Heart of the Barbarians

In my reading of Douglas Kerr’s article, “Three Ways of Going Wrong: Kipling, Conrad, Coetzee”, the similarities between Conrad’s Kurtz and Coetzee’s Magistrate were explored from all angles, but what I found more interesting was how the article allowed me to appreciate the commonalities between Jolle and Marlow. These two characters are foils for Kurtz and the Magistrate, respectively. Marlow and Jolle personify the power of the empire. The two men are stringent followers of orders and both believe fully that everything they do is in the best interest of their empires. The obvious reluctance any skeptic should have with this argument is the drastically different feelings a reader has towards these two characters. Jolle is seen as a heartless, war-crazed colonel obsessed with justifying the empire’s need to have an enemy. In contrast, Marlow is a bit arrogant, but overall, an amiable man, who politely narrates his treacherous adventure into Africa. While Coetzee and Conrad portray these two characters very differently, the two men serve the same quintessential purpose: they exemplify a reliable and constant image of what a respectable gentleman, in the eyes of the empire, should look and act like. Both men prove to be obedient, blind followers of the empire, the perfect civil servants of any empire, in contrast to the actions of the magistrate and Kurtz as they both fall victim to “temptations” of the barbarians.
A second contrast between the two novels I believe worth mentioning is the concept of who is really the savage/barbarian that both writers briefly address. Conrad broaches the subject in the way he eloquently describes the beauty of the Africans in the way they do their work and how they are in tune with nature. Coetzee delves into this notion through the thoughts of the Magistrate when he is reflecting on the idea that none of the barbarians will ever collect his tools and remains as artifacts or decorations. The barbarians are far too pure to be fixated on objects that do not benefit their survival. The elemental purity that both Conrad and Coetzee bestow upon the theoretically savage people leaves the reader of either novel with a question: which people are truly the “civilized” ones and which are the “savages”?
Finally, the role of sex in the two novels seemed to be both authors’ ultimate way of expressing how the Magistrate and Kurtz eventually accepted the cultures of the savage people. Through their respective lovers, both men subscribed to a logical notion that the beauty they saw in these women was in no way sub human or in any way inferior to their own humanity.

(448)

Language and Racism

Only seventeen pages into J.M Coetzee’s Waiting for the Barbarians and it already echoes parts of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness. Okay you probably could have seen striking similarities between the two stories after a glance at each stories respective first pages, but the similarity I am talking abut goes a bit deeper than the brutally animalistic way white people view nonwhite races in the stories. The similarity that stands out to me is the role that both writers give language in their particular brands of racism. Conrad and Coetzee both use language as a defining characteristic of the inferiority of the nonwhite race. When reading Heart of Darkness we discussed the extreme infrequency that Conrad bestowed the English language on the blacks. Coetzee uses the spoken language of the outpost in a similar fashion. When the fishermen are brought back to the outpost as prisoners Coetzee describes their inability to really communicate with any of the towns people through language. This rift proves to solidify their image as zoo pets for the towns people to look at, mock openly and laugh at. It also allows the narrator of Waiting for the Barbarians to portray the fishing people as inferior to the other nomads because he can not communicate with this brand of wild people. I find the emphasis that both writers put on the ability to communicate and language to be a very interesting way of expressing the racism the two groups of white people demonstrate. Personally, in a modern sense I do not witness or even think of language as a racial barrier as much as it is a cultural barrier. This observation lead me to wonder if Conrad and Coetzee heavy emphasis on the language barrier between races is a result of their understandably high regard for language, or was language once a central characteristic of racism?
(311)

Chinua Achebe An Image of Africa: Racism in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness

+ Achebe’s article first addresses his observation that many “westerners”, contemporary and those of the past two centuries, have a conscious or subconscious, “desire – one might indeed say the need— in Western psychology to set Africa up as a foil to Europe, as a place of negations at once remote and vaguely familiar, in comparison with which Europe’s own state of spiritual grace will be manifest.” He goes on to state that he believes Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness is the most notable and respectable book of modern day containing these themes. Achebe concedes the eloquence with which Conrad, with his great writing ability develops these themes, but Achebe, an African History teacher at the University of Massachusetts, takes special grievances with Heart of Darkness because of its prominent role in all literature educations.


+ Achebe first points out the role of the English language in the novel. There are very few places in the novel in which the Africans speak any English at all, and of these places Achebe believes they are instances in which Conrad simply could not keep the characters from speaking English without losing a part of the story. When Conrad does bestow the civilities of the English language on the Africans, it is often in very unfavorable lights such as the crudely spoken desires of the carnivores and the chilling announcement of Kurtz’s death.

+ Achebe acknowledges that Conrad’s inhuman, and beast-like descriptions of the Africans could be a literary device, used by Conrad, through the voice of Marlow, to further authenticate the setting of the fictional story, but he gives a compelling counter argument to this common defense. Achebe asserts that Conrad, with his gifted writing ability, does not provide enough space between the racist idea in the novel and the reality of the racism that existed in the region at the time. His reasons stated, Achebe goes so far as to reject Heart of Darkness as a classic, and analogize Conrad to a doctor who poisons his patients.

Faulkner's Tad Bit of Closure

The ending of The Sound and the Fury was in many ways parallel to the final scenes of countless modern day horror movies which end with the pure chacter surviving while countless others are left dead or dying. The reader is left saddened and depressed at the horrible state that things are in, while at the same time emotionally preoccupied with the rush of relief and joy caused by the escape of an innocent Quentin. I was deeply saddened by dreary demise of the Compson family and the horrors that Benjy will face with the inevitable death of Dilsey. As the novel comes to an end the Compson family has deteriorated into a family consumed by its dismal past, as the Compson estate stands testament to what was once a proud southern family. On the other hand, my mind was allowed some reprieve with the escape of Quentin and the appropriate turn of events for Jason. The power reversal between Jason and Quentin (Quentin’s taking of the money under Jason’s bad) is perhaps the most significant form of closure that Faulkner allows the reader. The reality of Jason left penniless to dwell his remaining years in the dying Compson home is the most clear cut instance of a character getting what they deserve in story. This final twist by Faulkner allows the reader a final hint of closure before abruptly ending the story effectively out useful characters.

Benjy the Dog?

When our class began reading The Sound and the Fury by William Faulkner each of was asked to formulate a question pertaining to something in the first eight pages that puzzled us. To say the least gradually Robert and I were puzzled by a couple of things but due to our table positioning we gradual heard each of our questions asked before it was our turn to ask a question. This left us with that one question at the bottom of our notes. Neither of us knew the answer to. At the same time, neither one of us really wanted to be the person to ask it out loud to the class. Since it was the only question we had left, we bit the bullet and asked, “Is Benjy a boy or a dog?” Though Harry, and a few others, quickly found many examples from the first 8 pages proving that Benjy was indeed a human, I would like to point out that at least one other person, besides Robert and me, saw the similarities between the way Benjy was described and the way the other characters acted toward him. In fact Jacqui Griffiths found enough similarities to write half of an article about it. At one point he even states his shared confusion with Robert and me, “Despite the fact that his age is mentioned on the first page of Benjy’s narrative, my first read was dominated by thoughts about whether he was a dog or an Infant.” The article I am referring to and will proceed to analyze further is Almost Human: Indeterminate Children and Dogs in ‘Flush’ and ‘The Sound and the Fury’

In the second half of his article, Griffiths explains the many similarities between Benjy and a dog. Griffiths has three general categories for doing so; Benjy’s castration, the behavior of Benjy (especially with regard to Caddy) and the way the family and other characters act in response to him. Benjy’s castration relates Benjy to a canine as well as acts to make him more of an animal. Even the event that resulted in the need for his castration is similar to that of a dog. Pacing up and down along the fence before one day attacking is something that draws images of a dog or a zoo animal. Thus, the event and result are tied together in forming the first pillar of Griffith’s hypothesis. Benjy’s behavior as a whole also hints at that of an animal. When he constantly pulls at Caddy’s dress it reminds one of a dog playing tug-o-war with your pant leg. This behavior could be associated with that of an infant, but Faulkner portrays it as far more animalistic than playful adolescent. Finally, the entire family treats Benjy like he is an animal. He is constantly attended to and always viewed as someone’s responsibility. The way Caddy, possibly the most understanding person towards Benjy, talks to him is in the same tone and 3rd person that one would talk to a puppy. I found this article to be both interesting and very useful to my understanding of the story. It effectively organized and affirmed a recurring theme of Benjy’s character in my mind.
(536)

Bad Boys?

Elliot Ginsburg
AP English Royal
Paper ID #
Word count 821

Tom Boyle's story Greasy Lake tells of three confused 19 year old boys whose "bad boy" statuses were tested, and subsequently revoked. The narrator and his two friends are glaring examples of the dilemma faced by countless young adults as they strive to find their identities, while at the same time fearing society’s opinion. This desire to fit in will eventually prove to become a driving and blinding force behind the action of the story. As a result, the narrator, Jeff, and Digby find themselves conforming to the clothing and lifestyles of the stereotypical “bad boy” of the 1960’s from “torn up leather jackets” to “cocaine”(1), while maintaining a comical hint of their true selves; good guys who are noticeably well educated.
The narrator and his two companions, Digby and Jeff, possess descriptions that are far from that of what most would consider a "bad boy". Digby, a Cornell attendee who in a true bad boy manner, "allowed his father to pay his tuition", sports a gold star earring to show his true rebellion against, well they don't really know. Both Jeff and Digby are given an air of superiority with regards to coolness in the narrator’s eyes especially because of their “mirror shades” which they are described as wearing, “at breakfast and dinner, in the shower, in closets and in caves”(3). The narrator considers these shades the root of their badness. In fact these “mirrors” are an analogy for the way the two boys shield their true selves from the world instead only reflecting and imitating what they are led to believe is cool. The narrator’s references to Westmoreland’s decision, Anne Frank, and Sabine women, demonstrate his above average education while far less hidden clues such as Digby’s enrollment at Cornell clearly show that these boys are at the very least extremely well educated “bad boys”.
After explaining to the reader what it means to be a “bad boy” in the 1960’s, Boyle emphasizes the boys’ immaturity by beginning the story with the boys cruising around in the narrator’s mother’s Bel Air, as Jeff is vomiting out the window. This scene immediately allows the reader to understand the immaturity and youth of the boys. This immaturity goes hand and hand with lack of definite identity which later proves to be an almost fatal combination. Eventually, after exhausting all other options, the boys drunkenly arrive at Greasy Lake filled with confidence, and strained of common sense and bashfulness. The boys wrongfully mistake the only other car by the lake to be that of their friend Tony and proceed to flash their lights at the car and swarm around it. This mistake proves costly as a real “bad greasy character”(9) emerges from the car after having his romance interrupted. The bad greasy character in accordance with his status as a real “bad” guy reacts immediately to defend his status as bad in front of his lover. His action is to kick an unsuspecting narrator in the face before similarly dispatching Digby and his martial arts approach and Jeff with his Mike Tyson approach. As his friends are easily dealt with, the narrator is blind sided by reality, filled with fear and, and commandeered by rage and revenge. The narrator reached for the tire iron he kept under his seat because “bad characters always keep tire irons under the driver’s seat.”(11) Thus, the narrator charging, “like a kamikaze, mindless, raging, and stung with humiliation” delivered an almost life taking blow to the “bad greasy character.” Jeff and Digby, witnessing this act of “badness”, and consumed by the same rage and embarrassment that drove the narrator, fell easy victim to the empowering comfort provided to members of a mob. Thus, the three boys saw themselves defined as real “bad boys” feeling the entitlement of their decided identities. This transformation and emotional overload drove the boys together into a pack, defined and controlled by hormones and irrational thought. The boys were effectively reduced to dogs with, “eyes masked with lust” (17) and turned their attention to the “fox” (15) and began like wolves to attack their prey. The boys were eventually brought back to reality by a spotlight, and just as suddenly as they became animals they were once again humanized and their strength nullified. The boys eventually escaped unharmed physically.
Emotionally the boys were stranded, lost inside of themselves as the story comes to an end. The clothes, such as Jeff’s leather jacket were gone, signifying the departure of their bad boy status for good. The narrator’s discovery of the dead biker, who represents the top of the hierarchal chain of the stereotypical “bad ass” solidified the eventual reality of a real bad boy. This realization coupled with the offers from the two attractive girls, drugs and sex (implied); affirms the sincerity of the boys decision to let their bad boy lives die at Lake Greasy.
(821)

"Dope"

“Then I asked if he wanted to smoke some dope with me.” (57) It might just be me ( I'd doubt it though) but when I read this line my head jerked back from the semi daze of monotony that I was fixated in while reading Raymond Carver's story. These few words suddenly changed the setting and overall vibe of the story (or at least as long as it took me to read them a second time and confirm that I was in fact reading the same story). With the injection of “dope”, instantly the story changed from one about the boring monotonous life of a forty something year old man and his wife, living in a suburb and possibly experiencing tension in their marriage because of a “blind man”, to one of personal adventures, risks and stretching of one’s comfort zone.

This shift in the story, catalyzed by the husband’s offer of dope is impossible to miss. Yet, it is the reason that Carver chose to insert it into the story that is so puzzling. I subscribe to a belief that in a short story, everything has a purpose. Even those who do not fully take this to heart must admit that the injection of marijuana into the story is in no way a small detail. I wonder why Carver found a need to put cannabis into his story: it seems as if it could have flown perfectly smoothly without. One explanation is that “dope” was simply used as a wow factor or “did I just read that line?” Though it is possible this was the case, I would hope that the reader’s attention and focus would not be wasted on a red herring. With this optimism, I venture to say that Carver used “dope” as a tool in two ways. First, it was a connection that Robert and the husband were able to share, the first such connection without the wife acting as a bridge. This connection allowed the husband to see Robert by himself, as a man, without having to see Robert in the context of Robert’s relationship with the husband’s wife. Once the husband’s jealousy was temporarily displaced, it paved the way for the two men to bond further in their forced attention to “The Cathedral”. Also Carver’s use of cannabis furthered the two men’s relationship because for the first time it was an experience/ activity that the narrator (husband) felt more experienced and knowledgeable about than Robert. Before the introduction of “dope”, the reader got the feeling that Robert was jealous because he felt inferior in the eyes of his wife to the blind man. Since it was Robert’s first time, the narrator instantly took on a more confident tone with his discovery of something that he did better than Robert. This confidence allowed the husband to put down his guard just long enough to truly befriend Robert.

Word count (486)

A&P without tunnel vision

In our class discussion of Updike's story, A and P, I believe we allowed ourselves to "PCDS" our analysis of the story. What I mean by this is that we are guilty of human nature: we analyze and interpret literature from the perspective of our own lives and events we have experienced. As a result of this human tendency our relatively economically, educationally age nondiverse class, susceptible to reaching an agreed opinion of something in a novel while never seeing the other side.Such an incident of tunnel vision occurred in our class discussion of A and P. When we looked at Sammy’s position as a 19 year old store clerk, we unanimously concluded that it was simply a summer job. This finalized our perception of; Sammy, the right or wrongness of his decision and the magnitude of its impact, was greatly influenced by this unquestioned conclusion. Based on the pretense that it was a mere summer job, we characterized Sammy as a very emotional teenage boy who made a bad decision when caught in the moment, but in no measure a life altering one. However, this conclusion does not perfectly fit with the story. As we read on, Sammy’s boss, Lengel, is quoted as saying, “you don’t want to do this to your mom and dad” and he proceeds to say, “You’ll feel this for the rest of your life.” Legel’s quote referring to the feelings of Sammy’s parents abut Sammy’s decision could fit with his job being a summer job, though it also opens the door to the idea that this was an important job for Sammy. Perhaps his family needs the money which would, in the 60’s, suggest that Sammy might not be financially able to attend college. Legel’s second quote sends the reader into the door opened by his first lines. Deciding to quit a summer job may be a big, bad and brash decision, but it is not a decision that would be considered one to be regretted for the rest of Sammy’s life. Losing a summer job after all, leaves more time for sleeping in, hanging out with friends, and in Sammy’s case maybe even going to the beach a little bit more. No, Sammy’s decision to quit was a regrettable one because it was his immediate, and possibly long term, future. He walked out on his career over some girls in bathing suits. This is reaffirmed by Sammy’s final words, “I felt how hard the world was going to be to me hereafter.” Once again one would not have this pessimistic tone after simply losing a summer job. These are the words and thoughts of an adult fired from his or her job after several years.
(460)

Summer Reading The Curious Incident

This past summer I read Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austin and The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time by Mark Haddon.
Five minutes or 7 pages into Mark Haddon‘s The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time I felt a unique connection to Christopher (the narrator and main character in the novel). This connection and ability to relate to Christopher exceeded any emotional empathy even when reading a story. Christopher is an autistic teenager with an innate ability to process numbers, similar to that of a computer. Despite his borderline genius high school math abilities, he is unable to normally process the world’s many abstract ideas and social behaviors. Instead he sees everything in well defined black and white, right and wrong, good and bad, and truths or lies.
Mark Haddon paints a fictional picture of the world from the eyes and mind of an autistic teenage boy living in Swindon, England during the 1990’s. The book is “written” by Christopher as a school project. The book begins by thrusting the reader into the night that spurred the creation of the book, the night Christopher stumbles upon the murdered remains of a neighbor’s dog Mr. Wellington. Christopher’s black and white view of morality does not allow him to differentiate the severity of a murdered dog and a murdered human. Thus, the book originates a more or less as a journal, compiling the clues in his effort to solve the murder of Mr. Wellington. As the plot proceeds Christopher documents to the reader many random facts and daily events mixed with various flash backs to explain his past. Contrary to traditional adventure novel writing style, and more in line with that of a mystery, Christopher’s flashbacks are sporadic, sometimes pointless, and always uniquely encrypted by his unusual perspective of what is going on around him. Through this writing style Haddon allows the reader to deduce information unknown to Christopher without spelling it out allowing the reader to mingle a first and third person experience.
Furthermore, more the Christopher finds that his once thought to be deceased mother is in fact alive: his father had lied to him when she abandoned them. This realization jolts Christopher as his pillar of stability; his caring and patient father is transformed into a liar. In Christopher’s black and white mind his father has crossed the line from white to black. In an effort to regain Christopher’s trust, his father admits to killing Mr. Wellington which serves to further enflame the situation, casting his father as a liar and a murderer. This shock to Christopher drives him to face his fears and seek out his mother in a comical journey through the English train system filled with evading police (albeit by accident) and life threatening situation in his quest to his find his mother’s flat in London.
Christopher’s mind and view of the world instantly hooked me for two reasons. Firstly, my own learning disabilities allow me to relate to Christopher. We both resent the feeling by some others of our intellectual inferiority as a result of a lag time between seeing or hearing information and eventually receiving that information so that our minds can grasp it. Secondly, this summer in working with teenagers this summer who had social issues to those of Christopher, I found myself immediately empathetic. I can easily understand Christopher’s well documented awkward, brief and inadvertently rude human to human interactions.
(573)