Two Time Periods, One Image

Reading through Hamlet; it reminds me of my outside reading book A Thousand Splendid Suns written by Khaled Hosseini. Upon reading Hamlets soliloquy in class, I kept seeing the reoccurring image of isolation and the feeling of not being accepted that I found in A Thousand Splendid Suns.

Hamlet feels isolated for many different reasons. His father has recently died and it hasn’t even been two months, before everyone has moved on. His mother is even remarrying to Hamlets uncle; her brother-in-law. This was considered incestuous at the time, but Hamlet is the only one that sees the marriage as such. Everyone else seems perfectly content with it. Hamlet also feels like he cannot properly mourn his father because everyone else has moved on. He idolized his father, and while the other citizens and country people have moved on under the reign of Claudius, Hamlet refuses this and continues to think of his father as the true and better king. Hamlet doesn’t even interact with many of the other characters found in the play. While speaking in court, he only addresses his mother and never directly speaks to Claudius.

Almost the same exact story line is occurring in A Thousand Splendid Suns. Miriam has lived with her mother in an isolated area because she is considered a “bastard” child that everyone wants to forget about. They are sent away to this deserted area so people can forget about them and the original sins of the father. This is very similar to Hamlet, because Hamlet was next in line for the throne, yet people seem to want to cast him aside. Miriam also goes through a terrible loss of her Nana (her mother’s name). While she continues to mourn, others are already making plans for her future. After just 2 weeks of mourning time in her biological father’s house, he finds a suitor for her and marries her off. When she cries in front of her new husband, Miriam is continually asked why? No one seems to understand the heavy lose that she has gone through. They all expected her to move on within the course of a few weeks, which is the same exact emotional response that Hamlet is receiving from the different members of his own family.

Miriam is also very isolated. She rarely talks to different characters and when others do approach her, she rarely comments directly back to them. She prefers to spend her times alone in the comfort of her own house.

It was interesting to see almost the same exact occurrences happening in two stories that couldn’t have been more different. Although they are set in different time periods in different parts of the world, this reoccurring imagery of being alone and not being understood is prevalent in many of the stories found in literature. I thought it was very interesting just how closely related these stories were though.

Ted Kooser

In class, we discussed Ted Kooser’s “Blind” poem, to better ourselves in analyzing poetry. I found that I really liked the way that he styled his poems. They were simple thoughts and words written in a pretty simple structure, but each different aspect had a key place. I enjoyed that each word’s denotation would lead to another words connotation or denotation. The web that it created was fascinating to look at and connect to other pieces of the puzzle.

I was planning on doing a more in depth read for my blog, but when I tried to find the poem “Blind”, I could only find the poem that he wrote called “A Blind Woman”. I decided that I was just going to look at it, and see if it was at least similar, and this is when I decided that Ted Kooser is my favorite poet.

She had turned her face up into
a rain of light, and came on smiling.

The light trickled down her forehead
and into her eyes. It ran down

into the neck of her sweatshirt
and wet the white tops of her breasts.

Her brown shoes splashed on
into the light. The moment was like

a circus wagon rolling before her
through puddles of light, a cage on wheels,

and she walked fast behind it,
exuberant, curious, pushing her cane

through the bars, poking and prodding,
while the world cowered back in a corner.

I liked the imagery of the light that is streaming in. When I think of light I think of the little rainbows that show up and the happiness that it usually brings along. But the specific colors that Kooser uses are white and brown. These colors are extremely muted, which was ironic for a piece about being light and colorful. The other imagery that came from the repetition of the word light was joyous happiness and even the curiosity that follows a young girl. But then there is that repeated imagery that is somewhat of a caged animal. The “cage of wheels” and how she is “pushing through the bars” makes it seem like she is caged and only sees light on a small occasion.

This led me to think, is she literally caged within a prison cell, or caged within her own body? She cannot see, which can be told from the title (Blind), but that could mean that her eyes cannot see at all, or that she is blind to the outside world that she is trying so hard to get to. The bars could be that she cannot overcome the struggles that await her.

It also makes me think that she is a sort of animal that people want to see, but at the same time, want to keep their distance from at the same time. The speaker talks about seeing the circus wagons, but then she goes on to say “through the bars, poking and prodding,
while the world cowered back in a corner”. She’s the act that people hope to keep their distance from. But then that also lead me back to the question of what are they wanting to see from her. She might be blind to this as well. She might not see what they see.

This used to frustrate me about poetry that I could never have a clear answer to a question that I had. The poet wasn’t right there to explain the exact uses for the words that he had chosen. But this actually interests me. I like to think of all the different questions and actually using the text to support and disclaim the different theories that float through my head. Poetry is interesting once you find a poet that writes in a style that you prefer.

Not That Bad

When Ms. Clinch first told us that we were about to start a poetry unit, I secretly panicked inside. I have never been able to completely analyze poems the way that the teacher and even the other students have, and knowing that complete analysis is needed for this class, the poetry unit seemed like a difficult unit to cover.

But I’ve learned over the past week that I can find almost anything in a poem and write a semi-solid response on it.  There are so many ways that the poet both visually captures the poems central theme by using various word structures but also the specific words that can be the ultimate piece of understanding the poem and it’s so what.

My favorite poet that we have read in class so far is e.e cummings. I like that he goes against everything that English professors pick over. Nothing is capitalized and words seem to be randomly thrown around, while the stanza’s structure is so diluted that there seems to be no meaning. But every single piece of the poem has a meaning. In the poem in Just, only two words are capitalized, and even after an entire class period discussing it, a proper answer wasn’t formed.

I used to not like that poetry had no answer. That even after a lot of thought and discussion, the true meaning that the poet was trying to convey is never properly struck down. But after last semester of intense analysis, I enjoy that I can take a different meaning from the poem and not be entirely correct. And seeing all the small things that the class picks up is very interesting and adds to my own thoughts about the poem as a whole.

When Ms. Clinch stated that we would have a timed writing on analyzing a poem, my heart did sort of drop though. I did not believe that I was ready to jump into the deep end of completely analyzing a poem for myself. How would I be able to come up with my own ideas and write a solid essay without the help of Ms. Clinch or my fellow peers?

When I walked into class Friday, I was dreading writing this timed writing. I looked at the poem and had a literal pity party for myself for at least a minute, but then I looked at it, read the prompt and started analyzing the prompt. I soon started to see how the structure of the stanzas was leading me to believe one thing about the poem, and that led me to see another aspect of the poem that I had missed in the beginning. Before I knew it, my poem was marked up and I had questions scattered around the margins that would help me write this timed writing. It wasn’t as difficult as it seemed and I realized that poetry isn’t as terrible as it first seemed merely a week ago.

Shadow Hero?

In psychology, we discussed the different archetypes that Carl Jung created. While I was reading the different passages I noticed some key points that really helped put Grendel into perspective, and put it in a way that seemed to capture Grendel specifically.

The first aspect that stood out was “the shadow” character that Jung argued is found in every single work. The Shadow can also be called a villain. What stood out the most though was that, the shadow is neither good nor bad, but is similar to an animal. It stated that an animal is capable of tender care for its young and vicious killing for food, but it doesn’t choose, it does what it has to do. But in the perspective of a human, the animal looks harsh and inhuman, so we as human beings push it aside. This brings back the question of whether Grendel is good or bad. Although in Beowulf, it characterizes him as a ruthless killer for just sport; his personal narrative shows his true proposes. It is hard to characterize whether Grendel is good or bad, and it is difficult to determine if what he is doing is moral or not. He needs to attack to eat, but he also doesn’t need to attack the specific people of Herot (Hart). Grendel was born into the monster that he is, and although he tried desperately in the beginning to gain the trust and love of the humans, they saw him as a threat and treated him as such. This makes the humans look like the monsters. It makes me wonder who is right and who is shaping our ideas to make their own ideas sound better.

The other character that Jung created was called “The Persona”. This character represents the public image of a character and it also comes from the Latin for mask. It can be a good impression or a false one, depending on the individual. Both of these sides show Grendel. He wants to be accepted by the people, but he knows the consequences that will follow. The mask that he puts on could be his “monstrous face” or his gentle side. Both have been seen. Sometimes Grendel kills ruthlessly without a care. Other times he gently treats people; him lifting Unferth up and carrying him home. The characters in the mead hall only see his public face, which shows that he is violent and filled with rage, while he stomps around the castle killing people. The private side shows that he is still scared of weapons, even though he knows they cannot harm him. The different masks that Grendel puts on, helps increase the complexity that arises in determining whether he is good or bad.

We read this passage today in psychology class, and it just jumped out at me how similar it was to Grendel, and how it shows that this difficulty in determining whether the “villain” is good or bad is found in all different kinds of works. It also helped to word the mixed feelings that I was trying to express about Grendel.

Their True Side

I thought the character shifts from Beowulf to Grendel were very interesting to observe, and that is why I chose to write my blog on it this week.

In Beowulf, Hrothgar is characterized as a man of great worth and respect. The mood when he was around was pitiful because of all the hardships that he had gone through. He was losing beloved friends and men, and his large mead hall that was compared to heaven was being torn to shreds by one monster. This is the tone that followed Hrothgar around throughout Beowulf. But when Grendel speaks of him, the reader sees how Hrothgar came into power. He overpowered all the other tribes of individuals living in the woods and made them pay tribute to him. The tribute was so large, that many had a difficult time paying for it, and had barely enough goods to manage themselves. Although Hrothgar offered comfort and safety for them, his character was not the same one that was seen in Beowulf.

Another character that changed quite a bit was Grendel. Even by the first few pages of the book, the reader understood more aspects of Grendel than an entire section of Beowulf. Grendel is described in such great depth, while in Beowulf, it is almost like a game to try and uncover small facts about Grendel. Yes he is the main character in this book and needs to be characterized, but the fact that so much of him was explained in less than half the time he had in Beowulf, shows that the character that he was personified to be in Beowulf, was not even close to the individual that he is.

Grendel’s mother was also different from Grendel to Beowulf. In Beowulf, the mood was fierce and full of revenge. But, as Grendel pointed out earlier, only individuals with thought and knowledge could process the act of revenge. In Beowulf, Grendel’s mother seems to have a plan of attack and knows what she must do in order to properly avenge her son. She seems almost human in this respect, because the Anglo- Saxons believed in avenging their dead and fallen kinsmen. But in the book Grendel, she is portrayed as a monster who has no understanding of language or reasoning. She sits in the corner of the cavern and does little to nothing during the day. Grendel, her own son, does not understand her and has a difficult time approaching her.

The characters started to show their true colors in the beginning stages of this novel. The discovery that Hrothgar was not as honorable of a king as he appeared to be in his later years, helped show how he came into complete power over all of the towns. The characterization of Grendel and his mother also seems switched. This adds more depth to character, in contrast to Beowulf where none of the characters were heavily described.

Feed the Weak to the Strong

I wanted to discuss the topic of Nora and Torvald. In class we have already discussed how their relationship was false and based on the fantasy of a perfect doll house. But when Nora leaves the doll house, is she ready to take on the challenges of reality, or will she end up alone and helpless? Can she handle the struggles that are certain to come against her? The answer is that, no, Nora cannot handle the struggles that will come her way, and she will end up miserable and helpless, and because of her choice, her children will end up just like her.

Nora has had no personal experience with taking care of herself. She has been handed almost everything in her life. Nora was “simply transferred from papa’s hands into [Torvald’s], who arranged everything for his own taste” (260), not allowing Nora for anytime for herself and her own needs. Nora has proven herself to be manipulative and able to persuade Torvald and those around her with her sexuality. Although she has this indirect power over Torvald, she still cannot use it to sway his opinion on larger scale events. She cannot use this manipulative sexuality in the real world, because, as Krogstad proved, it does not appeal to everyone. Nora has no means of attaining money, because she has never had to work or directly care for herself and her family. Although she did a little sewing on the side, this will not support her financially or for a long span of time. Nora believes that when she walks out of Torvald’s perfect doll house, she will be able to manage like Kristine, but with limited experience in any workforce or any knowledge of what she is capable of, she will not be able to support herself.

                Nora is also leaving her children in an impossible situation, because she thoroughly did not plan out her departure. In this timeframe, it was very rare that a woman left her household and her children. Nora lost her mother when she was very young, and grew up with her father. She does not want to influence her children, and does not want them to end up unhappy like she did. But Nora did not take into account that she was leaving all of her children in the same situation that she had been left in. They will grow up with Torvald, and not get the nurturing that a mother would give them, which is also what Nora lacked. Because Nora wanted what was best for the children, she left them so they would not grow up in the perfect doll house. But in doing so, she has left them in the same situation that she was placed in as a child, and it will be more likely for them to develop into the same individual that Nora was in. Nora is not ready to depart into the real world because she could not even imagine the outcomes and consequences that will occur to the children. She is still in her own childhood state thinking about herself, and with this frame of mind, she will not be able to support herself in the harsh reality of the world outside the doll house.

Past in the Present

This is late, but I think that the entire purpose of Chapter 4 was to relate back to Jack and his life in the present. Cass and all the individuals that surrounded that story can be found translated back to the people in Jack’s own life. In a way, it seems like this is how Jack is trying to learn more about the story. Jack had all the facts, but not the truths, and through this selection of people, he can understand those truths that he left decades before.

                Cass reminded me the most of Willie, in his attitude and the way he went from an uneducated sap to a man that could run his own business.  Like Willie, Cass grew up uneducated and not ready to enter into any political or business management position. But over the course of a few years both “were not hobbledehoy” (245) and had learned how to manage certain aspects of the realm they had not understood earlier. They both had the use of mentors (for Cass it was Gilbert and for Willie it was Jack), that helped them develop into these educated men though. Both grew into men that could organize and successfully run a plantation and an entire government. Both were also interested in politics, although not at first (252). Willie became a good politician because Jack encouraged him and told him what to do at all time. Willie developed into this strong natured individual after this and made his own decisions about the policies that he was enforcing. Cass was forced into politics by Gilbert. Although Cass did not want to enter into this work field, he learned that he could be quite successful at it, yet he did not stay in the political field long.

                Gilbert also reminded me of Jack, in how he developed the Cass/Willie character and also how they continuously would take control of a situation. Jack and Gilbert encouraged and mentored their respected individual and brought them into the political and management positions that they had throughout their lives. Without Gilbert/ Jack, Cass/ Willie would not have been the success that they were. Cass wrote that “Gilbert treats me like a wayward and silly child” (274), just like Jack treats Willie in the beginning. Because both of the characters were so lost in the beginning of their political careers, Jack and Gilbert had to guide them and treat them like young children because they were so ignorant to the important business surrounding them. Jack considered Willie a sap in the beginning of his career and had to direct him in everything that Willie did. Both Gilbert and Jack are also not the forefront of the story. Willie is the Governor, and Cass was the focal point of the history paper, and the two other men were not primary characters. Although they were not the leading roles, they still had such a great influence that they might as well have been the lead character.

                Although chapter 4 seems really random, it does tie back into the life that Jack and Willie are leading during the main course of the story. It was interesting to try and find the links between the characters because there were so many of them throughout the chapter.