I actually did enjoy watching the movie that went along with this book. I thought that it was interesting to see how they portrayed Janie. I actually was looking forward to seeing the end of it. What I don't understand is how Oprah could say that this book was one of the most romantic books she had ever read. For me, romantic is not really the best describing word for Their Eyes Were Watching God. If anything, it was a very sad, sad story about how a woman tries to be her own woman, but is never able to because men keep coming along and marrying her. I could understand the first marriage, but the second one... In my eyes, she was purposefully using her sexuality because she was bored, she wanted excitement. I guess I just do not have patience for that kind of behavior. And the marriage with Tea Cake? What in the world was that all about? You have got to know that when something like that happens it is too good to be true and also it will NOT WORK OUT! How stupid can you be?
So anyhow, I don't know how Oprah can call a story where the ending is shooting the only man you have ever "loved" - not that I think Janie loved him, I think she lusted him. This whole story was mainly about lust and the conflicts one can get into with lust. I guess overall, this was not my favorite read. I just cannot like Janie. She is just too selfish and lustful for me.
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
Their Eyes Were Watching God - Extra
It was nice that this book incorporated a woman's perspective into the class. I know that we had Mrs. Dalloway, but I like that we get Janie's perspective. This book was difficult for me because there were parts that I did enjoy and parts that I did not enjoy. The storyline was very good I thought. It was different-I have not read this story before. I liked seeing this growing into womanhood throughout the story. I really don't think we have read any other books where a character grows so much in such a long period of time. I also liked Hurston's writing techniques. The way that she puts her words together is just beautiful-like poetry. She can describe a simple scene like no other. In a way, it sort of reminded me of Harry Potter just because there were so many details. Like in the beginning with the tree blossoming. Who comes up with stuff like that? Who could even think that a tree is erotic? Also, this is one of the few books that we have read where the setting is very well laid out for the reader, I enjoyed understanding where I was at in the story.
Okay, for the things that I did not like. I did not like Janie very much as a character. I think that she was very, very, very selfish. All she really cared about was herself and I HATE characters like that. Maybe it is because, most of the time they are portrayed as female characters. So anyway, I also think that Janie was kind of a skank... She used her good looks to get whatever she wanted. And whenever she finally found "love" she just became this puny woman who let her husband beat her. It just sort of upset me.
Okay, for the things that I did not like. I did not like Janie very much as a character. I think that she was very, very, very selfish. All she really cared about was herself and I HATE characters like that. Maybe it is because, most of the time they are portrayed as female characters. So anyway, I also think that Janie was kind of a skank... She used her good looks to get whatever she wanted. And whenever she finally found "love" she just became this puny woman who let her husband beat her. It just sort of upset me.
Maus I
Definitely the best read we have had so far this semester. I seriously loved this book, and actually wanted to read it to see what was going to happen next. Maybe I am a visual learner of something, but I just got this book. It was so real-just extraordinary. I am not a huge comic book fan, but the way that this story flowed, it just seemed like a poem...weird, I know.
Probably my favorite part of the book was the relationship that the father and son had. It was just so real-probably because it was real. It reminded me of the relationship that I have with my parents. A relationship that I think we all sort of have as young people, when we think we know more than our parents. The father telling his story is just so touching, and I think that as a reader, you cannot help to like the father. He sort of reminded me of my grandpa, the way he did things that were so odd and the son could not convince him otherwise.
The relationship that I found a little confusing was the father's relationship with his new wife, Mala and the one with his first wife Anja. I talked to a friend who has read the second book and she said that I'll find out more about it later. I guess I just don't understand why the father married Mala...
I also found it interesting that the father actually shared this story with his son. I think that if I had gone through this experience, I would never even want to think about it. Maybe that's why Anja killed herself-because she did just keep it all in. I can obviously see that the father is very strong. He is the strong and stable one throughout everything. I think that by sharing this story with his son, he is sort of releasing everything that happened.
What an awful thing. It's so sad at what happened to so many innocent people. Sometimes, if seems like it could just not be real. I think that this book very well makes it real.
Probably my favorite part of the book was the relationship that the father and son had. It was just so real-probably because it was real. It reminded me of the relationship that I have with my parents. A relationship that I think we all sort of have as young people, when we think we know more than our parents. The father telling his story is just so touching, and I think that as a reader, you cannot help to like the father. He sort of reminded me of my grandpa, the way he did things that were so odd and the son could not convince him otherwise.
The relationship that I found a little confusing was the father's relationship with his new wife, Mala and the one with his first wife Anja. I talked to a friend who has read the second book and she said that I'll find out more about it later. I guess I just don't understand why the father married Mala...
I also found it interesting that the father actually shared this story with his son. I think that if I had gone through this experience, I would never even want to think about it. Maybe that's why Anja killed herself-because she did just keep it all in. I can obviously see that the father is very strong. He is the strong and stable one throughout everything. I think that by sharing this story with his son, he is sort of releasing everything that happened.
What an awful thing. It's so sad at what happened to so many innocent people. Sometimes, if seems like it could just not be real. I think that this book very well makes it real.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Slaughterhouse Five
I read Slaughterhouse Five in high school and found absolutely no enjoyment out of it. Four years later I read it and I still find absolutely no enjoyment out of it. I understand that Vonnegut is creating this situation in which society/people can draw these huge questions out of this story and so that change can occur but why does it just have to be so weird? I have to give Vonnegut credit though; it is probably the most creative novel that I have ever read.
I guess that another reason why I really do not enjoy this novel is the way it is set up; going back and forth, from the present to the past and then jumping to the future and then back. I guess I am a pretty chronological person and I just do not like it nor do I understand it. Like the section we read for Tuesday about the British men coming out and singing. It was just so...weird, just out there in all ways possible.
In all of the stories that we have read, even if I do not really like the story, I can still say that the language and wording the author uses is brilliant or lovely. I really cannot say that about Vonnegut. His words are just so dry, plain, and straightforward. At least that's the way it seems.
I feel badly for Vonnegut that he had to live through the bombing of Dresden-which would mess anyone up- but why in the world did he have to start writing about it and convince readers that he was this brilliant man. Sadly, yet honestly, I think he was a nutcase - just my opinion.
I guess that another reason why I really do not enjoy this novel is the way it is set up; going back and forth, from the present to the past and then jumping to the future and then back. I guess I am a pretty chronological person and I just do not like it nor do I understand it. Like the section we read for Tuesday about the British men coming out and singing. It was just so...weird, just out there in all ways possible.
In all of the stories that we have read, even if I do not really like the story, I can still say that the language and wording the author uses is brilliant or lovely. I really cannot say that about Vonnegut. His words are just so dry, plain, and straightforward. At least that's the way it seems.
I feel badly for Vonnegut that he had to live through the bombing of Dresden-which would mess anyone up- but why in the world did he have to start writing about it and convince readers that he was this brilliant man. Sadly, yet honestly, I think he was a nutcase - just my opinion.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Waiting for Godot
Okay... In a weird way, I liked the second act of this play a lot more than I liked the first act. Overall though, it is just a weird play and I really have no idea what it means. I understand the nothingness of it all and the waiting waiting waiting for in all honesty NOTHING. It seems like Estragon and Vladimir have no idea what is going on around them, very much like the reader because I have no idea what is going on in this play! I think I need a visual of this. I think that my favorite character in this play is the Boy. We don't even know who the Boy is, just that he is the Boy and he is the one who comes to tell Estragon and Vladimir that Godot is not coming. I really like the part:
"Boy: What am I to tell Mr. Godot, Sir?
Vladimir: Tell him...(he hesitates)...tell him you saw me and that...(he hesitates)...that you saw me. (Pause. Vladimir advances, the Boy recoils. Vladimir halts, the Boy halts. With sudden violence.) You're sure you saw me, you won't come and tell me tomorrow that you never saw me! (Silence. Vladimir makes a sudden spring forward, the Boy avoids him and exit running. Silence. The sun sets, the moon rises. As in Act 1 Vladimir stands motionless and bowed. Estragon wakes, takes off his boots, gets up with one in each hand and goes and puts them down center front, then goes towards Vladimir.)"
It just almost seems like a puppet show! Actually, this whole play sort of reminded me of a type of clown show in some crazy mixed-up circus. They all just do not seem real.
Something that I really did not understand in the second act was that no one remembered anybody else. And yet, they still had this distant understanding of what had happened the day before. It is almost dream-like the way the talk to each other in the second act; like nothing had ever really happened the day before.
"Boy: What am I to tell Mr. Godot, Sir?
Vladimir: Tell him...(he hesitates)...tell him you saw me and that...(he hesitates)...that you saw me. (Pause. Vladimir advances, the Boy recoils. Vladimir halts, the Boy halts. With sudden violence.) You're sure you saw me, you won't come and tell me tomorrow that you never saw me! (Silence. Vladimir makes a sudden spring forward, the Boy avoids him and exit running. Silence. The sun sets, the moon rises. As in Act 1 Vladimir stands motionless and bowed. Estragon wakes, takes off his boots, gets up with one in each hand and goes and puts them down center front, then goes towards Vladimir.)"
It just almost seems like a puppet show! Actually, this whole play sort of reminded me of a type of clown show in some crazy mixed-up circus. They all just do not seem real.
Something that I really did not understand in the second act was that no one remembered anybody else. And yet, they still had this distant understanding of what had happened the day before. It is almost dream-like the way the talk to each other in the second act; like nothing had ever really happened the day before.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
As I Lay Dying - Extra
This story is creepy... I just cannot get over the son building his mother's coffin right in front of this. It is weird to me that Faulkner continues to concentrate on the fact that Cash is this supposedly great carpenter. I guess it might be the irony of this son using his craft for his mother's coffin. Faulkner keeps going back to the fact that Cash is right outside his mother's window building her coffin. When Darl says, "A good carpenter Addie Bundren could not want a better one, a better box to lie in. It will give her confidence and comfort. I go on to the house, followed by the Chuck. Chuck. Chuck. of the adze" (4-5). It is just very strange to me that it seems like everyone in this family is so concentrated on the mother's death. Even Addie is "accepting" her own death and nothing is being done about it. It really makes me mad how the stupid son keeps continually reminding her of her own death. It will be interesting to see how they come to terms with the death.
Even though this is a very creepy book, the language that Faulkner uses is actually very well put together and very beautiful. The way he describes things gives the reader such a vivid visual. I love when Darl says, "I enter the hall, hearing the voices before I reach the door. Tilting a little down the hill, as our house does, a breeze draws through the hall all the time, upslanting. A feather dropped near the front door will rise and brush along the ceiling, slanting backward, until it reaches the down-turning current at the back door: so with voices. As you enter the hall, they sound as though they were speaking out of the air about your head" (20). Whenever I read this, it told me so much about the setting and the character and what was going on. The entire mood of this story is developed so well.
Even though this is a very creepy book, the language that Faulkner uses is actually very well put together and very beautiful. The way he describes things gives the reader such a vivid visual. I love when Darl says, "I enter the hall, hearing the voices before I reach the door. Tilting a little down the hill, as our house does, a breeze draws through the hall all the time, upslanting. A feather dropped near the front door will rise and brush along the ceiling, slanting backward, until it reaches the down-turning current at the back door: so with voices. As you enter the hall, they sound as though they were speaking out of the air about your head" (20). Whenever I read this, it told me so much about the setting and the character and what was going on. The entire mood of this story is developed so well.
As I Lay Dying - Extra
What struck me first about As I Lay Dying is the format of the novel. It is interesting how Faulkner changes characters thoughts through different chapters. The way that he deliberately separates the characters and still intertwines the thoughts of the characters is amazing.
In the beginning of As I Lay Dying I was a little confused about what was going on because the characters changed so quickly. As I got into the story, I learned the characters and began to understand the way that they act. What I find fascinating about Faulkner is his uncanny ability to create the different characters with such distinct personalities. As I continued reading farther on, whenever I read the name at the beginning of the chapter, I immediately brought the character into my mind.
Faulkner also has that amazing ability to write at the surface but the reader knows that there is a ton more going on that what is being said on top. I think that his writing is very poetry-like. He tends to put a lot of understatement into his writing and he also puts such a huge meaning, concept, or emotion into just a few simple words. I think that his writing really draws the reader in.
In the beginning of As I Lay Dying I was a little confused about what was going on because the characters changed so quickly. As I got into the story, I learned the characters and began to understand the way that they act. What I find fascinating about Faulkner is his uncanny ability to create the different characters with such distinct personalities. As I continued reading farther on, whenever I read the name at the beginning of the chapter, I immediately brought the character into my mind.
Faulkner also has that amazing ability to write at the surface but the reader knows that there is a ton more going on that what is being said on top. I think that his writing is very poetry-like. He tends to put a lot of understatement into his writing and he also puts such a huge meaning, concept, or emotion into just a few simple words. I think that his writing really draws the reader in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)