So maybe I was too hard in my last post on The Crying of Lot 49, and maybe I do like it more than I think I do. As we were discussing it in class, I kept on thinking about how much I did understand what was going on, well, except for Trystero, which I still don't have a clue.


 This book reminds me of a cool dream, one that you want so badly to remember in the morning, but can't. Then like a week later, out of no where, you remember the dream, and you're like Totally! Yeah, that's this book in a nutshell. 


So I might not understand what exactly I'm reading at the time, but something will click later. And that's the thing with Pynchon I think, you're not supposed to know the whole story. It goes back to the decode VS. detangle example - and I think with Pynchon, it's more about detangling the clues. 


I found that I do have more in common with Oedipa than I thought. Well except for the young republican thing, but I'm all over the tupperware party! I see her character differently when you take in to context that  this was written in the 60's. Oedipa suddenly becomes a bold woman, who doesn't let anything stand in her way. 


I'm curious why Pynchon decided to call her Oedipa, and is she going to kill her father and sleep with her mother? Is Pierce her father??? Ok, that's going a little too far, but there has to be something about a name like that.
I hope it reveals itself in the next two chapters, which I can't wait to read!

The Crying Of Lot 49???

So I made it through the first 79 pages and that is an understatement. I believe I only comprehended 30-38 pages give or take a few. I feel like I have a love/hate relationship with this book and I also believe that Thomas Pynchon may be completely out of his mind. 

I like to give books a fair read before I decide if I like them or not, and I'm definitely keeping my mind open to this book, I think my main problem with it so far is all of the obscure references. huh? 


I guess my big question is just why is this book important? 


It must serve some purpose or be the answer to some quest for the Holy Grail? Maybe? 
I suppose it's important to always read new things and keep your mind sharp...oh that's totally it! I think the purpose of The Crying Of Lot 49, is to make the reader think! 








This is not some calm, smooth, uneventful story we're dealing with. You drift off for a second and you miss everything. I found myself enjoying chapter 2 and 3 the most, because I could actually follow what was happening. After I read the first 9 pages, I thought I was a goner! But then I remembered the blog on how to read Pynchon, and I gave it another attempt.


I guess my main question is...What the hell is going on? 


I was fine up until Oedipa and Metzsger left the hotel room with the Paranoids, then I just got completely and utterly lost. I've been keeping my eye out for the references to lots, and wondering what Lot 49 is? 
I think at this point it has something to do with the WASTE symbol, but I could be completely wrong. 


Someone Please Enlighten this girl! (I usually read nothing but non-fiction)

Follow up for "A Good Man"

First of all, I must say that I thought the small group discussions were harder than I imagined. I think mainly because of the formality of it. It didn't feel like a class discussion, it felt more like a competition. That was just my initial reaction and maybe it's just because I get extremely nervous in leader type situations (I'm a failed Leo) but that was hard. The other thing is that I had quite a bit to say and I feel like I didn't say any of it. I think in a group discussion, one should be open to respond when they have something to say, and when someone is keeping track of that, it makes you more aware of what you're saying and all of a sudden, it's like you question when or if you should speak or save it for later. I don't know, maybe thats a good thing?

Anyways, I did prepare differently for this discussion than a normal class discussion and I'm not sure if it helped me? I started by reading the story on Friday and letting it sink in. Then I started doing research for scholarly journals about the story and other interesting articles. I started reading through the sources and tried to see if I could analyze the material. For the most part, the added resources helped me understand the characters in a better way. Then after I went through all the supporting evidence, I re-read the story and looked for specific examples of irony, foreshadow, "The good," and colors. The second time I read it, it seemed less shocking and more of a moral conviction.

My normal preparation for class is usually just reading and thinking about what I read, without any outside analysis. I think that is probably the norm for most people. I found it really helpful to find outside research on this story.

Three things I learned:

1) Having resources is always better than not having resources.
2) The risk of public humiliation is always motivating.
3) No matter how far-fetched it seems, someone will always come up with a conspiracy theory. 


For serious, I thought this was an interesting approach to a group discussion and I felt better prepared to discuss the text than I normally do, however I was really nervous. It did teach me a lesson about preparation though, and I think I need to step up my game on a regular basis.

~Witney Ryan

"A Good Man IS Hard To Find" if you ain't lookin....

WOW! I love this story. Flannery O' Connor really created a masterpiece when she wrote the short story "A Good Man Is Hard To Find." 


There really are many ways to analyze this story and I think it helps if you know a little background in the Catholic religion, as did O'Connor. 


The story gave me the HeeBee GeeBee's for sure! But also, I compared the story to Welty's "A Worn Path," immediately after reading it. The main reasons were that both stories were set in the South and both had a ton of symbols. Another reason was that they both struggled with some form of internal conflict. The Grandmother in Welty's story has to struggle with racism but also her grandsons condition. The Grandmother in O'Connors story struggles with finding grace, although she doesn't know it until it is too late. 


I guess both of these stories are classified as "Southern Gothic," which I would have to agree with. SG is its own sub genre of American Lit. that deals directly with issues of the South. It also uses irony, supernatural events, and unusual events. SG also tends to use racial tension and gun violence. 


One critical analysis I found on EPSCO said that the entire timing of the story added up exactly on a real U.S. map. All of the driving and landmarks were really on the map, except Timothy. When the family stops at the town of Timothy to eat at Red Sammy's, that is the only town that O'Connor made up (unless it is so small it can't be located with a map). Critics say that she chose the name Timothy specifically for the book of Timothy in the New Testament of the Bible. The verses in this book apparently deal with "how to be a good person and Christian", according to the article I read. 


(Source: Bryant, Hallman B. "Reading the map in "A Good Man Is Hard To Find.")


O'Connor uses irony, foreshadow, and biblical references to really underline the idea of the "Good." 

Villanelles make me curse....There really is nothing worse!

Just a fair warning.....

This is bad...bad...poetry.

But for the sake of the blog....here ya go. I might also add that after two hours, and 17 refrains later, I opted for using a Norah Jones lyric as my first refrain. So this poem is inspired by Norah Jones new album, which I highly recommend!

I Gotta Get Ya Out Of My Head

I gotta get ya out of my head-

can't sleep, can't eat

But remember the words you said.

I wasn't mad, I just went to bed

I didn't think it was sweet,

I gotta get ya out of my head.

You didn't read what I read,

practice deceit,

and remember the words you said.

What an awful ground to tread

'pick up the pace feet'

I have to get you out of my head.

I'm sorry if you were misled,

I didn't cheat,

I remembered the words you said.

After all no one's dead,

just hit delete,

So I can get ya out of my head,

and stop remembering the words you said. 

~Witney Ryan

Thursday Again...

I just keep telling myself if I can write this blog, I can have the Dublin Mudslide Ben & Jerry's in the freezer....Come on....


I've been sittin in this chair for hours...and can't come up with a worthy question, although there are many questions in my head.




What do all of these poets have in common?


It seems like they are all writing about life and their surroundings. I'm sure that is a common theme in poetry already, but these four poets, (Roethke, Bishop, Lowell, Brooks) do it in a very natural way. 


Two of my all time favorite Villanelles are by Roethke and Bishop.


~ The Waking by Theodore Roethke and One Art by Elizabeth Bishop ~


In The Waking, Roethke uses a masterful rhetoric to illustrate the tragic and beautiful cycle of life. Or at least that's how I read it. We sleep to wake, and wake to sleep, and it all happens very fast. I love how the words in this poem resonate and flow off each other to the very end.


In One Art, Bishop seems to poke fun at loss, which can be a hard thing to deal with, but it's no "disaster." I like to think of this poem as my mantra, because I struggle with loss on a daily basis (I'm sure we all do), and the more I can learn that it isn't the end of the world, the easier it is to deal with. She too uses rhetoric to make the reader think hard about the meaning. I think the second to last stanza is a good example of that. She doesn't literally lose 2 cities, 2 rivers and a continent, but if she did..it would not be a disaster. 


What is it about the human condition, that compels us to write about pain? 
.........

Tuesday Night Homework Club - 4/10/12

Post - Modernism...it's kind of like irony...it's hard to define. 

(It took me 2.3 seconds to find this picture By Munch.)

It seems that PM is philosophical by nature, but has a realist twist. The idea of the "HyperReal" a concept established by Jean Baudrillard, makes complete and utter sense.  In fact, the rate at which this HyperReal phenomena is occurring, seems to be speeding up at an incomparable rate because of the Internet. 

If an idea pops into your head, it takes Google 3 seconds to find it. And not only do you get what you were searching for, you get things you didn't even know you wanted to know. That's right!

Back in the day, like in Picasso's day, you were the source. If you wanted to know something or see something, you researched it, or painted it. There was no instant gratification was there?

I personally find myself getting overwhelmed really easily in this day and age because there is always some form of media bombardment in our daily lives. The second I wake up in the morning, 13 decisions flood my brain about the day. Instead of living reality as it comes, I live it through false "make believe" ideas   in my mind, and then I'm disappointed when they don't come true. 

I think I will finally take my parent's advice and "drink heavily," it's going to be a bumpy ride. 

Post-Modernism For Real...

We begin our Post-Modernism week with three extremely important writers, Robert Hayden, John Berryman, and Ralph Ellison.  I found the short Bio's on these writers interesting because they seemed to have alot in common.
Here is a quick reminder:

Robert Hayden: 


Born: 1913
Died: 1980
Adopted when he was 18 months old.
Poor background/ Traumatic childhood
Studied Music
Read modern poetry (Hughs, Cullen)
Grew up in Detroit


John Berryman:


Born:1914
Died: 1972
Father commit suicide, mother remarried.
Traumatic childhood
Studied Poetry
Taught at Wayne State in Detroit
Multiple Marriages

Ralph Ellison: 


Born: 1913
Died: 1994
Father died when he was three
Also read modern poetry (Langston Hughs, Cullen)
Awarded Music Scholarship, but switched to poetry
Multiple marriages

Out of the readings this week, I was most confused by The Invisible Man, by Ralph Ellison.

I was trying to read the story with my irony goggles on. Searching for some hope that the plot in this story was just a sick joke and not in fact actually taking place.

I think one of the most important parts of the entire story is the opening scene in which the grandfather is on his deathbed. The grandfather, who the boy takes after, is a trickster figure. He even tricks his own family. After Reconstruction when the South was a terrible place for African Americans to live, the grandfather did what he had to do to survive. He was polite and made sure not to cause any trouble. But this was a lie and he even calls himself a "traitor." And the most important thing is to keep up this tradition of undermining the white folks. This idea is what haunts the protagonist his whole life.

Throughout the story, words and ideas of Booker T. Washington are echoed, and this is another important theme. The second paragraph brings up the idea of "separate like the fingers of a hand." And the bot even calls himself a "neo-Booker T. Washington." But he mentions that it was in his "pre-invisible days." This is what leads me to think that invisibility equates to trickery.

Fast forward to where he is in the fighting ring and he finally figures out that his blind fold slipped and he could see. He is using a trickster move to dodge the other boys and have others take the blows that were aimed at him.

When he is trying to figure out whether or not to win against the "big boy," and he is conflicted about his moment of humility, he catches a blow to the head and is knocked out. This moment is pivotal because he starts to realize his grandfathers words very much a part of him.

The last four pages give me a stomach ache when I read them. I have a hard time interpreting what the protagonist is actually thinking.

I'm waiting until after class to finish this post. I will have to follow up.

TBC.

WORD TO THE ENGLISH CLUB!

On March 23rd, the CWI English club presented the first Word reading of the semester. Despite the fact that it was held on a Friday night on the eve of Spring Break, there was a full house. I too had nothing else to do on a Friday. (Did I type that out loud?).  But Seriously, it was worth the drive to Nampa.

There were a total of six brave speakers including our classroom's very own Nathanael! The line up included poets, non-fiction writers and even a songwriter. The array of images made for an eclectic palette.
I apologize in advance for forgetting some or most of the names of speakers, my notes are hard to decipher.

From the first speaker, a dark and twisted non-fiction story, maybe not suited for the young children in the room. All I can say about that one is that I would have never thought I would hear cinnamon and blood, used in the same sentence.

Next, a young writer with a small cache of poems. My personal favorite was his last poem in which he took a humorous approach to stereotypes. Although, by the number of uncomfortable faces looking around, I'm not sure if it was a fav. of everyone. (Welcome to Idaho.)

Next was our Musician friend, solo without guitar. I always find lyrics interesting when they are being spoken. For some reason, they lose a dimension in translation. I think the writer was extremely passionate and brave for sharing so many of his songs.

Next, a semi-autobiographical poet/writer, who reminds me of someone..but I can't put my finger on it..hmm.
I appreciated the realism in his writing. Often we forget that life is full of poetic moments all on their own.

Nathanael Peterson was our next poet. I didn't realize she was the same poet who wrote "Learning Korean" in the second edition of Caliper, which happens to be one of my favorite poems. She was full of witty epigrams that for me was a high point. There is nothing better than a great epigram.

The faculty speaker of the night, Kelly Ford, was definitely worth the wait. Her short non-fiction story "You will miss me when I burn," was a little gritty and passionate western. She proclaimed to borrowing the title from a Bonnie "Prince" Billy song, which I had no idea who that was. I googled him and that is a whole other blog in itself.
I really hate to compare writers to other writers because I feel like every writer should be their own thing. But this story really reminded me of the contemporary writer Annie Proulx. Ford's writing style is organic and comes off natural and easy to visualize, which is also a trait of Proulx.
Fav, quote from the story, "A beautiful girl, like a good horse, can change the world."

Great end to another successful Word.

Tuesday Night Homework Club

Aside from the fact that it feels like forever since I sat down to write a blog (or anything for that matter), I'm trying to refresh my spring broken brain. 


I'm thinking of a thought that was brought up about The Wasteland and I was curious about it as well, as I was re-reading my last blog. 


Who was T.S. Eliot writing for? His poem requires the reader to have a wealth of knowledge at their disposal, and yet then he provides notes. 


This seems to contradict the purpose. 


But what is the purpose?


AND ANOTHER THING.....


The original title, HE DO THE POLICE IN DIFFERENT VOICES: part I, could have been a hint that Eliot was using different speakers in his poem, which I didn't really catch onto at first. 


Which raises another good question, what constitutes a speaker? 


I believe for the sake of argument, a speaker can be anyone or thing that is speaking or having a thought that is not the original speaker's thought. So in the case of The Wasteland, stream of conscious and imagined characters count. 


It becomes hard to differentiate where the speaker changes, especially after the first section. The sections following one, seem to be a narration and they include multiple speakers. 


I still stand with my first initial thought and will need to read this poem at least 20 more times.