Time and Distance Overcome

“Time and Distance Overcome” is a shocking piece that reveals the atrocities of human nature. As history has proven over time, and unfortunately continues to prove in the modern world, humans are capable of unfathomably horrific acts. Eula Biss describes gruesome accounts of violent racism in excruciating detail, which were laced seamlessly into an initially lighthearted narrative. To the unsuspecting reader, these events are particularly upsetting and shocking. Though such detailed descriptions are disturbing in every sense, it is important for humans to learn about and acknowledge the cruelties of our past as a race. In the words of Abraham Lincoln, “Human nature will not change. ...Let us therefore study the incidents in this as philosophy to learn wisdom from…”. As an attempt to prevent repeated mistakes, and move forward as a populace into a more progressive world, this piece is invaluable. From a literary perspective, the story effectively conveyed the messages, with crude language that left little to the imagination. Informative, sickening, engaging. The telephone pole has a surprisingly grisly past.

Week 6: "What Sacagawea Means To Me" & "Time and Distance Overcome"

I’m really struggling with this creative nonfiction unit. I just don’t understand how nonfiction can be creative. Writing my own creative nonfiction, I feel kind of stifled and smothered, like I did in my AP Literature class last year when we had to write historical fiction. I couldn’t just write like I normally do, in the way that comes so easily to me- I had to do research and incorporate it into my story, and that made what should have been an enjoyable assignment for me a grueling chore instead. I had the same difficulty with our first creative nonfiction assignment.

The pieces of creative nonfiction we were assigned to read only added to my confusion. Although “What Sacagawea Means To Me” was the less confusing of the two for me, I felt like it was just a bunch of fragments of essays haphazardly thrown together. The first paragraph, which talks about a hypothetical amusement park where for a nominal fee one can step into Sacagawea’s virtual shoes, could certainly be further developed and placed into one of those dystopian novels that are all the rage right now. The second paragraph grabbed my attention from the start with “Sacagawea is our mother. She is the first gene pair of the American DNA.” Right away, I was intrigued and hoped for some elaboration. Unfortunately, the rest of the paragraph didn’t follow up on these claims, instead discussing Sacagawea’s death, and drawing parallels between it and the early colonization of America. The third paragraph shifts focus entirely away from Sacagawea, mentioning all the other people involved in the Lewis and Clark expedition, which seemed irrelevant to me. Then in the fourth paragraph, we are finally introduced to what we can probably call Alexie’s central argument: that America is a land full of contradictions. This argument is strengthened in the final paragraph when she states that these contradictions are echoed in herself and in Sacagawea. I wondered why Alexie didn’t introduce this idea of contradictions right off the bat and dedicate the entire piece to it. The paragraphs of this piece individually made sense to me- but together, I think they fail to be cohesive.

“Time and Distance Overcome” seemed even choppier. The first half could have stood on its own as an examination of the effects of the invention of the telephone on society. The second half could have stood on its own as a history of lynching in the United States. The final paragraph is the only part of the piece that is creative, because it is the only place where Biss ties her own experiences, beautifully recounted, to the collection of facts that form 90% of the piece. I also thought there were far too many of these facts, and felt they were simply listed off rather than explained and developed, especially towards the end. Hopefully creative nonfiction will make more sense to me after reading a few more example works. 

Week 6 - "Time and Distance Overcome"

 I really enjoyed the work "Time and Distance Overcome" by Biss. Namely, I like how she took this seemingly ordinary object, the telephone pole, and showed us the rich history behind it. Generally, most people don't even pay attention to telephone poles; they just fade into the background. However, as Biss demonstrates, the pole symbolizes so much American history. She discusses how Mark Twain was one of the first people to own a telephone, the Sioux resistance to the poles, and the lynchings that utilized the telephone poles. As I read the hate crimes that used the telephone pole, the pole took on this monstrous identity. But in reality, the pole is an inanimate object. As Biss contends, "The poles of course, were not to blame. It was only coincidence that they became convenient as gallows, because they were tall and straight, with a crossbar, and because they stood in public places. And it was only coincidence that the telephone poles so closely resembled crucifixes." Thus, it is us humans who distorted the original genius of the telephone and telephone pole. That said, next time I see a telephone pole, I will see it in a different light. 

Week 5 - Puss in Boots

  This was one of my favorite stories we've had to read so far in this class. I used to read Puss in Boots a lot as a small child, but reading it again now I've picked up so many new things I never noticed before. As a younger kid I always thought puss in boots was very funny, and smart to trick people to get what he wants; but now there is so much more I pick up about his personality, and the details in his elaborate plans. This version of the story was also very different from the one I've grown up reading so it was interesting to see the small differences that come with a different version. I've always known Puss in Boots to be an extremely sly and cocky cat who will do whatever it takes to get what he wants. He cares a great deal about his social standing and in my opinion, he believes that he should receive special treatment. But as self centered as he is, Puss in boots always manages to get whatever he or his master may want; the more challenging it is to get, the more elaborate and ridiculous his plan will be. He works extremely hard to please himself, his master, and his friends and admirers. Even when it seems impossible, he (insanely) always comes out on top. Though he deserves to take credit for his accomplishments, he does not deserve to be cocky; especially since he constantly blows himself up and out of proportion. Even with all he has going on, he takes the time to tell us about his boots and explain all of his special tricks in detail. Puss in Boots may spend a good portion of his story talking about himself, he really does care about others, which he proves every time he helps his master. He may be cocky, but he really does have his friends and masters best interests at heart.

Week 5- "Alice Weir"

This piece was so compelling to me. I wanted to know so much more about Alice Weir, the seeming subject of the piece, but I didn't learn much. Alice is the subject of the piece but the speaker seems to not be able to focus on his/her alleged subject, as he/she gets easily distracted by their surroundings. Their seems to be so much hustle and bustle about this train station. As the speaker states, however, it is rush hour and Alice Weir appears to be a regular at this train station. But what is it about her that draws everyone to watch her? The speaker claims that everyone is watching her, but she doesn't appear to be doing anything interesting. All the speaker sees her do this particular time is get off the train and wait for a taxi. What is so compelling about that? I want to know her story.

It is actually quite frustrating to me that the speaker diverts his attention to something else. He/she seems to enjoy people-watching. He watches a family interact with each other and then he's like, "okay, back to Alice...but she's gone." Okay great thanks.
And the oddest thing to me is that everyone knows she will be back. How do they know this? And what has she done to deserve all of this attention?

This piece left me with many questions and I really want the answers to them.

Week 5- Puss-In-Boots

I enjoyed Angela Carter’s take on Puss-In-Boots. The perspective from which the story was presented most impressed me. It is not very often that I read a story told completely in first person where the main character often refers to themselves in third person. But what better character to pull off this feat than the amazing Puss?? The fact that this story is seemingly told through two different yet perfectly simultaneous perspectives is completely appropriate within the stories context. Puss sees himself as such a magnificent character that it is foolish to even consider his character could be contained into one form of narration. The controlling force of the story is Puss and his actions. In addition Puss is the only character that sees everything that goes on. He understands his masters situation from dealing with him firsthand, and he understands the princess situation through his meeting with his lover. Puss is the eye that sees all and knows all. The major plot of the story is obviously the predicament of Puss’ master, but the title of the story has nothing to do with his master because, to put it plainly, he’s not important. The title of the story is “Puss-In-Boots”. That is the title for a reason. Puss pervades the story with his charismatic presence and this unbearable ego is successfully conveyed through Puss’ mixing of the first and third person storyteller.

Week 5 - "Butter Cow"

One aspect of this story, aside from the purposeful vagueness of the identity or point of view of the narrator, which really captured me was the rhythm that Martone created through repetition, both through diction and subject matter. This created an almost droning effect as I read it to myself. The repetitious description of the cows, their behavior and the generations of cows that came before them also helped encapsulate the droning monotony of a landscape that rolled on and on and on, flat in every direction. The way he describes the people at the fair roaming around, eating, chewing, consuming thoughtlessly and endlessly directly mimics the cows, making the people feel like cattle in our proverbial eyes. The whole piece has this unsettling way of making everything blend together – fields and roads, cattle and people – melting into Dali-esque dreamscape. It becomes even more surreal as it draws to a close, the repetition of words growing closer together until sentences are hardly coherent, and leaving, at least to me, a yawning, empty space which soon after floods with confusion. This piece left me with the kind of frustration I get when not only I do not understand, but feel as though I was never meant to understand in the first place.

Week 5 Butter Cow

I found a lot of word play as I read this piece. In the beginning when he writes, "through this state, you don't have to think about driving" he means state of mind as well as the geographical state. When he discusses there being an intersection every mile I think he was creating a metaphor for life. Life goes steady for a while and then it reaches "an intersection" or time when we don't know which choice to make (the roads representing the choices). As the narrator describes the different sites she sees it is a metaphor for the different conditions or phases of life. She discusses parts where fences have been torn out and parts where there are fences and crops and animals. Bad and good times in life. I'm not sure if the metaphor was intended, but it works in many places. I was also wondering why the narrator can't just ask the man what he's thinking. I thought when i first read it that maybe they had gotten in an argument in the car ride and then stopped talking, but then they would have probably went home instead of to the fair if they were fighting. Maybe she is just shy or likes not knowing and would rather guess what he is thinking.

Fern response

As I reread this story I found a new prospective meaning in it. I believe Jean Toomer is assimilating the characteristics of a beautiful emotionally conflicted women with the south. I first notice this when he begins to describe her. "When she was young a few men took her, but got no joy from it. And then, once done they felt bound to her." What I believe Toomer is referencing is slavery in the early colonial south. It has been common for men to describe no human things as "her" or a "she". The idealistic characteristics of beauty are usually attributed to women. Ever since ancient times when men wanted to describe things as beautiful they compared them to women. Now when Toomer says that "a few men took her but got no joy from it" I believe he is describing how African American slaves were forced to work the fields and maintain the prominence of the south under extreme scrutiny. They gained no joy from this they simply were forced to do it; but afterwords when slavery was abolished some couldn't bring themselves to leave. For although it was forcibly made there home it was still there home none the less. The beauty and majesty of south lured men from all over. I believe this is where the main character comes into play. After the civil war the south entered an era known as Reconstruction. During this era people up north traveled south to take jobs and reap other benefits that the brutalized south had to offer. Southerners referenced these northern yankees as carpetbaggers. Toomer states that "he" came down on a train and was enthralled in the beauty just like every other person who was lured to her siren like call. Like everyone else he asked to much from a place that just wasn't in the position to give it.

Week 5- Alice Weir

There are many unique aspects of this piece that I would like to touch on. First, the use of 1st person plural narration goes a long way in making the reader realize that a group of people share the same ideas about the situation. It is as if the speaker is speaking for everyone in the train station. Places like, "...we are only interested in the people who are arriving this evening" and "We're tempted to tell her to wake up and pay attention" show how multiple people are watching the scene since the word "we" is being used. I also like how this piece is a perfect example of a camera panning around a certain area. I enjoy how the author cuts from the scene with Alice to the scene of the family. It's relatable in that sense because usually when people are watching other people, they tend to get distracted by other things.

Enoch and the Gorilla

I found this piece to be almost overbearingly sad. Enoch, as a character was very interesting; he didn't fit in anywhere and was forced into a city he didn't know because of his father. The narration in this piece is particularly interesting. It gave us an outsider, third person perspective with hints that it was from Enoch's point of view. However, while reading it, I almost did not realize just how strange Enoch's actions were throughout the text. The narration made it seem like these actions weren't very out of the ordinary, in fact, it displayed them like any other simple task one might perform throughout the day. It's only when the reader takes a step back to truly analyze what Enoch was doing that we realize just how out of place he really was. In the beginning, he's standing in line to shake hands with a gorilla. On top of that, he's standing with children. Think about that a minute; an adult man would look ridiculously out of place among a throng of kids that probably barely reach his waist. Again, when he shreds the umbrella, the narration describes this action almost offhandedly. Now, imagine what Enoch would look like with a sharp skeleton of the umbrella tucked under his arm.

The narration seemed to lull the reader into a sense of sympathy for Enoch, and this sympathy (for me anyway) can blind the reader into noticing weird or important things about the text.

Week Five -"Alice Weir"

            People-watching is fun. Entertaining. “Alice Weir” reminded me of being out in public and simply observing the people passing by with their day-to-day routine and habits. The piece begins with the idea that “as the train stops, the story should begin”; everyone has a story, why they’re going where they are going and from where have they come. In this train station, it feels like the narrators may even be inventing stories for all of the people they observe.

            The biggest question for me is who the narrators are. A group of people? Do they know Alice Weir, or are she and even her name someone for whom they have made up a story? The narrators, in my opinion, are indeed a group of people, although they could also include the reader, since it seems that without physically moving we are able to leave the train station with Alice and venture outside to see a family getting out of a cab. However, it seems that the narrators get fed up with Alice and her dilly-dallying on the sidewalk, just like the fellow passengers whom she is blocking, and their attention diverts to said family.

            By the time they get bored with this family, their attention reverts to Alice who is gone. But they must go on this people-watching excursion often, because they know that since it’s only Monday, “[s]he’ll be back”.

            At this point in my reading, I believe the people-watchers are all-seeing and include the reader. It’s like panning in and out of scenes during a movie, following the action. So, I conclude, that people-watching is justified because it is simply like watching a movie.

Week 5: "Puss-In-Boots"

Angela Carter did an excellent job of assuming the voice of a cat in “Puss-In-Boots” (that is, if cats had voices). Cats are independent, proud, mischievous, and uppity, and Puss-In-Boots’ characterization is true to these traits. The use of illeism- like when Puss says “proud of his fine, white shirtfront that dazzles harmoniously against his orange and tangerine tessellations… proud of his bird-entrancing eye and more than military whiskers; proud… of his fine, musical voice”, referring to himself- serves to convey the feline’s egotistic personality. His assured declarations, such as “[French] is the only language in which you can purr”, indicate a high level of refinement and sophistication, as does his lofty speech like when he says “Puss can perform a back somersault whilst holding aloft a glass of vino in his right paw and never spill a drop”. The fact that Puss almost single-handedly brings his master and the object of his master’s affection together attests to his wit and penchant for mischief. “Puss-In-Boots” has it all: humor, adventure, suspense, and romance, all told through the eyes of a faithful pet cat. I thoroughly enjoyed this story.     

STRUCTURAL IRONY IN PUSS-IN-BOOTS // Week Six

I really enjoyed the narration of the short story “Puss-in-Boots”, by Angela Carter, and in particular the structural irony that Carter’s narrative endows the story with. By using a non-human narrator, she is able to create a discrepancy between the descriptions of events that take place and the actual events themselves. For example, when Figaro describes himself performing his “meditative toilette” and the pensive deliberation that takes place at the same time, it contrasts very sharply with the image that I have in mind when I think of a cat using a litterbox. The narrative as a whole effectively makes use of this contrast across the whole story, as an intelligent cat describes many things that ordinary cats do on a regular basis from his own perspective. I enjoyed reading this clever reinvention of the classic European fairy tale, and especially so because of the witty narration and feline turns of phrases.

Week 5- Enoch and the Gorilla

Throughout this story, the reader gets the sense that Enoch has had a troubled past, and carries a negative aura with him. I noticed that O'Connor used the presence of rain quite often in this story, and I began to see it as a symbol of Enoch's outlook on life. The story starts out with a downpour where Enoch needs to borrow a broken umbrella. This directs the scene into a wearisome, defeated set of images. Continuing on, the presence of rain is mentioned in every page up to page five. It is almost as if it is a way of showing how Enoch feels that his life is sinking into the dreary rain, or is being washed away by it. For example, on page two, the narrator describes the music of the "Tarara Boom Die Aye" to be "almost drowned out by the rain" and how the Gonga truck's record was, "barely a mumble in the rain." On page five, however, the presence of rain seems to disappear. Coincidentally, this is the page where Enoch undergoes his transformation where he finally claims, "I know what I want." As a result, I thought that O'connor's utilization of rain as a symbol in Enoch's life throughout the story helped compliment the scenes as well as the changes that Enoch underwent in the story.

Week Five - "Butter Cow"

As I was reading “Butter Cow”, I couldn’t help but wonder about the connection between the “I” and the “he”. Is the “I” female and the two are on a date or are they relatives or friends?  Whatever the case maybe, the “I” seems extremely bored with the “he”. Namely, this is seen when the narrator states, “I am thinking, he is thinking…” The repetition of this line throughout the story demonstrates a strong familiarity between the narrator and the “he”, or at least the “I” believes she knows him well enough to predict almost every thought. The first paragraph describes the road intersections at right angles, the soybeans, and cattle. The narrator describes the drive as “mindless”, but this could also apply to the “he”. From what the narrator reveals, the “he” has a great breadth of agriculture knowledge and is seemingly fascinated by it. However, perhaps the narrator is not actually interested in agriculture and feels the whole fair experience to be banal.

            The narrator’s disinterest in the fair and arguably in the “he” as well is demonstrated when the narrator describes the scene. For the narrator contends, “And at the fair people there walk and eat, lap up against each other, wave the paper napkins stained with four kinds of grease across their moony faces…” As I read this, the description made me wonder who actually are the animals. And perhaps, that is the narrator’s point.  

Week 4- "The Sock"

This piece was very intriguing to me because of the almost emotionless narrator, and her apparent lack of emotion gives off so much. You can tell that, though she is still possessive of her husband and still has some sort of sweet feeling for him, she's trying her hardest to be accommodating; to not be known as the "bitter ex-wife", to keep everything together so that her son doesn't grow to resent either parent. You can tell she's almost being taken advantage of because of this, the fact that her ex husband asks that she takes care of his mother, knowing that she'll agree because of how accommodating she's been thus far, and you almost get the sense that she knows it too. Her little victory, the only revenge she really takes, is when she doesn't remind her ex husband that his sock is in his back pocket, that she lets it go and she lets him feel foolish even for just one slight moment. Her sort of flat tone throughout the piece indicates a person who is really emotionally spent, someone who doesn't even have the energy to be upset, someone who has been reduced to finding small pleasure in very, very small moment.

Week 5 -Enoch and the Gorilla

This piece was really confusing for a while, it spun in my head as I tried to re -read sections and wrap my head around what was going on. At first I pictured Enoch as an older man as the beginning of the story mentioned, " Enoched had borrowed his landlady's Umbrella-". The first thing that I figured was he owed his own home of some sort and was some awkward looking man. He even stated he hated kids as he stood in line to wait for the gorilla. We find out he is actually 18 and the ends of his front teeth were broken off. We also get a sense that this "Gorilla" is an animal from a zoo of some sort but instead its some jerk in a suit. But what really threw me off was how Enoch suddenly found some inner courage after reading the whereabouts of all the stops this fake gorilla was going to be. I would have never suspected Enoch to jump into the van and suit up in the gorilla suit. I took it that he had a great idea to rat out the fake gorilla and show everyone that he's a fake. When he began to dig a hole for his cloths and put on the gorilla suit, I pictured a man transforming into a werwolf but instead this was a gorilla. I had to read it over a few times to finally understand what was going on.

So I suppose what I'm getting at is, there were misleading parts or rather parts to this piece that made you jump to conclusions and then later find that you're conclusion was wrong. But thats what kept the drive of this story, it had you think one thing and then made into soothing else. Filled with surprises and and overall rather interesting piece. 

Week 4 - "Yours"

“Yours” is an extremely subtextual story - we are put in a position where we as readers have very little information about the private scenes we're eavesdropping on, and must read between the lines in order to understand the story. In particular, I wish to focus on the significance of the letter from Clark’s family.

One of the only pieces of information we are freely given about Clark and Allison’s relationship is the age difference.This seems a reasonable explanation for why Clark's family is so set against their relationship - they think that Clark is an ‘old fool’ for being with her. Initially I thought that the insinuation might be that they think Allison is a gold digger, who means to steal his money. However, the inclusion of the check makes me think that the letter was in response to a request by Clark to borrow money, implying that he is hardly wealthy. In addition, Allison’s illness has already been heavily hinted at -  this brings up the possibility that they might have needed the money for her treatments, which makes the inclusion of the false check an even crueler gesture.

The most crucial detail, however,  is the fact that when Allison finds the letter with the rest of the mail, it has already been opened. If Clark was the one who read the letter, it begs the question of why he would leave it where Allison would undoubtedly find it and read the terrible things his family had to say about her. There is significant tension in their dialogue that could suggest that it was a sign of doubt and aggression -  that Clark was starting to believe that he really is an old fool; however this seems out of line with his attitude as the story progresses. It could simply be a way of letting his wife know that they couldn't get the money, because he can't bear to say it himself, or, even more glumly, a sign of resignation - because if they know by now that Allison is terminal, they wouldn't need the money anyway.

However,  Allison finds the letter with the maid’s chore list, and the dinner she has prepared for Clark, making it a definite possibility that Clark hasn't seen the letter at all - that maid has read it and hidden it from him, perhaps to spare his heart, but left it for Allison to read, revealing a strange dynamic - though Allison is dying, she is still the one taking care of Clark, not the other way around.

Week 4 - " The Sock"

This story was filled with regret and past memories, the women narrating spoke in a tone that made her almost understanding about the situation. It seemed she sounded as if she had come to terms with her separation with her husband. But I couldn't help but notices he refers to her ex husband as, " My husband.". Now as far as I'm aware, you don't refer to an ex or divorced significant other as if they are currently in a relationship with you. This really stood out within the reading because it shows that even though on the outside she shows she has come to terms and is comfortable with the fact she no longer with her husband. But on the other hand deep inside she is hurting, wishing things had worked out a bit differently. She even mentions she plays nice with " her husbands" wife for the sake of her child. In other words if she could fight off his wife to have him back she would in a heartbeat. The sock seems to trigger flashback memories of this woman and her husband when they were together. She describes her memories in such detail, " How he would lie reading on his back on the bed with his feet crossed at the ankles so that his feet would be pointed toward different corners of the room.". I just don't understand the end though, she keeps his wives belongings such as a, " Red comb, red lip-stick and a bottle of pills." and sticks them in a draw until the next time she sees her husband and his wife. Why can't she simply send them back? The only thing that can come from holding on to these belongings is more regret and a build up of hatred. But hey, thats just my opinion!

Yours Response

Underneath a very plain and subtle text is a feeling of unsettling resentment. I found the dialogue very passive aggressive. It seemed that both the characters had so much to say but they can't bring themselves to just come out with so they sort of go back and forth with these little irritable comments that mask there great feelings of resentment towards each other. The off-putting way both characters interact with each other reveal a certain coldness that inflicts those who are dealing with their mortality and haven't quite learned how to accept the unfortunate inevitable. Just through a simple activity like carving a pumpkin you can pick up on so much.

week 4- Some of Us Had been Threatening Our Friend Colby

I loved this short story. The fact that the main topic of the story was being discussed in such a nonchalant manner, despite its morbidity, aggressively grabs the reader’s attention and refuses to let go. The characters show genuine concern for Colby when they describe him as being their “dear friend” and immediately juxtapose that concept by going over the minute details regarding the event of his hanging. I think what made the story so incredibly pervasive was its ability to display the characters genuine concern for the tastefulness of the grotesque event that they were organizing as if it were a gala assembled for the social elite. The undeniable irony of the situation is evidently clear as the group of friends comb over the tact and practicality of such details as: music, physical imagery, gibbet vs. tree, wording of invitations, legitimacy of a hangman, and the idea of a wire vs. a rope. Their attention to detail is clearly ironic in the gravity of their actions. However, perhaps the most brilliantly crafted move of the story is what the author leaves to the unknown. The reader is left to question first “what did Colby do” and second “if they are his friends why are they hanging him?” The level of comfort that the characters display when faced with their friend having “gone too far” and their seemingly inevitable decision to hang him, suggests that this situation is not uncommon. But even this idea is contrasted at the close of the story when the narrator informs that no one ever went “too far” again. The mystery of the story leaves the reader with a sort of unsolvable riddle.

Week Four- "Yours"

In my film class, we recently discussed the idea of challenging preconceived notions of plot lines. The viewer expects one thing to happen, and then something else does. Similarly, I think the piece "Yours" does the same thing. We, as readers, looked at the two characters Allison and Clark. We expect Clark, since he's the older of the two, to die sooner than Allison. Then Robison turns it around and makes Allison die before him.

I recently read a piece where a similar thing happened. The author spends the first section of the piece describing and focusing on a dying dog, and then something completely unexpected happens that has nothing to do with the dog. (http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1996/06/24/the-fourth-state-of-matter).

I think it's really interesting how an author can change a piece to make it completely different than the reader first thought. That command over craft in these two pieces completely blows me away, and I really want to imitate them.

week 4

Well this is weird. In a nonchalant tone, some "friends" of a character Colby plan and carry through his execution for having, "gone too far". This piece finds us in a place in which capitol punishment is out of the question, thus leading Colby's friends to carefully plan and execute (pun kind of intended) his hanging in a way that wouldn't tip off the authorities, yet still gather a crowd. In what seems like a satirical piece mocking the modern wedding industry, Barthelme seems to keep character descriptions to a minimum thus allowing for the reader to make assumptions and quickly learn some essential characteristics of these people throughout this short piece.

Colby's action of "going too far" is also left vague. It seems almost irrelevant though; it doesn't matter what Colby had done in this piece, the only thing that really seems to matter is careful planning of a rather barbarous act.

TLDR: Weird story and it doesn't matter what Colby actually did.

Week 4 - "Yours"

I really liked this story because the ending surprised me and it was written very beautifully. The imagery of fall and carving pumpkins brought me back to my childhood. It is such a relatable thing to be sitting in your home with your loved ones carving pumpkins and making fun of your own, because it is a difficult task. The specificity in which everything is described such as: "...Allison and Clark gutted and carved the pumpkins together, at an old table set on the back porch, over newspaper after soggy newspaper..." makes me see the image so clearly and feel like I am there. I can recognize these images as they've been well-known in my life.

The way it ended really shocked me because it was such a pleasant piece but then it suddenly took a dark turn. I hadn't paid much attention to the fact that Allison "wore a natural-hair wig", but one can assume that she had a form of cancer. Her age was of significant because the author brought it up twice, and even mentioned her husband's age in its contrast and I never expected her to die.

week 5: Enoch and the Gorilla

This piece out of all the others confused me the most. through most of the story we see Enoch establish himself as kind of an awkward character; the scene with the waitress expresses others view of him the most and the fact that "although the waitress had met him many times, she had not yet begun to like him". I expected him; when he put on that gorilla suit, to revert back; and become less awkward through the beastly acquisition of his "new skin". Instead, the reader is treated with a very childish rendition of him scaring the young couple. Which in no way matches up to the beastly awe the children showed the previous gorilla; or the friendly handshake Enoch expects to receive from the young couple.

I think the piece challenges the readers expectations of what is to happen (as readers; I think everyone loves to make predictions); in the beginning we expect him to throw away the crappy umbrella; but he doesn't. We do not expect him to wait in line with the children, but he does; we do not expect the gorilla to be a man in the suit, we do not expect the waitress to treat Enoch; who seems admittedly a little emotionally disturbed but mostly harmless, so harshly. And in the end, I expected Enoch to go crazy on some wild killing spree in the gorilla costume (given that he had already either killed or beaten the suits previous inhabitant unconscious); but instead he had been after what he wanted all along; a simple handshake.

Week 3: Red Shift By Ted Berrigan

(Before you start reading; i had problems with my computer during week 3 and was unable to respond to our last week of poetry; this is me making up that assignment)

In class we have been doing allot of discussion about the particular choices of writers which is a topic that i find, very very interesting. My favorite poem; Red Shift by Ted Berrigan, tells a very interesting story through the fine particulars, this is it:




Here I am at 8:08 p.m. indefinable ample rhythmic frame
The air is biting, February, fierce arabesques
        on the way to tree in winter streetscape
I drink some American poison liquid air which bubbles
        and smoke to have character and to lean
In. The streets look for Allen, Frank, or me, Allen
        is a movie, Frank disappearing in the air, it's
Heavy with that lightness, heavy on me, I heave
        through it, them, as
The Calvados is being sipped on Long island now
        twenty years almost ago, and the man smoking
Is looking at the smilingly attentive woman, & telling.
Who would have thought that I'd be here, nothing
        wrapped up, nothing buried, everything
Love, children, hundreds of them, money, marriage-
        ethics, a politics of grace,
Up in the air, swirling, burning even or still, now
        more than ever before?
Not that practically a boy, serious in corduroy car coat
        eyes penetrating the winter twilight at 6th
& Bowery in 1961. Not that pretty girl, nineteen, who was
        going to have to go, careening into middle-age so,
To burn, & to burn more fiercely than even she could imagine
        so to go. Not that painter who from very first meeting
I would never & never will leave alone until we both vanish
        into the thin air we signed up for & so demanded
To breathe & who will never leave me, not for sex, nor politics
        nor even for stupid permanent estrangement which is
Only our human lot & means nothing. No, not him.
There's a song, "California Dreaming", but no, I won't do that
I am 43. When will I die? I will never die, I will live
To be 110, & I will never go away, & you will never escape from me
        who am always & only a ghost, despite this frame, Spirit
Who lives only to nag.
I'm only pronouns, & I am all of them, & I didn't ask for this
        You did
I came into your life to change it & it did so & now nothing
        will ever change
That, and that's that.
Alone & crowded, unhappy fate, nevertheless
        I slip softly into the air
The world's furious song flows through my costume.

(here is a link to the page from where i copied and pasted the poem; http://epc.buffalo.edu/authors/berrigan/redshift.html)

I have spent allot of time analyzing this poem and at first glance when reading this poem it appear too disjointed to form any coherent thought. But then when you begin to examine the particulars of Ted Berrigans style you begin to realize that this poem tells the story of someone who is born, ages, then dies. Particulars that clue the reader in to this idea are the early lines; but mostly the first. the first line says "Here I am at 8:08 p.m. indefinable ample rhythmic frame" the numbers refer to the speakers time of birth and the rest holds the idea that at that moment he has the ability to become anything he wants. unfortunately this can not last. 

another line i find interesting is "The Calvados is being sipped on Long island now/ twenty years almost ago," - this line shows the transition from childhood to adulthood, both in the idea that he has moved on from drinking  "some American poison liquid air" to expensive brandy; as well as saying that twenty years has past. 

 Age creep upon the speaker harshly in the last few lines; when i think we can make the assumption that the character knows he is going to die he even seems to go through a midlife crisis - "I am 43. When will I die? I will never die, I will live". With this line we see that the last section of speech differs from the beginning in the way that it become more frenzied almost as if the character is struggling to live.  The second to last line "i slip softly into the air" almost evokes the very action of dying. 

 Ted Berrigan is also great at creating action through line breaks; one of my favorite lines that reinforces this idea are the lines that read " into the thin air we signed up for & so demanded/To breathe..." i feel like this break between demanded and to breath hovers on the air and reinforces the word "demanded". It gives the reader an even more personal idea of what the speaker has been through; the idea that life has not been easy for the speaker. 

I could talk about this poem for hours but here's my question; what particular do you first notice?

Week 5: Enoch and the Gorilla

Some pieces defy analysis. In my opinion, this piece invites it. It leaves all sorts of unanswered questions. One question that occurs to me is did Enoch start off crazy or did something make him snap in the course of the story? His frantic behavior with the umbrella at the start of the story suggests that his mental state may have been precarious to begin with, although this does not become apparent until after one reads through the whole thing. The language he uses to describe the rain, "it came down with a shriek and and stabbed him in the back of the neck", makes it sound as though he attributes malicious intent to the rain's behavior. Once we know that Enoch is unbalanced, we can look at the story in a new light. The story is written from Enoch's point of view, so it is likely to be a warped view of the world. Perhaps the children are not as amused by him as they appear to be. Perhaps the children are not looking at him, it is merely him being paranoid. Perhaps their laughter is simply the laughter of children waiting to see a gorilla, but Enoch's twisted mind makes it seem like they are laughing at him. Enoch's inappropriate reactions to events also indicate is state of mind. When he realizes that there is a human inside the gorilla suit, his first reaction is jealousy. He thinks the man in the gorilla suit is more important than himself because people are lining up to shake his hand. He does not register that the people have been bribed to do so with the promise of free admission. His actions from that point on are quite clearly those of a mentally unbalanced person, from the nervous fidgeting in his apartment to the theft of the gorilla suit. One other thing that the text leaves unclear; did Enoch merely beat the man senseless, or did he stab him with the sharp end of the stick?

week 4 - Some of us have been threatening our friend Colby

               For me personally, this story was extremely disturbing to read, mostly because everyone was planning an execution as if it were a wedding. They say they made a big deal out of this because Colby is their friend, but nobody in their right mind would enthusiastically plan their friend's execution. Something tells me that whatever is was Colby did wasn't really that bad. Though he may have "gone too far," I doubt his actions truly called for an execution. If Colby really did deserve an execution then his friends would have gone straight to the authorities, who wouldn't have objected given his actions. These people don't prove to really be Colby's friends. I think the person who steered everyone away from hanging Colby with wire may have felt sorry for him but he wasn't enough of a friend to save his life. If these people truly were Colby's friends, they wouldn't be planning his execution. It also seems as though they've been looking for a reason to kill him since they put so much time and energy into the execution. They never tell us exactly what Colby did wrong, and because everyone made a point to keep this from the authorities they must believe their event would be forbidden if anyone were to find out. Then they have the nerve to call themselves his friends. The people in this story tell Colby that this is his day and everyone is there for him, but when he tries to request different things for the event everyone is rude to him. Nobody seems to highlight the fact that this is an execution until its time for the actual hanging to take place. If they really did believe that they were forced to kill Colby, they wouldn't have been looking forward to this execution as much as they seemed to be. This piece of writing really disturbed me because of the betrayal of friendship, but mainly because of the way an entire celebration was planned around a possibly unnecessary execution.  

YOURS // Week Five

I think what stood out to me most as I was reading Mary Robison’s “Yours” was how little I understood and how much I liked it. This was not a story that was spoon-fed to its audience. It was a refracted patch of light off the mirror of a passing car. A brief, three page glimpse into the life (and death) of this married couple. The reader was made to work and infer for almost every detail. It just felt genuine. I was able to immerse myself so deeply in the subtleties of the story that I did what every writer dreams their readers will do: I forgot that I was reading. The details and inferences needing to be made pulled me in past even the words on the page. This was thanks in a large part to Robison’s relentless adherence to the old adage, ‘show, don’t tell’. There are just a sparse collection of sentences over the entire vignette that tell the reader specific details, one of which (“Clark had been a doctor, an internist, but also a Sunday watercolorist”) was integral to Robison’s message from Clark to his dying wife in the penultimate paragraph. It’s a formidable task to show what you want to tell the audience, but Robison appears to have been up for the challenge.

Week 4- Some Of Us Had Been Threatening Our Friend Colby

   Although the somewhat ironic tone was touched on in the class discussion today, I would like to further elaborate on the ironies that I picked up on when reading this piece. First of all, I thought it was very ironic when the speaker was justifying the act to kill Colby due to the fact that he had the "moral right" to do so and also because Colby was his "friend" who "belonged to" him and the rest of the speaker's group. This section made me pause and continually think about the fact that if this speaker was really Colby's "friend", wouldn't he be trying to stop Colby's hanging? I also found a very ironic spot when the speaker was discussing the possibility of rain at the hanging ceremony and how it would make the scene, "look kind of dismal". This really highlighted how cruel and close-minded the society in which the speaker was living in when I read it. This is because a hanging is dismal in itself; yet the speaker would only see it that way if it were to rain. One question I had about this piece was about the title. "Some Of Us Had Been Threatening Our Friend Colby" does not seem fitting to the speaker's perspective because the speaker continually discusses how Colby was the one to go too far, yet in the title, it almost puts blame on the speaker and his group by saying "Some of Us Had Been Threatening.." Does anyone have any thoughts on the meaning of the title?

Some of Us Had Been Threatening Our Friend Colby

This piece was really interesting to me. At the start, it had sort of a morbid tone, our narrator saying that Colby had "gone too far", and it certainly had a threatening air to it in coincidence to the title. The piece adopted a much lighter tone as it went on, as though planning Colby's execution was something to be highly regarded, almost a festive event. The thought of a giant ball being the means by which Colby hanged himself was practically comedic as the text went on. But by the end, the shivers of unease were back as they brought back the threatening vibe of "going too far". In a sense, I felt as though it was nearly a message to the audience as they read the piece, like the narrator was insinuating that we cannot go too far either.
I loved the use of showing and telling that the author included. They left a lot to the imagination (what did Colby do?) which gave it an even darker edge depending on how you look at it. However, the situations they did describe as being rather light contrasted nicely against the theme of death throughout the text. It's interesting how the author made such a morbid topic so lighthearted without the reader even realizing that they'd been lulled into a sense of tranquility as they read about Colby's death plans.

Week 4 -"Yours"

            Something about Mary Robison’s “Yours” struck me. Maybe it’s because I love autumn and Halloween so this makes me think of candy corn, pumpkin pie, the changing of the leaves, and the warm smell of cinnamon. Unfortunately, this piece exudes none of that coziness, and instead leaves you with the taste of sour, rotting apples.

            At first I didn’t give much thought to the fact that the story is set during the autumn, and now I realize that it is the most fitting. It is a time of endings, though not yet the finish that is winter. It is the coming of the inevitable: trees losing their leaves, the end of a cycle. What adds to the intensity of this is that “most leaves had been blown away already”; time is up and nature is signaling it. Also, the image of pumpkins is a fleeting one. They only last a short while before they begin to rot. Both of these autumnal images help to indicate the coming of an end.

            There is one other image that just struck me as I was re-reading the piece: the “yellow vigil candles”. Candlelight vigils are typically held in remembrance of a lost life. Allison and Clark use vigil candles to light their pumpkins, and before they retire to bed Allison tells Clark, “‘Don’t blow out the candles. I’ll put in new ones tomorrow’”. This statement is tragic in that she cannot put new ones in tomorrow. All night these candles held a silent vigil for her.

Week 4: "Yours"

I really enjoyed “Yours”. At first I didn’t understand it, but I read it through a few more times and eventually I took it as an exploration of aging and death. The most obvious motif that led me to this conclusion was the autumnal setting- leaves covering the ground, and trees standing bare like skeletons- but there are many more besides this. Spouses Allison and Clark are described as being “both quite tall” and “something alike in their facial features”. However, they are separated in age by forty-three years. To me, Allison symbolizes youth, naivety, and vigor. Besides the fact that she is the younger one of the couple, she spends her afternoons volunteering with children and seems to have a glimpse into their minds, which is evident when she warns Clark not to make his jack-o’-lanterns too surreal because they’re for kids. Clark, on the other hand, symbolizes old age and experience. He leads a slower life and spends a lot of time sitting in his glider rocker, and when he does move, it is carefully and languorously. Clark’s wisdom is evident when he says towards the end of the story that he wants to speak to his wife “from the greater perspective he [has]”, most likely due to his vantage point on the path of life. It is also evident in the pumpkins he carves, which are “expressive and artful”, and made with great skill and artistic command. Allison’s pumpkins are “less deftly drawn” and more crudely crafted, symbolic of her lack of life experience compared to her husband.

The way in which Allison sets up the finished jack-o’-lanterns on the porch railing- “[taking] a while to get each candle settled, and then to line up the results in a row” and then lighting the candles and “[fixing] the pumpkin lids over the little flames”- seemed very gentle and almost motherly to me. The faces carved into the living things give them a human persona, and the way she fixes them is almost like she’s tucking children into bed. This, plus her characterization as I mentioned it above, and the fact that Halloween is mostly for kids but Allison and Clark prepare for it anyway, seemed to communicate that Allison longs to be a mother. No offspring of Allison and Clark are mentioned. Maybe they weren’t able to have children because of Allison’s illness, or her illness in combination with Clark’s age.

As his wife lie dying, Clark wants “to get drunk with his wife once more”, tell her “that to own only a little talent, like his, [is] an awful, plaguing thing; that being only a little special [means] you [expect] too much, most of the time, and [like] yourself too little”, and assure her “she [has] missed nothing”. I interpreted these sentiments as a kind of bitterness that he is losing what had for so long brought youthfulness back to his life, as well as his way of giving her peace of mind by telling her she won’t be missing out on much, because being wise, talented, and special isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. This might also be Clark’s way of expressing grief, and of dealing with the somber idea of his much younger wife dying before him and leaving him alone in the world. 

Week 4- The Sock

This piece to me screams regret and a woman having a hard time moving on. She is territorial and refers to people and things as "my.." or "mine. The first line sets the selfish atmosphere "my husband is married to a different woman now..." she does not refer to him as her ex husband. The voice in this piece compares herself to the new wife, degrading herself but is described as acting civil with them on the outside. Now, the most interesting point the speaker talks about is what his wife leaves behind. "A red comb,  a red lipstick, and a bottle of pills". I don't understand the speaker would not just send these back to her, pills (hopefully for a medical reason) are important to a person's well being most of the time. She states how she just keep forgetting to ask about them and eventually stuck them in a drawer. What I am questioning also is the sentence at the end of the piece "because by then it wasn't going to be long, and it made me tired all over again just to think of it". It wasn't going to be long until what? Were they going to visit again? Why? How often does this happen? If this is a usual occurrence then I empathize with the woman because she cannot move on if her husband keeps coming around and visiting with his new wife.

Week 4 - "The Sock"

I found the “The Sock” a very compelling short story. Through first person narration, the reader learns of the narrator’s psyche. In the first paragraph, the woman’s anger is palpable as she childishly focuses on the physical attributes of her ex-husband’s new wife.  For example, the narrator contends, “My husband is married to a different woman now, shorter than I am, about five feet tall, solidly built...” Perhaps, the narrator scrutinizes the ‘new wife’ as a way to deal with her own insecurities, which naturally arise when a husband cheats.  In accordance, the woman is on the verge of a mental breakdown. This emotional cliff is seen later on when she fixates on the sock. The run-on sentences show how her mind spirals when she sees the sock; memories plague her and she starts to wonder what if. Interestingly, the speaker never finds peace with the situation but rather resigns herself to this bitter anger.  The ending phrase, “it made me tired all over again just to think of it”, really underscores her resolved disposition.

Week 3 (Is It O.K. to Mine Real Relationships for Literary Material?)

I thought this piece was really interesting because I, as a writer, always draw on inspiration from my personal life for material. It's understandable, though, that writers have to be cautious when speaking of people in their personal life because they could be offended very easily. Just because a quality of a person in someone's life is the inspiration of a character, doesn't mean they are necessarily that character in all respects but, it makes sense why offense could be drawn.
This article mostly explored the cons of taking inspiration from your life, but I believe that there are many pros. Like, characters who are parts of people in your life can become the most real. If they are based off an actual person than they can be more humanistic. Also, writing about people in your life helps you understand them better, I feel like.
Many writers ignore all the naysayers who think it to be too risky a move and just go for it, and I believe that produces some of the best writing.

Week 3 – “Still Life with Canary”

This poem is particularly tricky, in that it’s meaning isn’t immediate or intuitive to us as readers, and, as we saw in class, it opens itself to a very layered, nuanced reading.  I, however, would like to take a closer look at it’s title, which in itself conveys several ideas. In their description the poet ‘paints’ a still life – the landscape of the mountains and the grove in which the hunter stands. As a separate entity, a canary in the context of a poem about a mine is immediately a cause of trepidation, as the birds were used as an early warning system, perishing at much lower gas levels than people and giving miners the chance to escape before they ran out of air.  The phrase ‘still life with canary’, as those familiar with art know, is a bit counterintuitive, as a still life does not generally depict a live subject – this makes us almost certain of the fate of the bird, and by extension, the miners.