Poetry- Close Analysis

Overlooked: An Analysis of
Mary Oliver’s “Ghosts”

The poem begins with the haunting reproof, “Have you noticed” (28) which suggests that the reader has not been paying attention to the current state or change of something rather important. Through this repeated statement, Mary Oliver accuses her reader of blindness and apathy in her poem, “Ghosts”. Although not explicitly stated, Mary Oliver warns that the transfer of the American heartland from Native Americans into the hands of the white man has erased something beautiful from the face of the nation. Oliver is referring to the loss of nature.
This loss is attributed to the white Americans who desecrated the country in the early nineteenth century. In her third section Oliver notes that in 1805 Lewis watched as the chicks of sparrows huddled together after having “left the perfect world and fallen, / helpless and blind / into the flowered fields and the perils / of this one” (29). The chicks’ descent into the harsh ground, far from their nest, is symbolic of America’s descent from Native American sacred homeland, to an industrializing new people. It is apparent that Oliver is referring to this descent in the fact that she alludes to Meriwether Lewis, the famous explorer who is credited with making possible the white immigration to the West. The phrase “Have you noticed” is repeated because although Lewis did appreciate and notice his surroundings, Oliver is under the impression that the reader hasn’t and stands blindly by as the unbeknownst memory of “so many million powerful bawling beasts / [who] lay down on the earth and died” haunts us (28) .

Later, in the fifth section, Oliver notes that rich Americans in the nineteenth century would shoot buffalo from train windows and leave the carcasses which “stank unbelievable, and sang with flies, ribboned / with slopes of white fat, / black ropes of blood – hellhunks” (29). Such revolting imagery is used not only to describe the rotting corpses, but also the disgusting effects of the train passengers’ actions. Thus, the reader comes to see the white culture as indifferent, rash, and disgusting.

Native Americans, however, may be seen in a different light. The entire culture is melded into the poem as symbolic of a fluid symbiosis with nature: “Have you noticed? how the rain / falls soft as the fall / of moccasins” (28-29). This comparison implies that the Native Americans’ footfalls did not harm the land, but gave it life and nourishment akin to the cleansing rain. Oliver’s continuing “Have you noticed?” here gives the reader the sense of what they have done wrong in direct comparison with what the Indians had done right. Native American culture has also been greatly affected by white culture, and Oliver seems to be mourning the loss of that culture in her poem, using the loss of buffalo as symbolic of the demise of the Indian tribes. The buffalo are given a Native American personification when Oliver states that the herds stood “moon after moon / in their tribal circle” (30).

At the end of all of this, however, it is important to remember that Oliver ends her poem of death with a story of birth. The lost buffalo is symbolically reborn as a cow “with the tenderness of any caring woman, / […] gave birth / to a red calf” (30). This rebirth may also symbolize the repentance of her own culture; earlier in the poem, Oliver notes, “In the book of the earth is it written: / nothing can die” which is followed by the idea of the Sioux that things do not die, they merely hide (29). Thus, we may see that the culture is still alive somewhere and they, unlike us, may “make room” so that we may share their “wild domains” (30).

Not sure if I need a more conciliatory statement to conclude.

Poetry--Extended Analysis

Slumber

The mind is a vault
to wander through
aimlessly or charted,

For a time, I stealthily searched the
depths
of my own

holding the lantern aloft
as I peered through each
cryptic door.

Some rooms are empty,
waiting patiently, sometimes
for eternity
a spark to fill it.

A spark to torch the room
to fill it with the blaze of knowledge.

Each night, as I wander down each corridor,
through each chamber,
and into each hollow,

my own smallness is
realized,
As I, wrapped

in a blanket of thoughts,
dance under a sky full of dreams…

I tried to make this poem Mary Oliver-esque, but I may have failed. I know she normally themes her poems around nature but there are some instances where she doesn't, and I thought this would be one of those instances. I tried to make the language seem like her and I think I did a reasonable job at capturing her voice in that light, but I couldn't acheive the proper flow. My inspiration for this was my own exhaustion at first (namely, the inspiration for the title). But once I got going I kept picturing the mind more and more like a giant storage space with millions of rooms waiting to be filled; after realizing that I remembered an episode of Yu Gi Oh I saw (yes I know, but I promise I only watched it a couple of times out of sheer Saturday Morning Boredom). In the episode their wandering around in a schizophrenic character's mind which contained a hallway and two areas; the first area was the area of the little boy, filled with toys and the like, the other area was that of a complex character, full of locked doors and stairs. In short it was cool and I liked the idea. More succintly, I tried.

Monkey Bridge--Extended Analysis

I made a powerpoint and researched the swallows' nests delicacy that Cao mentions semi-frequently. It sounded really itneresting so I did some research on it. It's pretty disgusting. I'll be presenting the powerpoint to the class. I spent about 2 hours fully researching and making the project.

sources that I actually used for the powerpoint:

Parkinson, Rhonda. "Swallow's Nest Soup With Rock Sugar." About.com. 2007. 20 May 2007 http://chinesefood.about.com/od/chinesesouprecipes/r/swallowsnest.htm.

"Natural Nests." Natural Nest. 2006. Natural Nest. 20 May 2007 http://www.naturalnest.com.
Lee, Sheng-pu. "Origin of Birds' Nest." Sunpower. 2007. Sunpower Wellness Center. 20 May 2007 http://www.proliver.com/orofbine.html.

"Swiftlet Nest." Swiftlet. 05 Oct 2004. HealthyNest. 20 May 2007 .

Poetry--Reader Response

Overall I liked both poetry books equally well, but in completely different ways. Mary Oliver's serene look on life is really easy and calming to read and her imagery and use of word flow is very effecting. Her subjects are interesting in the way she describes them and the randomness of poems like "Flying" is a nice break in between sad poems like "Ghosts" and "An Old Whore House." However, Billy Collins seems almost like the opposite. Although both authors have endings that often don't seem to fit their beginnings, Collins' subject choice seems much more day to day, which is refreshing. I especially like what I translated as a jibe at Oliver's dramatic flare with "To a Stranger Born in Some Distant Country Hundreds of Years From Now." I found Collins to be more amusing than Oliver, but both are equally entertaining.

Oliver's "John Chapman" was the first poem of hers that really caught my literary eye. I wonder what the poem is saying about women, or perhaps men, when a character like Chapman who "honored everything...spoke/only once of women and his gray eyes/brittled into ice: 'Some/are deceivers'"(24). Were the author male, I would assume this is a sexist remark, but coming from Oliver I don't know how to take it. Obviously some women are deceivers, but the same could be true for men, so why would Chapman (aka Johnny Appleseed) make such a derogatory statement? The end of the poem struck me on a deeper note. "[H]e became the good legend, you do/what you can if you can; whatever//the secret, and the pain,//there's a decision: to die,/or to live, to go on/caring about something" (25). When I read this I paused for a moment and reread the last three stances (stanzas?) to appreciate the full meaning. Care about something and leave your mark, become a legend and a symbol for others to follow.

"Tecumseh" was the other most poignant poem for me to read. "There's a sickness/worse than the risk of death and that's/forgetting what we should never forget" (77). The poem basically appreciates the loss of Native American culture and I felt like the poem is a final encouragement for us to at least attempt to make amends.

Collins’ poems are completely different and yet also the same. I never know what the message will be until I reach the very end of the poem and read the last few lines twice trying to comprehend the full meaning. There are some poems which I still don’t understand why he wrote: Egypt and Duck/Rabbit. Yet there are others that I appreciate too much to question. “Marginalia” may be my favorite poem in the book because I can relate to it so much. Staining books is a sin I feel sorry about daily, especially library books. As well as the need to write in the obvious, my copy of Monkey Bridge is littered with statements like “irony” or “symbolic??”. More importantly though, is the end of the poem. “‘Pardon the egg salad stains, but I’m in love” (16). This really brings back the deeper meaning of things to me. Why need I worry about staining the pages of a worn book, there are so many more important things in life, and at least such metaliteral communications will amuse later readers.

“Victoria’s Secret” is the poem I’m sure people will be talking about. The imagery amazed me because I could imagine each ostentatious pose. My favorite line is “What do I care, her eyes say, we’re all going to hell anyway” (57). Each elongated description of the clothing just adds to the pompousness that I think we often forget is inherent in a catalogue, nay a store, such as Victoria’s Secret. Mr. Collins, I salute thee.

Both books have given me a new appreciation of poetry. I still don’t understand the nuances, but I like it anyway. My ignorance is helping my bliss in this case and I may be sad once we must study the symbolism of the location of breaks in the line, which I missed entirely and eventually gave up looking for.

Persepolis--Extended Analysis

In the 1950’s Britain had control over Iran’s oil industry because it owned the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Although one would expect enormous oil reserves to be quite lucrative for the host company, the oil industry was not pulling Iran out of general poverty. Britain refused to pay the asked percentage of its profits to Iran so the industry was nationalized to increase government revenue. Because of the nationalization of the Iranian oil industry Britain and the United States organized an embargo on Iranian oil which ruined Iran’s fragile economy.

The American government (specifically the CIA) then aided in a coup against the Iranian government which place a new leader, known as the Shah, in power. The restructuring of the Iranian government put the large oil companies back into the hands of Britain, but this time forty percent of the company belonged to the U.S. Khomeini

With a now Western-friendly government in tact, Iran became the premier importer of U.S. military supplies. The economy grew quickly with the support of the Western nations. Economic profit however, was unequal; many remained in poverty and the new regime imprisoned and tortured several thousand political activists.

After public rallies and activism against him, the Shah stepped down and left the country in the hands of the revolution’s leader, Khomeini. Khomeini brought an Islamic theme and anti-Western sentiment into the Iranian government. The revolution and change of power brought on a social upheaval that left Iran weak.

Iraq, which considered Iran a threat to its cause, invaded Iran hoping that its adversary’s revolutionary instability would lead to a quick finish with Iraq as the victors. However, the war turned out to be much longer than expected.

Both countries had been building up large arsenals before the war and Iran had the advantage of sheer manpower. The United States had trouble picking sides: Iran had an unstable regime which could pose a threat later on; on the other hand, Hussein was considered to be slightly less dangerous and had the support of the Soviet Union. The greatest fear for many western nations was that one of the warring nations would eventually win over the other and become a regional superpower. If this were to happen, the oil reserves of the regions would be left in uncertain hands. The documents of powerful politicians during the period show a deep interest in the future of the oil fields in the region. Thus, the United States, among other nations, had little else they could do but claim neutrality from the entire situation.

However, as the conflict dragged on, America began to see the Islamic government as more of a threat than Hussein’s tyrannical rule. Thus, the U.S. began a covert “tilt” towards Iraq. This meant that the U.S. aided Iraq with extra funds sent over and secret military information was shared. The exchanges were made even more covert when Iran reported Iraq’s use of chemical weapons to the U.N. Security Council. When the U.N. confirmed the use of chemical weapons by Iraq, (using intelligence supplied by the United States) the U.S. bolstered security on Iranian oil refineries and ports.

During the eight year war, Iran took several American hostages who were finally saved by trading arms for the American citizens. Over the course of the eight-year war it is possible that more than a million people were killed in the region. Although the U.N. recommended a cease-fire, which meant no nations were supposed to aid on either side, at least ten nations helped the two combatants over the course of the war including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, the United States, France, Germany, and the Soviet Union.


WORKS CITED

Shalom, Steven. "The United States and The Iran-Iraq War." 1997. 1 May 2007 .

"The 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War: A CWIHP Critical Oral History Conference ." Cold War International History Project. 2004. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. 1 May 2007 .

"The Iran-Iraq War." Jewish Virtual Library. 2007. American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise. 1 May 2007 .

Battle, Joyce. "Shaking Hands With Saddam Hussein: The U.S. Tilts Towards Iraq, 1980-1984." The National Security Archive. 25 Feb 2003. 1 May 2007 .

Sepehri, Saman. "Twenty-Five Years After The Iranian Revolution." Socialist Workers Online. 27 Feb 2004. Socialist Workers. 1 May 2007 .

This research took me more than three hours to put together. Most of all it was hard finding credible sources, I must have paged through at least twenty sources but it was hard to find something that wasn’t published with the sole purpose of making America look bad, although that’s not hard to do with this situation. I decided to do this research because I felt like Satrapi gave a crash course in the history and seemed very mad at America but I wasn’t completely aware of why. I think this clears it up.

Monkey Bridge--Reader Response

Monkey Bridge, by Lan Cao, is the story of two Vietnamese refugees, a mother and daughter, trying to live in America in 1979. The novel showcases the difficulties of emigration and transition for different generations while giving beautiful descriptions of the Vietnamese culture itself. But more than this, Monkey Bridge is the story of a teenage girl trying to make amends with her traumatized mother.

When I first read about “The Accident [that] had been diagnosed as permanent” which consisted of scar tissue which spread across Cao’s mother’s face, I assumed that it was somehow symbolic of her mother’s permanent state of distress while living in America. But upon finding out at the end of the novel that the scar was actually caused by “Clusters of bright yellow flames [that] burst through a high-explosive mix of gasoline a jelly” (251), not a kitchen flame which “caught on a silk scarf loosely wrapped around her neck” (3), I think that the scar actually symbolizes the inner torment she carries with her always because of the shame from her father’s actions.

One thing that I thought was interesting was the way Cao’s mother seemed to be two different women (if not more). She is a haggling French-educated woman in Vietnam who believes in the healing power of charms and astrology, while being a grocer in America who is always worried. Also, she cannot speak English well and relies on her daughter to do it for her (example of apartment rooms), but writes beautifully of her homeland in exquisite imagery (example). Also, Cao’s mother is enthralled with motherhood but seems very bitter over wifehood, although she left herself three years to mourn the death of her husband.

Lan Cao stresses the differences between the United States and Vietnam in the book as well. “In the United States, there was no such thing as ‘one wrong move.” She describes the states as a place of limitless possibilities where people can rewrite their endings (example) and even sometimes their beginnings (example).

One thing that seemed very important to be me was the symbolism of the sea horse. Vietnam is described as “a long twisted peninsula hanging on the caost of the South China Sea like a starved sea horse waiting for happier days” (150). And then her “mother’s silhouette cast a faint sea-horse curve against the dark window-shine” (161). And even later her mother describes her own body “hunched and twisted like the sea-horse shape of Vietnam itself” (174). Finally Cao ends the book by stating “Outside, a faint sliver of what only two weeks ago had been a full moon dangled like a sea horse from the sky.” I’m wonder why this theme reoccurred so much throughout the book. Possibly because Cao wanted to show that her mother was also a symbol of her homeland. The narrator is uncertain of the history of her country but respects it, but is also ashamed of it, like her mother (example of ashamed of country, example of ashamed of mother, scar?) She also has trouble leaving her country’s past and tries to get it back because she has been taught her soul is there, and she has been taught that she and her mother share the same DNA and karma.

The mother-daughter relationship of the book was the most intriguing to me because I don’t really relate to it. My mother and I have a very close relationship in which we talk about everything, but Lan’s only link to her mother is reading the “papers” that she writes late at night which she thinks she is forbidden from. The relationship seems very close when the two describe it, but also very distant as well. They know and love each other and are willing to make sacrifices, but they have a lot of trouble talking about what they feel and want. Finally, Cao’s mother feels that she must kill herself just so she can provide freedom for her daughter. The mother daughter roldes are reversed because Lan is forced to take care of her mother after the stroke and even before this, Lan had to become “the keeper of the word” (37) and her mother became a child (35).

The title of the novel confused me for a long time because the idea of a monkey bridge is not introduced until page 109. Even then it is not until much later that we can see the significance of a monkey bridge. A monkey bridge is “how rivers are crossed by boatless peasants” (179). And I believe they are a true symbolism for the “one wrong move” idea. Almost as if life is a giant river which with must cross and our choices create a thin path, almost impossible to cross. One wrong move and we can fall off, like Lan’s mother.

Persepolis--Close Analysis

Marjane Satrapi’s graphic novel, Persepolis, was written to explain the middle east in a simple way to the western world. The author shows the similarities between the cultures so that we may understand her better. Satrapi then shows a captivated audience that some of the major conflicts in the Middle East have been caused, and made bloodier by the industrialized nations.

The cultural similarities between the Middle Eastern and developed nations are explained through many allusions throughout the novel. Characters in the novel play Monopoly, dress in punk rock clothes, and sing to American music. All of these cultural activities are from the western world but have been melded into the story so that we may understand that Iran is not as backwards as many Americans expect it to be. While this is true, westerners can also see what a huge impact the industrialized nations have on the rest of the world. One of the two refugee boys who spend a few nights at Marji’s house tells her “At my house, we have all the Star Wars stuff” (91). This cultural similarity seems almost paradoxical because although the boys are familiar with the hit movie, they are also refugees in a warring nation. Satrapi also hints to the reader that this book is aimed at the developed nations in the pictures; the two spoiled boys are wrapped in a blanket with white stars on it while Marji has a blanket with strips, reminiscent of the American flag (91)

Marji is not excited that her parents are going to Turkey until they tell her that all the “‘hip stuff’” (126) from the west that enter Iran are from Turkey. After hearing this Marji lists off the things she would like that we would expect American children to ask for on a daily basis; she wants “a denim jacket, a poster, no two posters, one of Kim Wilde, and one of Iron Maiden” (126). These allusions make the characters, especially Marji, more understandable, and it is thus easier to empathize with her later.

After making Marji relatable to the reader and showing that the cultures are not as different as one might expect, the author demonstrates that industrialized countries actually fuel the strife of the Middle East which inhibits the region’s development. For example, Britain fueled the revolution just so they could get Iran’s oil reserves: “You just give us the oil and we’ll take care of the rest” (21) a British aristocrat says to Reza, the revolutionary and future king. Even before this Satrapi, shows her claim graphically when she says that her people have endured tyranny from many sources including the “modern imperialism,” under which she shows Uncle Sam and a man holding the British flag (11). Marji’s father explains the suppression of Iran by America with the logic that “All that interests him [Jimmy Carter] is oil” (43). Mr. Satrapi says this after the U.S. president refused to give the Shah asylum in the United States, even though the U.S. had supported the Shah before.

Satrapi then explains that some industrialized nations did not only start the wars, they made them more bloody and gruesome by giving money and weaponry to both sides of the war. “Our torturers received special training from the C.I.A.” (50) Mohsen casually explains. And later, at the hospital, a doctor explains to the Satrapi family that “The Germans sell chemical weapons to Iran and Iraq. The wounded are then sent to Germany to be treated. Veritable human guinea pigs” (122). With this statements melded into the story, Satrapi is trying to tell her audience that her nation is not the only one with sins.

With evidence that Iran’s actions and tyrannical government was fueled by developed nations and that Iran’s wars were made worse because of democratic countries, Satrapi is trying to stop the world from thinking that the Middle East is a backwards region.

Persepolis--Reader Response

Persepolis was an incredibly interesting read. One thing that troubled me was the allusions I didn’t understand because I am not exceedingly familiar with the history of the Middle East.

One thing that was incredibly interesting, to me, was the similarities between the Iranian culture and the American culture. Marji is forced to deal with house bombings, the loss of loved ones, and a continual internal struggle with religion, but she also relieves her stress by singing “We’re the kids in America” (134). Although some of her problems happen to children in America as well, they are amplified by the fact that her country is at war and going through a revolution. Marji goes to parties and wants American pop culture to be part of her life, but also demonstrates against the government as a child, and has to read all about her country at a young age to understand the woes of the world.

Satrapi’s relationship with her mother perplexed me. Her mother is willing to risk imprisonment trying to bring home a poster for her daughter, and yet Marji commits an “act of rebellion against my mother’s dictatorship by smoking the cigarette I’d stolen” (117). As a very non-rebellious child, who has grown up with next to no problems, I find it very difficult to relate to the narrator’s actions. I was able to understand Marji’s anger at others however, I don’t know how she could not be angry at someone who says, “‘He killed communists and communists are evil’”(46) as if killing them for political reasons makes it ok.

Satrapi’s use of graphics also intrigued me. I like that she partially explained her love of comic books by saying, “my favorite was a comic book entitled ‘Dialectic Materialism’” (12). The graphics mainly helped me to add drama with image instead of through literary imagination.

Overall, it felt like Starapi was trying to get us to think twice about what people say. She even seems to second-guess her beloved father when she draws him with a satanic snake around him as he promotes enjoying a “new freedom” (43).

The book didn’t seem to make conclusions, it only made me examine human nature, and helped me to understand the hardships in the Middle East. Satrapi makes the readers hate Western Civilization because Germany uses Iranians as “human guinea pigs” (123), and Modern imperialism shows the British flag under a text saying “tyranny and submisiion” (11).

During discussion I would like to see the class discuss why Satrapi sometimes chose to narrate with a voice bubble and a picture of her talking, and sometimes with a caption. She possibly did this to stress an emotion in the pictures with captions.

Sula--Extended Analysis

For my extended analysis I decided to do an artistic interpretation of the scene where Nel and Sula are walking down Carpenter Road under the watchful eyes of the men of Medallion. Also, I was interested in visualizing how Medallion was actually laid out so I made a map after finding the scenes where it was described in detail. The stores or the Bottom and the important characters' houses are on the map. I didn't think my drawing showed the proper layout of Medallion so I also created a topographical map that matches with the first to show the elevation of the Bottom compared to the river.

This analysis took me about three hours to complete and although I'm not a great artist, I think I got the general effect on paper.

Sula--Close Analysis/Comparison Analysis

Cultural Healing

“[When] will those people ever be anything but animals, fit for nothing but substitutes for mules, only mules [don’t] kill each other” (63) thinks a white bargeman before he throws the corpse of a young boy into the river to ensure it doesn’t foul his cargo as he drags the body of Chicken Little behind his ship. His thoughts are completely normal for that of a white male in 1927; minorities seemed more inclined to violence, drunkenness, and crime than white people. Why would he not have such convictions? When non-dominant cultures are treated as inferior a stigma is created on the minority cultures which cannot easily be removed. Toni Morrison and Thomas King prove this in their novels Sula and Green Grass Running Water. The adults of the African American and American Indian cultures find themselves trapped into a caste system which leaves their children with little motivation to succeed. Since the time of Sula many have tried to remove whites’ stigma on other ethnicities. But even after the racism of the past has been swallowed, there is still a bitter aftertaste we cannot remove.

Even though the adults of the novels would like to move their lives forward, they often can’t because of their societal roles. The men of medallion spend much of their time “on sills, on stoops, on crates and broken chairs they sat tasting their teeth and waiting for something to distract them” (48). They had little else to do since they could not have many jobs. This reality is especially apparent in the case of Jude who sees “those white men laughing with the grandfathers but shying away from the young black men who could tear that road up” (81). He yearns for the labor. When he cannot work himself he needs “some of his appetites filled, some posture of adulthood recognized” (82). This shows that even though Jude is a provider for his family and full grown, he cannot feel a true sense of self because he feels like he is still a child. Helene is also treated as less-than-adult by white people; the train conductor addresses her as “‘gal’” (20) almost immediately after she leaves her town. Even Charlie, who has assimilated neatly into white culture, can only get a job when it is advantageous to white people; “They hired him because he was Blackfoot and Eli was Blackfoot and the combination played well in the newspapers” (126). King’s Indians and Morrison’s African Americans have been neatly allotted into non-white areas; the reservation and the Bottom both have very low employment levels which holds the characters back. In every aspect of their lives the non-white characters are subjected to inferiority and soon it begins to affect them.

After constant reminders of their place in society the “minorities” acquiesce to the will of the white people and must resign themselves to venting their emotions in new ways. Amos tries to drown his worries in beer and comes home so inebriated that he can’t function, “He tried to stand but pitched forward onto his face, lay there not moving, as if he had been shot” (96). Eva’s husband BoyBoy is obviously a prime example of being stuck in childhood just because of his name. Because of this he too tries to vent his emotions; “he liked womanizing best, drinking second, and abusing Eva third” (32). Others become incredibly bitter towards the white man. The Indians on the reservation council are a prime example of this bitterness; they feel that all they ever got from the government was a “goose” (127). Jude shares this resentment when he says “‘White man running it–nothing good” (102). Although he tries to channel his identity into his family and keep his sense of self, ultimately it is useless and he leaves Nel after having “smashed her heart” and leaveing her with “no heart just her brain raveling away” (117). Even Eva, who loves her children so much she sacrifices her leg for her family, has no time to nurture her children and give them the love and attention they need. As she points out, this is logical; “‘What would I look like leapin’ ‘round that little old room playin’ with youngins with three beets to my name” (69)?

Even though the children grow into better times, they are largely the same as their parents. All of their role models are drunk, bitter, or too tired to love them, and it affects them negatively. After “Amos never came back” (97) Alberta has trouble trusting men and thus can’t choose between Lionel and Charlie. As she grows up she feels a need for control which stops her from riding in planes because she feels “helpless” (90). It is highly possible that Alberta’s need for control stems from the uncontrollable events of her childhood and her relationship with her father. Morrison uses the Deweys to symbolize the stunted growth of those who are not nurtured and lack identity. The three of them physically never grow to be more than 48 inches tall because they have nothing to grow into. Lionel is torn apart by his identity and longs to be John Wayne. Perhaps the child most affected by her lack of true role models is Sula. One of the only times Sula shows any emotion in the book is when she finds out that her mother “‘just don’t like her’” (57) and feels a “sting in her eye” (57). After this point everything goes downhill for Sula. Soon after she throws a little boy into a river and is never the same. Even in adulthood she is “incapable of making any but the most trivial decisions” (101), and has “no center, no speck around which to grow” (119).

In point of fact the characters are all suffering from cultural trauma. The onslaught of whites onto American Indians and African Americans has disturbed the culture so greatly we cannot expect the culture to bounce back. It can take an traumatized individual years to get over a traumatic event, they may feel abandoned and alone, and their sense of safety and relationships with others is destroyed. If this can happen to an individual, can we expect entire ethnicities who have endured centuries of humiliation and degradation to act normally in society? Morrison ends by stating “Nobody colored lived much up in the bottom any more” (166), not because they have gained any status, but because “hill land was more valuable now” (166). Although the Civil Rights movement has come and gone and the government has a special bureau for Indian affairs, little has changed. Lionel stands among the wreckage of Eli’s old house ready to reside in the wreckage as a symbol because although the weapon of discrimination has been removed, the wound remains gaping open.

Sula--REader Response

Sula was not my favorite book of the four that we have read thus far, but I did enjoy it.

Shadrack was my favorite character in the novel. Obviously suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome Shadrack is one of the deepest characters in the book and I hope we can discuss him very in depth. I wonder if he has any symbolism. One thing that I thought was interesting was that Morrison never actually tells the reader what happens to Shadrack that puts him in the hospital for so long.

Helene seems like an incredibly anal lady. Is there actually a difference between the pronunciation of Helen and Helene? I felt bad for Nel because her mother “drove her imagination underground” (18). I had difficulty understanding how Nel and Sula could become such good friends so fast when they were so completely different. Morrison says they’re the same in many ways but he never really explains how. They do share the similarity that they both want to find themselves as individuals, but the do it in completely different ways at completely different times. Both of their mothers are extreme and attractive.

When Nel prays “Oh, Jesus, make me wonderful” I could really relate to it. I felt like she was going to be a very interesting character when I read that and I was disappointed by her actions later in the book. Why do the girls appreciate being called “Pig meat”? That doesn’t make sense to me at all.

I was very happy for Nel when she married a “handsome, well-liked man” (80). I was incredibly disappointed when he cheated on her.
I wonder why Sula decides to leave after Nel’s wedding. If she hadn’t left, probably things would be much better, she would have been able to find herself more easily I think.

When Nel is on the train and she thinks her mother turns to custard (28) I didn’t really understand.

I don’t like Sula at all. I wonder how she could not be upset that she accidently killed Chicken Little (the same goes for Nel). Also, I wonder how Sula could not have foreseen Nel’s anger when she slept with Jude. Reading “The Rose Tattoo” at the beginning of the novel, I am reminded of Sula’s birthmark which is described like a rose. What is the symbolism of the birthmark?

I thought it was interesting that the only child that Eva had that she doesn’t give a pet name to is the child one who stays with her. Why would Plum/Ralph keep a bottle of bloody water?

I have the strong impression that Morrison doesn’t like men very much. Shadrack is insane. Plum does drugs and his mother kills him. Boy-Boy abandons Eva. Jude sleeps with Sula. Ajax can’t handle commitment. Tar Baby does nothing but sing and drink. The Dewey’s are random. Teapot is spoiled. Are there any good males in the book?

The overwhelming theme of blacks’ oppression was written very interestingly. When the man of the boat asks “will those people [blacks] ever be anything but animals” it is ironic because the question is coming from the man who is prepared to leave people’s corpses in the water because it might inconvenience him not to.

When Hannah asks Eva about love I was surprised because Hannah had just said that she didn’t like her own child. Also, Eva’s answer gives great insight as to why she raised her children the way she did, but also why Hannah’s generation had so many problems. How could you be concerned with building your child’s mind when you were just trying to keep them alive.

It’s ironic that Hannah should die by fire when she killed plum by fire. Eva’s statement at the end of the novel that “It’s awful cold in water. Fire is warm” (168) provides interesting insight into Eva’s mindset when she killed her son and how she coped with her daughter’s death.

Green Grass Running Water--Extended Analysis

For my extended analysis I researched Noah’s arc and canoes that Native Americans used. After doing this I made a canoe and an arc and two Noah’s and two wives. I will be presenting the models to the class tomorrow along with a little bit of the information I found on Noah and canoes. The arc version is based off the biblical Noah who brought his wife, his three sons and their wives with him. He also brought two of every animal with him they are not included in the model as they are below deck, where they do not defecate (such is the will of the Lord). The King version has a white Noah and his wife who has big giant breasts (in accordance with King). Once again the animals of every kind are not included. The King version of Noah’s wife is included in my model because I thought that she deserved more representation than she received in the novel. Though my craftsmanship may not be up to the par set by the original Noah’s seven year construction, I did spend an enormous amount of time working on this project. I considered putting real horse manure in the bottom of the canoe, but I thought that I would make use of artistic license in this case.

Green Grass Running Water--Close Analysis

The Christian religion is often charged with having shaped created a poor image of femininity that has caused the degradation of women for many centuries. Similarly, western civilization has perpetuated the idea that non-white people are not the same as white people. They have done this by enslaving, killing, and crushing the wills of “minorities” and bending history to make white people seem superior. In Thomas King’s novel, Green Grass Running Water, the similarities between the oppression of women and the oppression of the “colored” is often subtly noted to show that Indians and women are both being held down by white males.

Throughout the novel there are very few likable and strong male characters. Charlie is “slick” and “sleazy” (234) and can’t keep a monogamous relationship. Lionel can’t make decisions on his life. Amos comes home inebriated and yelling right before he abandons his family, and Bob can’t handle having an independent wife who won’t succumb to his every desire so he leaves her. Also, throughout the novel there are very few likable and strong white characters. Bill Bursum has almost no respect for Indians and he often generalizes his statements, saying things like “‘I’ll bet you get all that easy Indian business’” (89). Dr. Hovaugh is another white character who obsesses over the loss of the four Indians, but doesn’t really seem to worry about their well-being or what they’ll do, he just wants them to be gone. His sentiments are shown as he pleads with John Elliot. “‘They’re dead’….‘I can feel it. All four of them. We just need the certificates. Heart attack, cancer, old age. I don’t care. Be creative’” (49). Most blatantly, King shows his disdain for white people in the stories of the four Indian women, who are repeatedly imprisoned by white soldiers on the charge of “Being Indian” (77). The most antagonistic character in the book is actually George, a white male. Not only does George “beat the hell out of [Latisha]” (59), but he also disrespects the sanctity of the Sun Dance by trying to take pictures.

The strong female roles of the novel often humorously point out the inadequacies of the male gender or the white race. When Latisha tells her mother that she thinks George is “more stupid than Latisha t could ever have guessed whites could be stupid” (213), her mother makes the transition from whites to males when she says “‘Quite a few men are like that, honey’” (213). Latisha’s children even portray the difference between males and females. The two sons Christian and Benjamin waited for them mother to come help them in their crib, but the daughter is “silent and determined” (268) as she crawls out by herself. Latisha later states that “‘Men get bored easy…most of them don’t have much of an imagination’” (409). Her statement is emphasized as she looks back and sees her two sons slapping each other for fun. King makes these humorous yet meaningful statements about men to show that although men are able to beat their wives and gain more money, they are not smarter or more respectable.

King skillfully shows that women have to deal with similar problems that Indians have to deal with. Noah has a very specific conviction of how women should look: “Thou Shalt Have Big Breasts” (162). Hollywood producers have a very specific image of Indians as well; this is shown by the fact that Portland has to wear a fake nose just to get a job. Later Noah yells to Changing Woman “if you can’t follow our Christian rules, then you’re not wanted on the voyage” (163) because she won’t procreate with him. Alberta’s husband has a similar idea when he divorces her because she refuses to abandon her education and have children with him. In another instance Alberta tries to be independent and have a child by herself, but she is unable to do so safely because of the regulations of the clinic. The Indians try to be independent and perform their rituals, but they can’t because of the regulations of the American border patrol. King blatantly portrays women and non-whites as one in his telling of “Moby-Jane, the Great Black Whale” (220). Captain Ahab can’t stand the idea of being defeated annually by someone who isn’t white or male, so he pretends that his nemesis is both and kills anyone who says otherwise.

Although King’s novel centers around the oppression of Indians, he ties in male’s domination over females. From the satirical stories of sexism and racism we can learn that King is not simply worried about Indians, he is writing about the balance of power of society in general, not just the balance of power for different ethnicities.

Green Grass Running Water--Reader Response

I really like this novel. Everyone warned me that it would be nearly impossible to follow, but I didn’t find that to be the case at all. I read a lot of satirical books and this one was one of the easier ones.

One thing that I thought was odd and interesting was the author’s decision on who got quotation marks when they spoke. The four women didn’t get quotation marks in their stories, but the four Indians (who are presumably the same people) got quotation marks when they spoke in the story. This reminded me of The Things They Carried because O’Brien doesn’t use quotation marks at the beginning of the novel.

One thing that did confuse me was the narrator/character “I”. At first I assumed that “I” was a character because when he speaks the author writes “I says,” but then the author writes “I tell” (2) which is the wrong tense and/or verb conjugation for a third person character. But if the name “I” is used in the sense of personal narration then the author wouldn’t write “I says”, he would write “I say”. Overall, trying to figure out who exactly “I” is was the most confusing part of the book. I’m hoping we can talk about him in discussion.

There were three major cultural themes throughout the novel. The first was the cultural differences between Indians and white people. One thing I thought was ironic was that while the Canadian government was trying to stand up for Indian rights it couldn’t decide whether or not the Indians were actually Canadians. When demanding the Sun Dance costumes back the Canadian government says “people of Canada and our aboriginal brothers” (310) which does unify in that statement that the Indians are “brothers”, but it also inherently states that the Indians are not Canadian. Throughout the novel white people and Indians make sweeping and racist generalizations about the other ethnicity. The other cultural theme was the difference between Americans and Canadians. Latisha’s husband tries to tell her basically how Canadians are pushovers and Americans are strong, but Latisha doesn’t translate it as this and gets back at George by chanting to her baby that he’s Canadian. The difference between America and Canada is over-generalized when an American states “everyone knows the US is sleazy, but Canada is supposed to have some integrity” (312). The third cultural theme is the comparison of Indian ceremonies to Christianity. The most amusing part of this for me was the bible stories intertwined with the stories of Thought Woman, First Woman, Changing Woman, and Traveling Woman. When First Woman pairs up with Ahdamn (an ironic name in itself) I thought it was an interesting jibe at Christianity when the author states “I don’t know where he comes from. Things like that happen you know” (40). This statement could be making fun of the fact that in the bible people just kind of show up magically by the hand of God, or it could be combining Christian stories with Indian beliefs by stressing that Indians don’t really need to know where people come from, they’re just there. I wonder if the author is trying to say that Christians (or white people) jump to conclusions when they label people because when the rangers run into First Woman “Yes they says, it is the Lone Ranger” (75). This statement could be alluding to naming Jesus as miraculous, or it could be alluding to how white people just gave Indians white names when they first came to North America.

I’m hoping we can discuss the “I’m God…you remind me of a dog” (72) quote because I think it has a lot of meaning for such a tiny increment of the story.

I don’t’ really know why the cars float around in the lake. There could be some sort of symbolism of the four cars and the four women who float but I don’t’ really know, I hope we can cover that in discussion.

I was surprised that Latisha doesn’t throw George out of the house immediately after he beats her up. Is there any symbolism in Elizabeth’s determination and saying “‘Yes I can’” (276) over and over again? Why would Latisha name her son Christian?

I’m hoping that in the seminar we will discuss the similarities between Karen and Alberta. Both are interested in Indians who tried to act like white men (according to Norma). It is ironic that Karen presumes she is pregnant and then is sorry she isn’t even though she doesn’t really seem to want a child and that Alberta presumes she is not pregnant when she is, even though she only thinks about having a child.

I’m really excited for class discussion. I’ve spotted a lot of irony and satire, but I’m sure I’m missing quite a bit of it as well because I don’t know who Nathaniel Bumpo is among other things. When we discuss this I’m hoping I’ll be able to string all of the pieces together.

The Things They Carried--Extended Analysis

The draft notice arrived on June 17, 1968. It was a humid afternoon, I remember, cloudy and very quite, and I’d just come in from a round of golf. My mother and father were having lunch out in the kitchen. I remember opening the letter, scanning the first few lines, feeling the blood go thick in my eyes. I remember a sound in my head. It wasn’t thinking, just a silent howl. A million things all at once—I was too good for this war.

…

War was for the supporters and those too stupid to grasp its full meaning. I could not mindlessly follow the orders of a drill sergeant; I could not come home in a flag covered coffin. My parents didn’t support the war. But, we did support America. I was torn in half. Part of my body seemed already there: firing on the enemy, holding my base, maybe even screaming in pain. But there was another part of me that longed to run to the north, it wouldn’t be far. A little drive and a swim and I would be there. In Canada.

Alive.

That thought was merely a dream though. I couldn’t leave my family to never return. I couldn’t be the one coward in hundreds of heroes.

A dense fog seemed to carry me through that summer. Then suddenly, as if in a dream, we were in the jungle taking fire. When men are in a platoon together, that is the closest they will ever be to another soul. Those boys, they saved my life and I saved theirs. For fun my friend, Rat, and I would play a deranged version of the game “chicken”. Rat Kiley would toss a smoke grenade at me and I would toss it back until one of us would miss or chicken out. The loser was called a yellow mother. It wasn’t clever, it wasn’t even incredibly fun, but it passed the time. And that was really the goal, pass the time, stay alive. After a while the game got too boring to play anymore. I headed over to play with Mitchell’s yo-yo but I never made it.

In retrospect, my death seems very non-climatic. Almost like killing off a secondary character in some cheap novel just to get the reader’s attention.

When they flew my body home I was surrounded by the corpses of others. Many others. The funeral was on a rainy day and my mother cried. She cried after too. In fact she never stopped crying. After a while she did run out of tears, but she was still crying. The smile that was there when my sister and brother needed it wasn’t there anymore. Soon people forgot that my mom ever did smile. My mother had never supported the war. She had never voted for any of those presidents. She had never agreed to lose her child.

My father cried some, but mainly he sat quietly, his gaze would sometimes sit on an inanimate object while the minutes past and he would stop moving. My sister later told my brother that he almost stopped living in those periods. Sometimes she said she could see the past replaying in him mind, a past when I was there. Or maybe he was gazing into a happier dimension. I was alive in that dimension. I had come home an honored and unscathed veteran. Or maybe I never even left; not when he looked into that dimension. He buried himself in work. His little clinic in Maple Grove, Minnesota boomed with business. He died a very sad and very wealthy man.

***

The draft notice arrived on June 17, 1968. It was a humid afternoon, I remember, cloudy and very quite, and I’d just come in from a round of golf. My mother and father were having lunch out in the kitchen. I remember opening the letter, scanning the first few lines, feeling the blood go thick in my eyes. I remember a sound in my head. It wasn’t thinking, just a silent howl. A million things all at once—I was too good for this war.

…

War was for the supporters and those too stupid to grasp its full meaning. I could not mindlessly follow the orders of a drill sergeant; I could not come home in a flag covered coffin. My parents didn’t support the war. But, we did support America. I was torn in half. Part of my body seemed already there: firing on the enemy, holding my base, maybe even screaming in pain. But there was another part of me that longed to run to the north, it wouldn’t be far. A little drive and a swim and I would be there. In Canada.

Alive.

That thought was merely a dream though. I couldn’t leave my family to never return. I couldn’t be the one coward in hundreds of heroes.

…

It seemed like I was shipped out to Vietnam the same day. The summer flew by and swept me along with. I was a medic, which was kind of almost perfect. I was going to school to be a doctor when I got back home anyway, so this was great experience. I saw some terrible things. But I also saw great things. I saw my two hands pull out bullets. I saw my medical kit on the ground next to me. I saw my fingers stitching, cutting, and healing. But I also did terrible things. I killed unnecessarily. I got sad. I got distraught. I became someone who I was never supposed to be, and I tortured creatures.

After a while we were put on the Night Life. At first it was okay, but then the darkness started to creep in. It wasn’t as bad for the other guys because they hadn’t be forced to see it all. But I was the doctor, if someone got shot, I saw it. If someone blew up a little, I saw it. I had seen the look on many people’s faces right before death. And it came back in the darkness. It would creep in, it would show me all the things I tried to block in the sunlight. It would bring me back to that village with the baby water buffalo. And I saw it all from a third person view. Floating just behind myself, I saw all my actions. It made me sick. I wanted to tear off my skin. I wanted to crawl outside of myself. I wanted to be the same person I used to be. I wanted to be the person who had received straight A’s through high school. I wanted the kid back who didn’t regret any of their actions.

Two more days of that and it was too much. I doped myself up and shot myself in the foot. I didn’t care what the other guys said anymore. Nothing they were thinking could be as bad as what I thought of myself.

On the way home I tried to imagine explaining to my mother about the things I had done. But she would never understand that it wasn’t me. Or maybe she would understand, but I wouldn’t.

When I got home I saw the tears of joy on my parents’ faces. They both knew I had shot myself, but they didn’t care. Twenty years later I know I would have shot myself again. The only regret I have about that is not having done it sooner. Months sooner. I wasn’t me anymore. Yes, I felt guilty. Yes, now I acted normally. But that made it all the worst.

Ever since I came back I’ve never been to stay in one place. I kind of bounce around from job to job until I find the right fit.

Now I wake up in the night sweating. My wife knows that it’s only war dreams, but she thinks I’m fighting VC. What I really see in those dreams is myself. I’m lying on the ground with my kneecaps shot off, staring down the barrel of a gun at my own face.

***

The draft notice arrived on June 17, 1968. It was a humid afternoon, I remember, cloudy and very quite, and I’d just come in from a round of golf. My mother and father were having lunch out in the kitchen. I remember opening the letter, scanning the first few lines, feeling the blood go thick in my eyes. I remember a sound in my head. It wasn’t thinking, just a silent howl. A million things all at once—I was too good for this war.

War was for the supporters and those too stupid to grasp its full meaning. I could not mindlessly follow the orders of a drill sergeant; I could not come home in a flag covered coffin. My parents didn’t support the war. But, we did support America. I was torn in half. Part of my body seemed already there: firing on the enemy, holding my base, maybe even screaming in pain. But there was another part of me that longed to run to the north, it wouldn’t be far. A little drive and a swim and I would be there. In Canada.

Alive.

…

I had heard all of the arguments before: “fight for freedom”, “don’t embarrass your family”, “you can’t abandon the land of the free forever”. But the war wasn’t for freedom. It was for…hell who knows what it was for. And as for embarrassing my family, that was just silly. Neither of my parents agreed with the war. They were strictly against it. Embarrassing my family would have been dying in Vietnam for a causeless war. Embarrassing my family would have been coming home without a leg because I didn’t get out of the way while my comrades burned down a village.

My mother had lost a brother as a child. She barely remembers him and talking about it doesn’t bother her too much, but my grandmother died with him. My mother told me once that she could never bear to lose one of her children because she saw how stricken her mother had been. I was sure my family could cope with me living in the neighboring country that provided free health care as opposed to coping with my death.

I headed north the next month. My mother and father had come with me to say goodbye. They told me that they would visit as soon as they could. Around 3:00 a.m. I crossed the Rainy River and by 4:30 I was sitting in Canada trying to figure out how to build my new life.

It was hard at first reorganizing my life to fit a new culture. After Carter pardoned my crime I returned to my hometown. It felt different being back in my hometown, I had missed it for so long, but after about a year I returned to Canada to live there.

Sometimes I feel guilty for leaving my peers to go to war. But I know that I could not fight for a cause that I don’t agree with. I could not cope with what I would have become.

***

I decided to do this for an extended journal because I wanted to follow up on the class project we did. When I told Curt Lemon’s story I tried to at least partially simulate the reaction that my grandmother had to her son’s death. I have heard my mother talk several times about my grandmother’s reaction to John’s death. Ever since then, my mother has truly believed that there is no greater loss than the loss of your own child.

It took me a while to really try to get down Rat’s story properly the way I would have reacted to it. For Rat’s story and Curt’s story I tried to incorporate how I would react along with the character’s reactions.

For the third story I tried to just imagine would I do. My father was drafted for Vietnam but the draft rescinded because of his poor eyesight. I tried to incorporate his reaction to be drafted as well as how he would react if either of his sons were drafted. My mother told both of my brothers that if the Iraq war seemed to be turning towards a draft they were going to go to school in Canada before they were sent to war.

The Things They Carried--Close Analysis

Growing Pains

“The deepest definition of youth is life as yet untouched by tragedy.”
Alfred North Whitehead
During the Vietnam War, our country sent thousands of its youngest, most able-bodied men to a foreign continent to kill unquestioningly. But they were not sent because of their youthful energy, or because they were most able to fight; the soldiers of Vietnam were so young because they were also impressionable and easily manipulated. The young men that emerged from the war did not know how to react to the things they saw, and as shown in Tim O’Brien’s The Things They Carried, they did some awful things as a result. Because the American soldiers in Vietnam didn’t know how to react to the atrocities of war, they decided to act immaturely and sometimes disgustingly, to deal with the pain.
Early on in the novel O’Brien states the average age of his platoon “was nineteen or twenty, and as a consequence things often took on a curiously playful atmosphere” (37). But youth is more than an age; it is a state of being. Over and over again O’Brien reiterates that a soldier is still “just a child” (105). But it is more complicated than simple childhood; the boys are to be caught in between adulthood and adolescence. Before Curt Lemon dies the soldiers may well have been ten-year-old boys playing in their backyard: Curt Lemon and Rat Kiley “giggling and calling each other yellow mother and playing a silly game they’d invented” while Mitchell Sanders plays with his yo-yo (69). After Curt Lemon dies the boys are forced to climb the jungle trees of Vietnam and peel out their friend’s body. Forcing children to do adult things causes them to skip the steps of growing up. Suddenly the ability to kill is present, but the knowledge of when to kill is not. It is this sudden leap that causes the soldiers to do some of the horrible things they do later in the book.
To deal with the war the soldiers often try to use “harsh vocabulary to contain the terrible softness” (20). The boys know they are only boys, they admit this often, but they still don’t want to show that they are boys. They act immature and even flippant about the death of close friends; they make phrases like “zapped while zipping” (17) to try to make the death less real. As shown by Norman Bowker’s story, such attempts to avert attention from the pain do not work. Norman doesn’t deal with the death of Kiowa, he only tells Azar to “‘pipe down’”, and the tragedy eats away at him until he can’t take it anymore and hangs himself long after the war is over. This again shows the impressionability of the soldiers and emphasizes that the atrocities that occur while their minds are still being molded affect them for the rest of their lives.
The most memorable example of an inability to deal with emotions is Rat Kiley’s massacre of the baby water buffalo. It is probable that Rat felt that he could not show his pain about the death of Curt Lemon through words because he thought that would be a juvenile reaction, so he tries to express himself in a manlier manner. When killing the baby water buffalo doesn’t help Rat to feel better, he reverts back to a near infantile state and starts to cry as he “[cradles] his rifle and [goes] off by himself” (79). But the scene is more than just Rat Kiley killing an animal; the baby water buffalo can easily be a symbol of the young men who have been sent into a war they don’t understand to take a beating they don’t deserve. The soldiers had been chased down by the government and tortured by their enemies. The soldiers never lash out at the government just like the baby water buffalo who is “all the while silent, or almost silent…nothing [moves] except the eyes which [are] enormous, the pupils shiny black and dumb” (79). This comparison of the helpless baby animal to the helpless young soldiers shows more clearly than anything else the inability to cope with what is happening around them.
Of all the things the soldiers in the novel carried, experience was not among them. Although they are still teenagers, many of the soldiers are forced to make life and death decisions. These decisions cause them to leap the chasm between childhood and adulthood without the bridge of adolescence to carry them across. Because the soldiers lack experience and knowledge in the face of the atrocities of war, they can’t express their emotions in any way that a truly adult person would.

"The Things They Carried"--Reader Response

The beginning of the novel focuses on the things each soldier carried. What I found very interesting was that many stories were not about the plot but in essence turned out to be the moral. For example, Ted Lavender’s death was not told to give respects to Lavender’s character as a person, but in fact to explain the characters more fully, especially Jimmy Cross. We learn about his love for Martha. We learn about his loss of Martha. And finally we learn how he became a stronger general because of Lavender’s death: “he went back to his maps…he was now determined to perform his duties firmly and without negligence” (25).

Cross’s story with Martha stayed with me throughout the novel. I didn’t really understand why he loved her so. She seems like a very average person, and the fact that he wanted to tie her up “and put his hand on her knee and just [hold] it there all night long” was very unsettling to me (29). What impresses me about Jimmy Cross is that he “did not want the responsibility of leading these men,” but he led them anyway (167). After I read that he didn’t want to lead them, I wondered how he had risen to his rank unwillingly and I realized that he is one of the only characters in the novel who truly cares about his men. Cross takes the responsibility to explain Kiowa’s death to the Native American’s father “carefully, not covering up his own guilt” (169). This is what makes Jimmy Cross worthy to lead.

Why doesn’t O’Brien use quotation marks for 27 pages? “There’s a moral here, said Mitchell Sanders” (21). There are no quotation marks where there should be.

The checkers O’Brien describes provided a lot of insight into how frustrating the war must have been. O’Brien clearly shows what he wanted in contrast with what the war in Vietnam actually was; “there was a winner and a loser. There were rules” in checkers, but not in his war (32). When I read about O’Brien almost running away I could relate with him the most. The author takes my exact sentiments of war when he states, “there should be a law…if you support a war…that’s fine, but you have to be willing to put your own precious fluids on the line” (42). This is an almost an exact quote that my mother gave when it seemed there might be a draft for the war in Iraq the year my brother turned eighteen.

O’Brien seems to stress the totally opposite aspects of war. At one point he will state “war is hell…and love. War is nasty; war is fun….War makes you a man; war makes you dead” (80). I had a lot of trouble comprehending this fully. I understand that the trips and adventures could be fun, but when the soldiers “can’t wait to get back into action” I don’t understand it (35). The soldiers have to kill people, and it changes them. The soldiers have to watch their best friends blow up, the soldiers have to peel people out of trees. This upsets them so much that they torture animals and even then “there wasn’t a great deal of pity for the baby water buffalo” (79). O’Brien even shows this with his story of Mary Anne Bell. Mary Anne comes to Vietnam innocent and unknowing and turns into a person who wears “a necklace of human tongues” (110). This worst part about Mary Anne though was that she then tries to convince her ex-lover that “‘it’s not bad’” that she’s become something new, something without feeling (111). I felt like O’Brien sends very mixed messages throughout the novel, sometimes “even though you’re pinned down by a war you never felt more at peace” (36). And sometimes “you can tell a true war story by its absolute and uncompromising allegiance to obscenity and evil” (69). All over the novel O’Brien continually compares the war to opposites: “‘it’s like trying to tell someone what chocolate tastes like’…‘or shit’” (113). I understand the message the author is trying to convey by doing this, but I can’t relate to it at all.

One of the main themes of the novel is story telling. And, in essence, the definition of truth. Throughout the novel O’Brien stresses that stories enhance truth to make it more real for the listener.

Blame is also an interesting theme from the novel. O’Brien seems to blame his town for him going to war. For putting pressure on him to do many things he didn’t think were right, “I held them responsible. By God yes I did” (45). The author understands that blame can go to anyone: “the munitions makers or Karl Marx or a trick of fate or an old man in Omaha that forgot to vote” (177). But in the end, it comes own to personal guilt as well.

Henry Dobbins became my favorite character when he carried Azar over to a well and told him to “‘dance right’” (136).

Norman Bowker’s story was very sad to me. Why did tasting the lake water make him feel better?

It was very powerful how O’Brien made up details that he could relate to for the boy who died. I was glad to finally see a character see a Vietnamese person as actually human instead of just a “dink”. What made it more powerful too, was that the author does not actually describe how he felt at the moment, he merely describes it all so that we may feel the disgust, partially by repetition, and partially by strong writing. What scared me is that he “did not see him as the enemy; [he] did not ponder morality or politics or military duty” (132). I consider such contemplations necessary for almost any decision, and it scares me when people don’t think about such things when a person life is on the line.

When telling the story of Mary Anne, O’Brien stresses the impressionability of the couple: Mary Anne and Mark Fossie. Is the reason we draft young people to wars because they’re impressionable? The best fighters can’t be under the age of twenty and yet “the average age of the platoon…was nineteen or twenty” (37).

"The Yellow Wallpaper"--Just a Question

While I was reading the story I continually noticed that the narrator was very careful to always talk about how much John loves her. As seen in many of the quotes of the previous post. I was going to ask about it in discussion but we ran out of time. Does the narrator constantly talk about John's love so the reader doesn't lay the blame on him, or does she do so to try to convince herself that she is living a normal life with the American dream and only her mind is holding her back? If John had truly loved her, would he have been more apt to listen to her? I wonder if perhaps the narrator only pretended that John treated her so only because she wanted to seem like a lovable person. The slept in separate beds, yet somehow he was there when she woke up at night.

"It is so hard to talk to John about my case, because he is so wise, and because he loves me so" (23). Why would it be hard to talk to someone because they are wise? Such quotes lead me to believe that the narrator is only pretending that her marriage is better than it is. But why would she hold up the facade well into her insanity?

Any feedback her would be helpful.

"The Yellow Wallpaper"--Close Analysis: John (edited)

The narrator of “The Yellow Wallpaper” goes insane in spite of the fact that she has a caring husband to take care of her. Throughout the novel John tries everything in his power to make his ill wife better; “he is very careful and loving, and hardly lets [the narrator] stir without special direction” (12). Although not lettering her stir actually worsened her mental state, John was acting under the direction of some of the finest doctors of the time. He cannot be blamed for his wife’s mental illness solely because he couldn’t cure it. Before much deterioration of her mental state the narrator notes that “John says the very worst thing I can do is to think about my condition, and I confess that it always makes me feel bad” (10). This statement proves that John did have some idea what was making his wife feel so terrible, and thus it provides proof that John must have been more intuitive to his wife’s needs than expected. Some argue that John is patronizing and unloving to his wife, but as her mental state deteriorates he has no choice but to simplify his statements so that she may understand. Even on the verge of her insanity the narrator notes that John is “so wise, and…he loves me so” (23). Later in the book the narrator attempts to convince the reader that John is attempting to steal her secrets and states that she fears him, but her only support for this is that she has “caught him several times looking at the paper” (27)! John’s failed attempts to heal his wife don’t make him less of a husband. He was obviously deeply unsettled by his wife’s deterioration and did everything in his power to slow her sickness.

"The Yellow Wallpaper"--Close Analysis: John

The narrator of The Yellow Wallpaper has gone insane in spite of the fact that she has a kind and loving husband to take care of her. Throughout the novel John tries everything in his power to solve his wife’s mental problems. Before much deterioration of her mental state she noted that “John says the very worst thing I can do is to think about my condition, and I confess that it always makes me feel bad” (10). This is still while the narrator is relatively lucid and is thus one of the statements the reader can trust the most. Although John was not entirely aware of what troubled his wife, he tried everything in his power as a doctor to make her well: “[John] is very careful and loving, and hardly lets me stir without special direction” (12). Such a husband who dotes upon his wife and deals with all of her odd behaviors cannot be blamed if she acts oddly. Some might say that he was unloving and patronizing to his wife but in her deteriorating mental state there was nothing else he could do. It is impossible to lay blame on the poor man’s shoulders with the basis for such blame being the narration of his wife. Even of the verge of her insanity she notes that “he is so wise, and…he loves me so” (23). Later in the book the narrator says that John is holding her back and attempting to steal her secrets, but this is after she has a very weak mental state and she has not support for this except that she has “caught him several times looking at the paper!” (27).

"The Yellow Wallpaper"--Reader Response

Overall The Yellow Wallpaper by Charlotte Perkins Gilman is an interesting insight into the mind of a mentally unstable woman presumably of the past. I found it difficult to pinpoint a setting for the novel but from my best estimation is happened in the sixties. I am assuming this because the book was copyrighted in 1973 and John, the narrator's husband, treats his wife in a very old fashioned manner.

The narrator is obviously in an unhappy marriage. John is described as kindly, but he is extraordinarily patronizing to his unhealthy wife. Such a husband who won't let his wife write obviously has some control issues which are not explicitly stated in the book. I felt as if the narrator was often trying to convince herself that John was a great husband when he actually wasn't. For example, the narrator writes "I did write for a while in spite of them; but it does exhaust me a good deal--having to be so sly about it, or else meet with heavy opposition" (10). This shows that John is restraining his wife in a manner which she is not happy with and in silly ways which do not help her. But the quote also shows some details which puzzled me. Why does she say she "did" write? Obviously she still writes and she has remarked this earlier by saying the paper will hold her secrets because it is dead.

Another question occurred to me when I read "John is a physician, and perhaps...that is one reason I do not get well faster" (9-10). While reading I wondered if this meant that she did not get well because her husband's constant flow of remedies did not work, or perhaps she did not get well because he gave her attention when she was ill that she would not have otherwise received. Alternatively, it has also occurred to me that she could be mentally ill just to spite the man she has built up resentment for. "He knows there is no reason to suffer and that satisfies him...It does weigh on me so not to do my duty in any way" (14)! She never explains what duty she cannot fulfill, but as I read on I find that it is a sense of purposefulness. A mother and wife who seems to only receive disdain and second-hand care from her husband and can't even bear to be with her child obviously has some issues that are not explained easily on paper.

The famous wallpaper after which the book is titled makes its first appears on early on. It is not mentioned thereafter for some time, but as the novel progresses the wallpaper is mentioned more and more frequently. Later the narrator declares she sees a woman in the paper and later reveals that the woman is behind bars at night. Even later the narrator also declares "The fact is I'm getting a little afraid of John" (26). She then goes on to talk about Jennie being queer as well. A feeling of paranoia crept over me as I read deeper into these pages. The woman behind the bars in the wall paper is most certainly the narrator herself. The narrator also feels that the pattern in the paper could be broken to release the woman, but the most perplexing part of this to me was that she wouldn't allow anyone else to help her: "But I knew she [Jennie] was studying that pattern, and I am determined -- that nobody shall find it but myself" (27)! I wonder if the narrator feels that only she can save herself from her own insanity, or that she just doesn't want to save herself.

"I think that woman gets out in the daytime! And I'll tell you why--privately--I've seen her" (30)! This part confused me. The storyteller had mentioned before that she goes outside during the day, but if the woman behind the bars can be out "creeping" during the day, why is she imprisoned at night?

"I have found out another funny thing, but I shan't tell it this time! It does not do to trust people too much" (page 31). I found this quote very intriguing because the beginning of the novel the wife was able to tell her secrets to the paper on which she writes, but that paper has turned into a living being that she can no longer trust. This not only enhances the feeling of paranoia but also distances the reader from the narrator and gives the foreboding feeling that inexplicable things are about to happen.

At the end of the story the narrator has combined herself with the woman in the paper and states "'I've got it out at last'...'in spite of you and Jane. And I've pulled off most of the paper so you can't put me back'" (36). The insanity has reached it peak and the poor woman feels as though she has pushed off her shackles but still can't tear herself away from the wall. I translated this to partially mean that she had found safety and support behind the bars in the paper she had imagined. Presumably safety from the man she neither trusted nor loved. She says the woman is only in bars at night and that seems to be the only time John is around. During the day she is free to creep around but is never truly happy because of her daunting marriage. I'm curious where the discussion of this book will go.