Monday, November 30, 2009
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Congo, Casement, and the Congo Atrocities - Alan Simmons
- Simmons discusses 2 men who wrote about the Congo: Conrad and Casement
- The two men knew and interacted with each other
- They were both "profoundly affected by their Congo experiences" and "found an outlet in their writing"
- They both shared a detestation for the atrocities they saw and supported reform
- However, their accounts of the mutilation differ significantly
- Casement began a crusade to find accurate eye-witness accounts to add to the reform movement. Therefore, his accounts offer graphic descriptions of specific atrocities to be presented to Parliament as an appeal for reform support.
- While Conrad wrote a fictional account intended for the public. therefore, Conrad uses much more hinting and vague suggestions (cannibalism example) rather than explicit facts. It is a "mixture of denial and evasion" perhaps, as Simmons suggests out of a threat to the European sense of self as "civilized."
- Simmmons then discusses the dilemma of expressing atrocities in general
- Conrad refers to the "unspeakable truth," but how exactly does one express things that are "unspeakable?"
- Cold hard facts, according to Simmons, are "doomed to be disbelieved because society has no context for it"
- "Heart of darkness" thus provides this context* and makes the discussion of uncomfortable facts more possible.
- Conrad expresses the unspeakable truth without over-exaggerating which would take away its credibility
- The facts are essentially unnecessary for Conrad's novella because "Officially, of course, it was denied. But man to man, everyone knew." He did not need to qualify the feasibility of his story. No one doubted it.
- The two men knew and interacted with each other
- They were both "profoundly affected by their Congo experiences" and "found an outlet in their writing"
- They both shared a detestation for the atrocities they saw and supported reform
- However, their accounts of the mutilation differ significantly
- Casement began a crusade to find accurate eye-witness accounts to add to the reform movement. Therefore, his accounts offer graphic descriptions of specific atrocities to be presented to Parliament as an appeal for reform support.
- While Conrad wrote a fictional account intended for the public. therefore, Conrad uses much more hinting and vague suggestions (cannibalism example) rather than explicit facts. It is a "mixture of denial and evasion" perhaps, as Simmons suggests out of a threat to the European sense of self as "civilized."
- Simmmons then discusses the dilemma of expressing atrocities in general
- Conrad refers to the "unspeakable truth," but how exactly does one express things that are "unspeakable?"
- Cold hard facts, according to Simmons, are "doomed to be disbelieved because society has no context for it"
- "Heart of darkness" thus provides this context* and makes the discussion of uncomfortable facts more possible.
- Conrad expresses the unspeakable truth without over-exaggerating which would take away its credibility
- The facts are essentially unnecessary for Conrad's novella because "Officially, of course, it was denied. But man to man, everyone knew." He did not need to qualify the feasibility of his story. No one doubted it.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Poor Dilsey : (
Dilsey is the thread of the Compson household. She is with the family for as long as we can see and is, perhaps, the only character able to function effectively in time. She essentially raises all of the Compson children as well as her own, while taking care of the baby of the family, Mrs. Compson. Once Caddy, Father, and Quentin are gone, Dilsey seems to be the only adult in the household. Benjy needs 24-hour attention to function; Mother depends on Dilsey and Jason for all of her needs; Quentin cannot grasp the concepts of responsibility and gratitude (understandably);and, Jason cannot grow out of his own immaturity and stubbornness.
With a house full of dependent "Children," Dilsey is forced to take on all of the household responsibilities. In section one, we get hints that Dilsey has a lot of help with this burden. Her husband and sons work hard to take care of some chores. However, in section four, it is clear that Dilsey is practically on her own. Luster does not have the same sense of willingness to help that we saw in Versh and T.P. Thus, Luster becomes just another child Dilsey has to babysit around the clock.
With all that Dilsey does for the Compsons, one would expect them to express immense gratitude towards her. However, not once do we hear someone thank or appreciate her hard work. Mother complains that she is taking too long. Jason complains that she is not perfectly obedient and complacent to his authority and Quentin flat out ignores her efforts to protect her from Jason. Why does no one express appreciation for arguably the most important member of the Compson family? Why doesn't, at the very least, Luster appreciate her? Is there a complete inability to express gratitude or do the Compsons show grattitude for other characters besides Dilsey?
With a house full of dependent "Children," Dilsey is forced to take on all of the household responsibilities. In section one, we get hints that Dilsey has a lot of help with this burden. Her husband and sons work hard to take care of some chores. However, in section four, it is clear that Dilsey is practically on her own. Luster does not have the same sense of willingness to help that we saw in Versh and T.P. Thus, Luster becomes just another child Dilsey has to babysit around the clock.
With all that Dilsey does for the Compsons, one would expect them to express immense gratitude towards her. However, not once do we hear someone thank or appreciate her hard work. Mother complains that she is taking too long. Jason complains that she is not perfectly obedient and complacent to his authority and Quentin flat out ignores her efforts to protect her from Jason. Why does no one express appreciation for arguably the most important member of the Compson family? Why doesn't, at the very least, Luster appreciate her? Is there a complete inability to express gratitude or do the Compsons show grattitude for other characters besides Dilsey?
Friday, October 30, 2009
Oh the Irony
Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury was written after a period of intense depression in Faulkner's life. After receiving harsh criticism on his novel, Flags in the Dust, he fell into a period of deep depression and loneliness. However, Faulkner was able to benefit greatly from this dark time in his life. He came out of it with a new sense of freedom, freedom from the press and the publishers. Faulkner remembered thinking to himself, “'I wont have to worry about publishers liking or not liking this at all.'“ Thus, one failure had opened the gates to the possibility of great success, and Faulkner did not disappoint.
While writing and inventing the stories of the Compson children, Faulkner became extremely secretive from his own family. He would not discuss the novel until it was completed. Perhaps this is because he was in the process of writing an intense and innovative, yet regressive novel. According to David Minter, the novel has two defining qualities, a regressive and an innovative quality. It is innovative, for Faulkner, in its move towards “home, family, childhood, and the interior.” In his preceding novels, Faulkner did not deal with these aspects to such a degree displayed in The Sound and the Fury. Therefore, the novel is innovative in its unconventional structure and use of unordinary themes and content (for Faulkner). Its regressive element is evident in Faulkner's constant use of repetition and memory.
The understanding of Faulkner's mindset at the time of writing The Sound and the Fury provides some clarity for the reader. Faulkner wrote the novel with virtually no regard for anyone but himself. He wrote the novel for himself, by himself. It served as a rejection of critics and publishers as well as a turn towards true writing, for the purpose of just writing. The confusing structure and morbid themes are not so strange in retrospect. Faulkner wrote the novel in private, while recovering from depression and rejection. After reading the novel, I feel many questions are still unanswered. This makes much more sense, knowing the fact that Faulkner did not write the novel for me. He wrote it as a private novel for himself. Yes, he intended it to be published if possible, but in essence the novel was for his own benefit as a proclamation of freedom. Faulkner knows all the answers and that is all that mattered to him at the time. Pleasing the readers and publishers was not his goal. How ironic! (413)
Minter, David. Faulkner, Childhood, and the Making of The Sound and the Fury. American Literature Vol 51, No 3, 376-393. 1979: Duke University Press.
While writing and inventing the stories of the Compson children, Faulkner became extremely secretive from his own family. He would not discuss the novel until it was completed. Perhaps this is because he was in the process of writing an intense and innovative, yet regressive novel. According to David Minter, the novel has two defining qualities, a regressive and an innovative quality. It is innovative, for Faulkner, in its move towards “home, family, childhood, and the interior.” In his preceding novels, Faulkner did not deal with these aspects to such a degree displayed in The Sound and the Fury. Therefore, the novel is innovative in its unconventional structure and use of unordinary themes and content (for Faulkner). Its regressive element is evident in Faulkner's constant use of repetition and memory.
The understanding of Faulkner's mindset at the time of writing The Sound and the Fury provides some clarity for the reader. Faulkner wrote the novel with virtually no regard for anyone but himself. He wrote the novel for himself, by himself. It served as a rejection of critics and publishers as well as a turn towards true writing, for the purpose of just writing. The confusing structure and morbid themes are not so strange in retrospect. Faulkner wrote the novel in private, while recovering from depression and rejection. After reading the novel, I feel many questions are still unanswered. This makes much more sense, knowing the fact that Faulkner did not write the novel for me. He wrote it as a private novel for himself. Yes, he intended it to be published if possible, but in essence the novel was for his own benefit as a proclamation of freedom. Faulkner knows all the answers and that is all that mattered to him at the time. Pleasing the readers and publishers was not his goal. How ironic! (413)
Minter, David. Faulkner, Childhood, and the Making of The Sound and the Fury. American Literature Vol 51, No 3, 376-393. 1979: Duke University Press.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Section 2: More Confusion!
After reading section one of The Sound and The Fury, one would expect section two to be, at the very least, less-confusing. However, this assumption leads to disappointment and frustration. Section two does not provide the much-needed clarity, but rather confuses the situation even more. One event, however, is heavily dealt with. The reader learns much more about the details of Caddy’s marriage.
We learn that Caddy and Quentin are very close through their conversations and through the way Caddy talked about Quentin to Herbert. We learn that one of the children (or two) has committed incest. We learn that Caddy is “sick” and has “got to marry somebody.” We learn that Caddy does end up marrying Mr. Sydney Herbert Head, who one family member states has “spoiled us all to death.” Through dialogue between Quentin and Herbert, it becomes clear that Quentin does not like Herbert. This becomes even more clear when we find out, “Quentin has shot Herbert he shot his voice through the floor of Caddy’s room.” All of these facts are thrown at us. The piecing together of details has now become the reader’s job. (189)
We learn that Caddy and Quentin are very close through their conversations and through the way Caddy talked about Quentin to Herbert. We learn that one of the children (or two) has committed incest. We learn that Caddy is “sick” and has “got to marry somebody.” We learn that Caddy does end up marrying Mr. Sydney Herbert Head, who one family member states has “spoiled us all to death.” Through dialogue between Quentin and Herbert, it becomes clear that Quentin does not like Herbert. This becomes even more clear when we find out, “Quentin has shot Herbert he shot his voice through the floor of Caddy’s room.” All of these facts are thrown at us. The piecing together of details has now become the reader’s job. (189)
Monday, October 5, 2009
Nessus at Noon- John Updike
I read "Nessus at Noon" by John Updike from The American Scholar. I enjoyed reading Updike's "A & P." His social commentary and themes of the importance of self and the ridiculousness of society's standards were perfectly mixed with a witty humor. Thus, I expected no less from "Nessus at Noon." Without reading a word, the story's unconventionality and uniqueness are obvious. The entire story is a conversation between a dry-cleaner and a customer. The story is short, witty, and to-the-point. I found it to have the same unique qualities as "A & P," with one exception.
In "Nessus at Noon," a customer receives his dry-cleaned shirt back with "Sorry, this is the best that can be done" attached as a note. The customer cannot walk away and continue wearing his shirt until he knows what about his shirt requires an apology. The dry-cleaner and the customer argue for some time until the dry-cleaner finally admits, "it's simply not you."
I will not be using "Nessus at Noon" for my short story paper. It was engaging, fun to read, entertaining, and concise. However, I can find only a few instances of a deeper meaning. For the most part, the story can be taken at face value. It can be appreciated for its creative story-line and clever humor. It lacks, however, a core theme or message, in my opinion. Therefore, it does not strike me as a prime choice for an interpretive essay! (242)
In "Nessus at Noon," a customer receives his dry-cleaned shirt back with "Sorry, this is the best that can be done" attached as a note. The customer cannot walk away and continue wearing his shirt until he knows what about his shirt requires an apology. The dry-cleaner and the customer argue for some time until the dry-cleaner finally admits, "it's simply not you."
I will not be using "Nessus at Noon" for my short story paper. It was engaging, fun to read, entertaining, and concise. However, I can find only a few instances of a deeper meaning. For the most part, the story can be taken at face value. It can be appreciated for its creative story-line and clever humor. It lacks, however, a core theme or message, in my opinion. Therefore, it does not strike me as a prime choice for an interpretive essay! (242)
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Inevitable Insomnia
Ernest Hemingway’s “A Clean, Well-Lighted Place” should not be mistaken for a meaningless short story. Its briefness, if anything, should be an indication of the importance of every word. The story depicts what might appear to be an everyday situation; however, Hemingway manages to establish an essential life lesson within the simple story. None of the characters are given names, suggesting the universality of the story and, more importantly, the story’s message. The lack of names implies that the message should apply to all “men,” young and old. The apparent declaration of universal application is bold and creates high expectations. It also makes the reader wonder: What exactly is Hemingway’s intended message and how will he present and develop it in such a short piece? Hemingway’s “A Clean, Well-Lighted Place” develops a universal message of empathy and understanding through a series of contrasting elements in a relatable setting.
Hemingway sets up four strikingly obvious contrasts within the story. Three of the four are introduced in the opening paragraph, perhaps saving the best for last. The first comparison the readers are exposed to is that of young and old. The first sentence refers to an “old man.” Thus it can be assumed that there are characters younger than the old man. Note, however, Hemingway’s use of “an” rather than “the” when referring to the old man, suggesting his universality and the unimportance of further identification. The theme of young versus old is perhaps the most dealt with throughout the story. There is a sense of progression among the three characters. One is “young.” One is “older.” One is simply “old.” The youngest is confident, selfish, and focused on solely material aspects of life. He shows absolutely no empathy for the old man. The oldest is lonely and depressed. He has lost interest in material possession and seeks things money cannot buy, cleanliness and light. The two men are set up as complete opposites. The addition of a third intermediate character creates irony and significance. The older man is able to relate to both other men. He entertains the young man’s questions and is able to relate to him. However, he is also able to understand the old man and even defends him. The older man recognizes that he will soon be in the same situation. The irony here is that the young man will eventually progress into the same later stages of life that he is disrespecting and criticizing. He fails to realize his own fate displayed right before his eyes. When he says, “An old man is a nasty thing[,]” the inherent irony is perfectly obvious. Every young man will progress into an old man; the young are blind to their own fate as it slowly creeps up on them.
The next comparisons are dealt with in a lesser sense but are equally as significant. Hemingway sets up a contrast between light and dark as well as between cleanliness and dirt. Both the old and older man understand the importance of a “clean well-lighted place.” The young man is baffled by this concept and mentions that “bodegas [are] open all night long.” After work, the older waiter seems to consider the younger waiter’s suggestion by going to a bar. However, he is met only with disappointment. He appreciates the bright lighting in the bar but is turned off by the lack of cleanliness. The waiter heads home to a dark lonely room. He waits until the sun rises to fall asleep, diagnosing his problem as insomnia. The older waiter cannot fall asleep in the dark; he is only comfortable relaxing in the light. The young waiter, however, is anxious to return home to his wife and get to sleep before the morning. The two are complete opposites, and yet destined to the same eventual fate.
The fourth contrast Hemingway sets up is a contrast between understanding and ignorance. Hemingway implies that understanding and empathy are acquired with age. The young are oblivious and ignorant until their impending destiny becomes inescapable. Ultimately, old age brings a realization of the wasted youth years consumed by ignorance. Unfortunately, all three men in the story wait too long to make this realization and condemn themselves to an old-age filled with regret and loneliness. Hemingway successfully portrays the ironic gap between generations within “A Clean, Well-Lighted Place.” The question left for the reader to answer is how can this unfortunate gap be avoided?
If the young remain preoccupied with material possessions and do not even attempt to feel empathy for their elders, they will fall into the same pattern portrayed in the story. Consequently, if the young can learn to see value in light and cleanliness and come to respect and understand their elders, they might be able to avoid a lonely destiny. Hemingway proposes that one must learn to appreciate the light early on in life or be doomed to chronic “insomnia.” (825)
Hemingway sets up four strikingly obvious contrasts within the story. Three of the four are introduced in the opening paragraph, perhaps saving the best for last. The first comparison the readers are exposed to is that of young and old. The first sentence refers to an “old man.” Thus it can be assumed that there are characters younger than the old man. Note, however, Hemingway’s use of “an” rather than “the” when referring to the old man, suggesting his universality and the unimportance of further identification. The theme of young versus old is perhaps the most dealt with throughout the story. There is a sense of progression among the three characters. One is “young.” One is “older.” One is simply “old.” The youngest is confident, selfish, and focused on solely material aspects of life. He shows absolutely no empathy for the old man. The oldest is lonely and depressed. He has lost interest in material possession and seeks things money cannot buy, cleanliness and light. The two men are set up as complete opposites. The addition of a third intermediate character creates irony and significance. The older man is able to relate to both other men. He entertains the young man’s questions and is able to relate to him. However, he is also able to understand the old man and even defends him. The older man recognizes that he will soon be in the same situation. The irony here is that the young man will eventually progress into the same later stages of life that he is disrespecting and criticizing. He fails to realize his own fate displayed right before his eyes. When he says, “An old man is a nasty thing[,]” the inherent irony is perfectly obvious. Every young man will progress into an old man; the young are blind to their own fate as it slowly creeps up on them.
The next comparisons are dealt with in a lesser sense but are equally as significant. Hemingway sets up a contrast between light and dark as well as between cleanliness and dirt. Both the old and older man understand the importance of a “clean well-lighted place.” The young man is baffled by this concept and mentions that “bodegas [are] open all night long.” After work, the older waiter seems to consider the younger waiter’s suggestion by going to a bar. However, he is met only with disappointment. He appreciates the bright lighting in the bar but is turned off by the lack of cleanliness. The waiter heads home to a dark lonely room. He waits until the sun rises to fall asleep, diagnosing his problem as insomnia. The older waiter cannot fall asleep in the dark; he is only comfortable relaxing in the light. The young waiter, however, is anxious to return home to his wife and get to sleep before the morning. The two are complete opposites, and yet destined to the same eventual fate.
The fourth contrast Hemingway sets up is a contrast between understanding and ignorance. Hemingway implies that understanding and empathy are acquired with age. The young are oblivious and ignorant until their impending destiny becomes inescapable. Ultimately, old age brings a realization of the wasted youth years consumed by ignorance. Unfortunately, all three men in the story wait too long to make this realization and condemn themselves to an old-age filled with regret and loneliness. Hemingway successfully portrays the ironic gap between generations within “A Clean, Well-Lighted Place.” The question left for the reader to answer is how can this unfortunate gap be avoided?
If the young remain preoccupied with material possessions and do not even attempt to feel empathy for their elders, they will fall into the same pattern portrayed in the story. Consequently, if the young can learn to see value in light and cleanliness and come to respect and understand their elders, they might be able to avoid a lonely destiny. Hemingway proposes that one must learn to appreciate the light early on in life or be doomed to chronic “insomnia.” (825)
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Who is to Blame?
I can think of many situations that would, to an extent, “justify” a teenager running away from home. Perhaps running away from home is never the best solution. However, it is at the very least understandable under certain intolerable circumstances. Donny’s at-home environment in Anne Tyler’s “Teenage Wasteland” does not even come close to one of these reasonable justifications for running away. Donny has a mother Daisy who is willing to dedicate herself completely towards helping her son. Unfortunately her efforts are in vain. Daisy has an unappreciative son who is consumed in self-pity. Donny fails to recognize that he is not the only teenager suffering from, G-d forbid, curfews and homework. His mind is so self-centered that he has lost the ability to appreciate what he is so lucky to have, a mother who is willing to do anything for her son. Donny does not deserve Daisy.
At times, Daisy is entirely confused in her methods of helping Donny. However, all of her efforts are put forth with love and with the best of intentions. Donny searches for his mother’s flaws and, of course, fails to appreciate her unconditional love. He continues to misbehave and disrespect his mother. Daisy is so accustomed to her son’s disrespect that she can not even recognize it. This is perhaps Daisy’s essential flaw as a parent. She fails to assert herself as an authoritative figure. This leads to Donny’s assumption of their equality and his right to criticize and blame his mother for his own faults. Regardless of Daisy’s failure to command respect, Donny should be able to acknowledge his mother’s devotion and respect her nonetheless.
The story concludes with Donny’s ultimate act of selfishness. He runs away from his completely unbearable situation at home and does not return for at least three months. Poor Daisy is left to live in wonder. She wonders where her son has gone. She wonders why he has left. She wonders what she has done wrong and what she could have done differently to prevent him from leaving. Donny, no doubt, does not even consider how his running away might affect his mother. Donny’s selfishness has condemned his parents to believe they are failures. Daisy is not a prefect parent. However, no parent who showers love and help as freely as Daisy does deserves to believe he or she has failed as a parent. Daisy did the best she could. Donny wanted more.
The story’s focus on Daisy as the active parent makes the reader wonder: where is Donny’s father and why does he receive no blame? When Donny acts up in school, Daisy meets with the principal. When Donny’s grades fall, Daisy supervises Donny’s homework habits. Finally, when Donny runs away, Daisy assumes responsibility. Donny’s self-centered nature is not Daisy’s fault. My purpose for writing this blog is to prevent readers from automatically placing the blame on Daisy. She is an easy target. However, Matt is equally as responsible and ultimately, Donny should be held accountable for his own mistakes.
At times, Daisy is entirely confused in her methods of helping Donny. However, all of her efforts are put forth with love and with the best of intentions. Donny searches for his mother’s flaws and, of course, fails to appreciate her unconditional love. He continues to misbehave and disrespect his mother. Daisy is so accustomed to her son’s disrespect that she can not even recognize it. This is perhaps Daisy’s essential flaw as a parent. She fails to assert herself as an authoritative figure. This leads to Donny’s assumption of their equality and his right to criticize and blame his mother for his own faults. Regardless of Daisy’s failure to command respect, Donny should be able to acknowledge his mother’s devotion and respect her nonetheless.
The story concludes with Donny’s ultimate act of selfishness. He runs away from his completely unbearable situation at home and does not return for at least three months. Poor Daisy is left to live in wonder. She wonders where her son has gone. She wonders why he has left. She wonders what she has done wrong and what she could have done differently to prevent him from leaving. Donny, no doubt, does not even consider how his running away might affect his mother. Donny’s selfishness has condemned his parents to believe they are failures. Daisy is not a prefect parent. However, no parent who showers love and help as freely as Daisy does deserves to believe he or she has failed as a parent. Daisy did the best she could. Donny wanted more.
The story’s focus on Daisy as the active parent makes the reader wonder: where is Donny’s father and why does he receive no blame? When Donny acts up in school, Daisy meets with the principal. When Donny’s grades fall, Daisy supervises Donny’s homework habits. Finally, when Donny runs away, Daisy assumes responsibility. Donny’s self-centered nature is not Daisy’s fault. My purpose for writing this blog is to prevent readers from automatically placing the blame on Daisy. She is an easy target. However, Matt is equally as responsible and ultimately, Donny should be held accountable for his own mistakes.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
"15 books"
The BFG- Roald Dahl. This is the first book I can remember not being able to put down once I started reading.
Bridge to Terabithia- Katherine Paterson. This was the first book to make me cry!
Night- Elie Wiesel. This book shocked me and made me realize that events in history are never quite as straightforward and as simple as history text books present them to be.
The Bread Givers- Anzia Yezierska. Again, this book helped me personalize historical events and see life through another point of view.
The Prince- Machiavelli. This was the most BORING book I have ever been forced to read. But, for some reason I still haven't forgotten certain details from the text.
The Odyssey- Homer. Fate Fate Fate. Hospitality Hospitality. Epic.
Othello- Shakespeare. The most ridiculous tragedy, everyone dies! Finally Shakespeare that made sense to me!
The Great Gatsby- F. Scott Fitzgerald. Still, every time I think about Gatsby I feel sad and pitiful. For me, he is probably the most memorable and well-developed character of any book I've ever read.
Beloved- Toni Morrison. This book made a lasting impression on me because it is strikingly different than any book I have ever read.
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime- Mark Haddon. Even though I have only recently read this, I am positive its message will stick with me for a very long time.
Bridge to Terabithia- Katherine Paterson. This was the first book to make me cry!
Night- Elie Wiesel. This book shocked me and made me realize that events in history are never quite as straightforward and as simple as history text books present them to be.
The Bread Givers- Anzia Yezierska. Again, this book helped me personalize historical events and see life through another point of view.
The Prince- Machiavelli. This was the most BORING book I have ever been forced to read. But, for some reason I still haven't forgotten certain details from the text.
The Odyssey- Homer. Fate Fate Fate. Hospitality Hospitality. Epic.
Othello- Shakespeare. The most ridiculous tragedy, everyone dies! Finally Shakespeare that made sense to me!
The Great Gatsby- F. Scott Fitzgerald. Still, every time I think about Gatsby I feel sad and pitiful. For me, he is probably the most memorable and well-developed character of any book I've ever read.
Beloved- Toni Morrison. This book made a lasting impression on me because it is strikingly different than any book I have ever read.
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime- Mark Haddon. Even though I have only recently read this, I am positive its message will stick with me for a very long time.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
A Self-Revelation
Books I read this summer:
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime- Mark Haddon
Pride and Prejudice- Jane Austen
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime is undoubtedly a moving book. For me, the book went beyond simply moving and facilitated a self-realization. Before I dove into the text, I decided to explore the front and back covers as well as the introductory pages. I noticed a few pages of quotes describing the novel. One in particular stuck with me as I read. The New Yorker describes the novel as “triumph of empathy.” As I read the first few pages and got to know the main character Christopher a bit, I admit I automatically made a dangerous assumption. Immediately, it became evident that he is a remarkably intelligent boy when it comes to math, memorization, and logic. However, it also became evident that Christopher lacks the ability to understand people on an emotional level. Despite his immense knowledge of logic, he is incapable of understanding the feelings of even the closest people to him. This makes what would generally be described as normal everyday interactions much more complicated for Christopher. The book is narrated by Christopher and follows him through a difficult and confusing period of his life.
The assumption I almost automatically made was one that the rest of the novel thankfully helped me recognize and prove wrong. I assumed that because Christopher is “different,” the “empathy” alluded to in the previous quote must be referring to empathy for Christopher. I falsely assumed that he is the only possible character I might be lacking a complete understanding of. The novel definitely helped me relate to him and understand his point of view better. I was able to feel immense empathy for Christopher. However, it failed to occur to me that perhaps empathy for other characters might be key as well. For the majority of the text I was convinced that its purpose was to help me relate to and begin to comprehend the complex main character. My preconceived notions ruled out any other possibilities.
By the end of the novel, I had realized that the insight I had gained into the minds of his parents and those who interact with him throughout the novel was just as significant as the insight I had gained into Christopher’s mind. I was able to feel empathy for Christopher’s parents and I learned not to judge them for their lack of patience and quickness to get angry. I was also able to relate to the characters that only briefly interacted with Christopher. I realized that I might have inappropriately reacted in the same way the characters do, had I not been exposed to the workings of his mind. One central theme I believe Haddon attempts (successfully I might add) to convey is that of human susceptibility to making false assumptions and judgments. The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime was a reality check for me. It was a reminder that I am not necessarily immune to the human inclination to judge. Thus the novel actually became beneficial to me in two ways. It not only allowed me to view and understand life from another point of view but also allowed me to realize the danger of automatic assumptions and prejudice on a highly personal level (551).
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime- Mark Haddon
Pride and Prejudice- Jane Austen
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime is undoubtedly a moving book. For me, the book went beyond simply moving and facilitated a self-realization. Before I dove into the text, I decided to explore the front and back covers as well as the introductory pages. I noticed a few pages of quotes describing the novel. One in particular stuck with me as I read. The New Yorker describes the novel as “triumph of empathy.” As I read the first few pages and got to know the main character Christopher a bit, I admit I automatically made a dangerous assumption. Immediately, it became evident that he is a remarkably intelligent boy when it comes to math, memorization, and logic. However, it also became evident that Christopher lacks the ability to understand people on an emotional level. Despite his immense knowledge of logic, he is incapable of understanding the feelings of even the closest people to him. This makes what would generally be described as normal everyday interactions much more complicated for Christopher. The book is narrated by Christopher and follows him through a difficult and confusing period of his life.
The assumption I almost automatically made was one that the rest of the novel thankfully helped me recognize and prove wrong. I assumed that because Christopher is “different,” the “empathy” alluded to in the previous quote must be referring to empathy for Christopher. I falsely assumed that he is the only possible character I might be lacking a complete understanding of. The novel definitely helped me relate to him and understand his point of view better. I was able to feel immense empathy for Christopher. However, it failed to occur to me that perhaps empathy for other characters might be key as well. For the majority of the text I was convinced that its purpose was to help me relate to and begin to comprehend the complex main character. My preconceived notions ruled out any other possibilities.
By the end of the novel, I had realized that the insight I had gained into the minds of his parents and those who interact with him throughout the novel was just as significant as the insight I had gained into Christopher’s mind. I was able to feel empathy for Christopher’s parents and I learned not to judge them for their lack of patience and quickness to get angry. I was also able to relate to the characters that only briefly interacted with Christopher. I realized that I might have inappropriately reacted in the same way the characters do, had I not been exposed to the workings of his mind. One central theme I believe Haddon attempts (successfully I might add) to convey is that of human susceptibility to making false assumptions and judgments. The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime was a reality check for me. It was a reminder that I am not necessarily immune to the human inclination to judge. Thus the novel actually became beneficial to me in two ways. It not only allowed me to view and understand life from another point of view but also allowed me to realize the danger of automatic assumptions and prejudice on a highly personal level (551).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
