, I was quite surprised when she asked at the beginning of class whether everyone had done the assignments she e-mailed out. :) Thankfully, it all worked out okay and I was able to at least follow the discussion about the two stories we had been assigned.

We also discussed "Plot, " "Short Story," "Point of View," and "Character." I liked hearing the different ways an omniscient narrator can be displayed - Editorial Omniscience (with the ability to comment on people's thoughts), Impartial Omniscience (presents the thoughts of others without judging or commenting), Total Omniscience (being able to see into the minds of all the characters), and Limited or Selective Omniscience (having insight into a single character). I thought of the movie Forest Gump when we talked about an innocent or naive narrator - what makes that movie so interesting and powerful is that Forest really doesn't understand the implications of what he is telling us. A lot of what we discussed was review of things I'd learned in high school. . .but I can always use a brush-up! Ms. Kolb talked about things like flat and round characters, conflict, protaganist, anit-hero, antagonist, climax, foreshadowing, etc.


"If a writer is true to his character, they will give him his plot." - Phyllis Bottome