I believe why the Japanese men didn't like the human version of Pi's story because adding people into the story made it too personal. Adding people into the story helps reveal the savagery/the animal, the looking out for number one within all of us. Where as with the animal story we are separated/removed emotionally and physically, which allows us to place ourselves higher than the animals; making ourselves believe that we are not like them, that we are better than them.
The only issue I had with this book was the island, that was too far fetched for me to believe and take in. I would have been able to believe the story true but that part really ruined it. I do believe that most of this story is true but what was the point of adding the island in there for?
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
π + Richard Parker = God
When Pi told the alternate version of the story I cringed the whole time. It was hard for me to read. The whole time I was thinking this can not be true. I could not bare to think of Pi having to watch his mother be eaten by the cook. I hurried and plowed through it so I could just be done. I chose to believe the story of Pi and Richard Parker instead. But now the more I think about it the more I realize that there is a strong possibility that it is the one that isn't true. It is after all a little bit more realistic than being stuck with a tiger in the middle of the ocean. Even if neither of them are true it really doesn't matter to me because I know that it is not the story but the emotions and what you carry away from the story that matter. The alternate version of the story is good (I guess if you can call canabalism good). It still is missing something though. That something can be found with a boy and a tiger and God. It is full of rich symbolism and thought provoking passages that really make you question what you would do. The biggest thing that stuck out to me is how God was found. Being stuck in a life boat with Richard Parker (or without?) forced Pi to really figure out who he was and what he was all about. Somewhere in that process he found God. This is a story that will make you believe in God.
To love or to hate? That is the ending
I was torn by the end of the novel. I felt all at once that I was being jipped, lied to, and that someone was laughing at me for believing the story he told in the first place. And yet at the same time I was glad that I had been able to read the first story. Honestly, I couldn't even guess as to which one is true. They both have things that make them utterly believable, true even, while containing things that just seem...wrong, for lack of a better word. Who is going to butcher a young man, then murder a woman in cold blood eat her flesh, dispose of her remains and then allow himself to be killed by a scrawny young man who is so hungry that he has difficulty standing? But on the other hand, after you had done such things, why would you want to live? The stories match each other uncannily well. Then I am struck with the possibility that Martel is just so brilliant that he thought the whole thing up out of thin air.
Regardless, I greatly enjoyed this book. I find it to have a very haunting quality to it. I can't get it out of my head. For some reason I greatly enjoyed the comparison of Pi to Richard Parker. It touches me deeply that we are not so far from nature that we forget the animal nature implicit of living on this earth. It does frustrate me though. Which story is true? Are either of them true? Is their such a person as Pi Patel? I hope so. I find it inspiring to see such boldness and creativity. I feel good just having read of someone who wants to survive, because that implies that there is something in our world worth living for. In today's society there is so much corruption, so much suffering, and worst of all, there is so much despair, that I have difficulty understanding why people try so hard to stay alive. So even if it was only for that reason, this book was worth all the tension that I have felt, as I have accompanied Pi through his ordeal. Even though I wanted to avert my gaze when he tried to eat Richard Parker's feces, or the barnacles, or sucking out the fishes' eyes (shudder). I am happy and grateful for what I have, and I hope that if it ever came to it, I would be able to withstand whatever came my way, just like Piscine Molitor Patel, aka 3.14.
Regardless, I greatly enjoyed this book. I find it to have a very haunting quality to it. I can't get it out of my head. For some reason I greatly enjoyed the comparison of Pi to Richard Parker. It touches me deeply that we are not so far from nature that we forget the animal nature implicit of living on this earth. It does frustrate me though. Which story is true? Are either of them true? Is their such a person as Pi Patel? I hope so. I find it inspiring to see such boldness and creativity. I feel good just having read of someone who wants to survive, because that implies that there is something in our world worth living for. In today's society there is so much corruption, so much suffering, and worst of all, there is so much despair, that I have difficulty understanding why people try so hard to stay alive. So even if it was only for that reason, this book was worth all the tension that I have felt, as I have accompanied Pi through his ordeal. Even though I wanted to avert my gaze when he tried to eat Richard Parker's feces, or the barnacles, or sucking out the fishes' eyes (shudder). I am happy and grateful for what I have, and I hope that if it ever came to it, I would be able to withstand whatever came my way, just like Piscine Molitor Patel, aka 3.14.
Pi - last
Chapter 92 The Carnivorous Island, to me is the most important chapter of the book. The chapter chronologically comes after a couple key moments in the book. Pi is weak from malnourishment on the verge of death, and ready to give up and die in one chapter. Soon after Richard Parker and Pi kill and eat the Frenchman. The story of the Island to me, while coming after those chapters really is a part of those chapters. Richard Parker himself to me is symbolic of many aspects of Pi throughout the story. An important one being Pi’s savage animal side, his basic instinct for survival. Pi tried to tame it, he doesn’t want to cannibalize the chef, but ultimately that is what has to happen for him to survive. This is one of the main things I saw happening in the Island Story. “I blew into the whistle with all my might… It had the desired effect. Richard Parker braked. I blew a third time, every hair on him was raised, his claws were full out… I feared my defensive wall of whistle blows was about to crumble.” The island is a symbol of his despair, he is on the verge of giving up his human self, his animal side will live on, he has the food and water, but how long before he is no longer himself? That is the carnivorous aspect of the Island, it is man eating literally and figuratively. As Pi says ”How long does it take for a broken spirit to kill a body that has food, water and shelter?” It is through his faith that he finds strength to continue on.
I am in love with Love: The Ending of Life of Pi
This may be going out on a limb. This book is brilliant in many ways. I gained a lot both in a literary and thematic sense from this book. There are many different things that I could discuss for days. However upon finishing the novel I mainly want to talk about love. For that is theme from Life of Pi that I will carry with me most.
I think it is safe to say that Pi is saved by his ability to love. This is established as the first of the book when he expresses his sincere desire to just love God. What astounds him about Jesus of Nazareth is that this "God" descends below all else and dies for his people. And for what purpose? Love, replies Father Martin. Pi believes in God, no matter what religion and thereby believes in love no matter where it stems from. It is this love that will rescue him from despair and hopelessness as his suffering continues. In his darkest moments he states that he must teach himself to love again. "The blackness would stir and eventually go away and God would remain, a shining point of light in my heart. I would go on loving."
Later in the novel Pi expresses his love for Richard Parker. I found this passage deeply moving. Many of us, I think lose our ability to love at sometimes in our lives. Our human hearts get broken and we choose bitterness, anger, and sometimes hate because it is safer. Pi suffers an ordeal that many of us will never and even after months of hopeless hardship, Pi bursts forth a sentiment of love, for a tiger no less. "Truly I do. I love you, Richard Parker". The ability to suffer and to keep loving is an amazing one.
As the novel begins with love, so it should rightly end with it also. As Pi is being questioned by Mr. Chiba and Mr. Okamoto, he chastises there use of the phrase "hard to believe". One of my favorite lines of this novel comes here "If you stumble at believability what are you living for? Isn't love hard to believe?....Love is hard to believe." Love is the most powerful intangible thing in the world. Love can be defined sometimes as what we touch and what we see but mostly it is defined by what we feel. We are defined by our ability to love. It is the greatest attribute mankind possesses. I believe it was Leo Tolstoy who said "Everything I understand I understand only because I love."If we believe in nothing else we must believe in love. Because it will be love that rescues us.
I think it is safe to say that Pi is saved by his ability to love. This is established as the first of the book when he expresses his sincere desire to just love God. What astounds him about Jesus of Nazareth is that this "God" descends below all else and dies for his people. And for what purpose? Love, replies Father Martin. Pi believes in God, no matter what religion and thereby believes in love no matter where it stems from. It is this love that will rescue him from despair and hopelessness as his suffering continues. In his darkest moments he states that he must teach himself to love again. "The blackness would stir and eventually go away and God would remain, a shining point of light in my heart. I would go on loving."
Later in the novel Pi expresses his love for Richard Parker. I found this passage deeply moving. Many of us, I think lose our ability to love at sometimes in our lives. Our human hearts get broken and we choose bitterness, anger, and sometimes hate because it is safer. Pi suffers an ordeal that many of us will never and even after months of hopeless hardship, Pi bursts forth a sentiment of love, for a tiger no less. "Truly I do. I love you, Richard Parker". The ability to suffer and to keep loving is an amazing one.
As the novel begins with love, so it should rightly end with it also. As Pi is being questioned by Mr. Chiba and Mr. Okamoto, he chastises there use of the phrase "hard to believe". One of my favorite lines of this novel comes here "If you stumble at believability what are you living for? Isn't love hard to believe?....Love is hard to believe." Love is the most powerful intangible thing in the world. Love can be defined sometimes as what we touch and what we see but mostly it is defined by what we feel. We are defined by our ability to love. It is the greatest attribute mankind possesses. I believe it was Leo Tolstoy who said "Everything I understand I understand only because I love."If we believe in nothing else we must believe in love. Because it will be love that rescues us.
Only Gods Knows All
Pi states "and so it goes with God." I instantly started to think what does that mean? Why would he say that? Then I began to think about the differences in stories about the animals and the people. Maybe the story with the people is true, but the humans became animals to him because it was easier to handle. I think that the story about the cook was really disturbing and there was nothing really to learn from it, unlike Pi's story about his journey with the animal. He states that Richard Parker is hiding that gives me a clue that maybe he has been Richard Parker all along.
"And so it goes with God," means the only one who will truly know which of the stories is true is God. And it honestly doesn't matter because the Japanese tell him that the story does not matter. There are a lot of moments in our lives that only God will know about and it seems like Pi is completely fine with it. He specifically asks the question "so it doesn't matter which story is true?" And then proceeds to ask "which is more interesting?" Obviously the animals so the question still remains, which is true. My answer, it doesn't matter because for me I experienced them both through reading and I learned from both. The story with the animals had a much greater affect on my life.
There are things in each of our lives where God is the only one who will ever know which of the stories is true and honestly I don't want to know. I am going to take what I learned and apply it. That is all that matters.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Life of Pi - Final Set of Prompts
1. In class today I asked you to be thinking about the arc of Pi's inner journey, the development of his character over the course of the narrative. How is Pi different at the end of the story? In what ways has he changed? And perhaps just as important is this question: in what ways is he the same?
2. What does the carnivorous island represent? Is it a symbol? A metaphor? A clue to interpreting the rest of the story? Why is it in the book?
3. At the end of Part I, we are told that "This story has a happy ending." Do you agree? Why or why not?
4. In the Author's Note that begins the novel, Mr. Adirubasamy tell Yann Martel (and the rest of us as we read), "I have a story that will make you believe in God." Does Life of Pi live up to this promise? Why or why not?
5. From the very beginning, Life of Pi is set up as a story. Martel never says otherwise. But at the end of the novel, Pi gives another version of his story, one in which the animals on the lifeboat are replaced by humans. In this version, the zebra represents the Chinese sailor, the hyena represents the cook, Orange Juice represents Pi’s own mother, and Richard Parker is actually Pi himself. If this version is true--and Pi never definitively tells us which version is true--then Pi has invented the version of the story with animals in order to cope with devastating tragedy. So now that you have both versions, I want to ask you the same thing he asks the men from the Japanese Ministry of Transport: "which story do you prefer? Which is the better story, the story with animals or the story without animals?" Why?
6. Apart from the alternate version of events, what else do we learn from Pi's conversation with the men from the Japanese Ministry of Transport that helps us understand the novel better?
7. Today we discussed a paragraph in Chapter 57, where Pi says, "But there's more to it. I will come clean. I will tell you a secret: a part of me was glad about Richard Parker. A part of me did not want Richard Parker to die at all, because if he did I would be left alone with despair, a foe even more formidable than a tiger. If I still had the will to live, it was thanks to Richard Parker. He kept me from thinking too much about my family and my tragic circumstances. He pushed me to go on living. I hated him for it, yet at the same time I was grateful. I am grateful. It's the plain truth: without Richard Parker, I wouldn't be alive today to tell you my story." If the story without animals is the true story, and if Richard Parker is really Pi, then what does this paragraph mean?
8. When the Japanese men respond by saying that the story with animals is, in their opinion, the better story, Pi responds by saying, "Thank you. And so it goes with God." Interpret this.
9. Like Pi, we tell stories. Some of them are true. Some of them are lies. Some of them are exaggerations. But we all tell them. We tell them so that other people can have a way into our lives, so that they can understand us. We tell them to make sense of our own experience, to understand ourselves. What has Life of Pi taught you about why we tell stories?
10. Quote an excerpt from The Things They Carried and then use that excerpt as a lens through which you analyze an aspect of Life of Pi. (Note: this is the kind of question you might expect to find on a midterm exam.)
2. What does the carnivorous island represent? Is it a symbol? A metaphor? A clue to interpreting the rest of the story? Why is it in the book?
3. At the end of Part I, we are told that "This story has a happy ending." Do you agree? Why or why not?
4. In the Author's Note that begins the novel, Mr. Adirubasamy tell Yann Martel (and the rest of us as we read), "I have a story that will make you believe in God." Does Life of Pi live up to this promise? Why or why not?
5. From the very beginning, Life of Pi is set up as a story. Martel never says otherwise. But at the end of the novel, Pi gives another version of his story, one in which the animals on the lifeboat are replaced by humans. In this version, the zebra represents the Chinese sailor, the hyena represents the cook, Orange Juice represents Pi’s own mother, and Richard Parker is actually Pi himself. If this version is true--and Pi never definitively tells us which version is true--then Pi has invented the version of the story with animals in order to cope with devastating tragedy. So now that you have both versions, I want to ask you the same thing he asks the men from the Japanese Ministry of Transport: "which story do you prefer? Which is the better story, the story with animals or the story without animals?" Why?
6. Apart from the alternate version of events, what else do we learn from Pi's conversation with the men from the Japanese Ministry of Transport that helps us understand the novel better?
7. Today we discussed a paragraph in Chapter 57, where Pi says, "But there's more to it. I will come clean. I will tell you a secret: a part of me was glad about Richard Parker. A part of me did not want Richard Parker to die at all, because if he did I would be left alone with despair, a foe even more formidable than a tiger. If I still had the will to live, it was thanks to Richard Parker. He kept me from thinking too much about my family and my tragic circumstances. He pushed me to go on living. I hated him for it, yet at the same time I was grateful. I am grateful. It's the plain truth: without Richard Parker, I wouldn't be alive today to tell you my story." If the story without animals is the true story, and if Richard Parker is really Pi, then what does this paragraph mean?
8. When the Japanese men respond by saying that the story with animals is, in their opinion, the better story, Pi responds by saying, "Thank you. And so it goes with God." Interpret this.
9. Like Pi, we tell stories. Some of them are true. Some of them are lies. Some of them are exaggerations. But we all tell them. We tell them so that other people can have a way into our lives, so that they can understand us. We tell them to make sense of our own experience, to understand ourselves. What has Life of Pi taught you about why we tell stories?
10. Quote an excerpt from The Things They Carried and then use that excerpt as a lens through which you analyze an aspect of Life of Pi. (Note: this is the kind of question you might expect to find on a midterm exam.)
Monday, September 28, 2009
Alpha Male, Prompt #2
I have really enjoyed reading about Pi's training sessions with Richard Parker. The imagery behind a Indian teenager, almost teasing, but training a huge tiger is pretty fun. That only intensifies when you imagine Pi rocking the boat while blowing his whistle over and over. Clearly this has reference to earlier in the book when he mentions lion trainers at the circus. I'm confident that if he hadn't made mention of it, I wouldn't have believed he could do it. Then, along with that, Martel helps you believe all this craziness because we had just read how knowledgeable Pi really was with animals. Without that in the exposition, it wouldn't have been believable, yet alone enjoyable to read. I think Martel did that very well.
Going along with the symbolism behind the trainer at the circus, I think there is more to Pi being the alpha male over Richard Parker. Through the religious detail in the exposition along with Pi's trails and experiences on the boat, I feel that Pi has also become a alpha male over religion as well. The reasons behind Pi's survival go far deeper than his animal expertise. He survives because of his faith in God. In adding upon this faith, he does not have faith in just one Being, but many! In Pi's eyes he has the most powerful Beings on his side, helping him survive. Before he got on the Tsimtsum, he had developed enough faith to prepare him for his adventure out in the Pacific. Once the ship wrecks, he has faith challenging trails daily preparing him for the next day. I thought chapter 74 showed all of this very well. We learn that even someone as strong as Pi had his doubts. However, despite the trails he always came to the same resolve, "I would go on loving." That is what makes Pi the alpha male. I'm happy that Martel made reference to the circus trainer as a symbol. It definitely helps me better understand Pi and his personal development.
Going along with the symbolism behind the trainer at the circus, I think there is more to Pi being the alpha male over Richard Parker. Through the religious detail in the exposition along with Pi's trails and experiences on the boat, I feel that Pi has also become a alpha male over religion as well. The reasons behind Pi's survival go far deeper than his animal expertise. He survives because of his faith in God. In adding upon this faith, he does not have faith in just one Being, but many! In Pi's eyes he has the most powerful Beings on his side, helping him survive. Before he got on the Tsimtsum, he had developed enough faith to prepare him for his adventure out in the Pacific. Once the ship wrecks, he has faith challenging trails daily preparing him for the next day. I thought chapter 74 showed all of this very well. We learn that even someone as strong as Pi had his doubts. However, despite the trails he always came to the same resolve, "I would go on loving." That is what makes Pi the alpha male. I'm happy that Martel made reference to the circus trainer as a symbol. It definitely helps me better understand Pi and his personal development.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
For Tuesday
I apologize for not getting prompts up for this Tuesday. I've been in Capitol Reef with no way to get online and post prompts. Please make sure you are caught up on your reading for Tuesday, but we will forego the online responses this time.
Thanks, and I'll see you on Tuesday.
Thanks, and I'll see you on Tuesday.
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
The Wonders of Symbolism
I was not sure what I wanted to touch on so I thought I would write something a little more personal. While reading this novel I have found myself analyzing everything. I am trying to pin point symbolism through out the entire novel. The wonderful thing is, every set of symbols is going to mean something completely different to each person.
What I mean by this is Martel could be trying to represent a specific thing like the Zebra looking forsaken up at the skies, but to another person the Zebra could represent something completely different. There is a part in the book where Pi is trying to chart his corse, but says it is completely pointless because he has no way of getting there. This applies directly to my life and I don't know if anyone else would see this symbolism because it applies directly to me. I thought about my life and how I try and plan everything out and try so hard to have a goal in mind and try and try to make things work out when in reality not everything is in my control. I need to let the "wind" take me where it will. I still need to have goals to "survive," but where i end up ultimately is up to a higher power.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Life of Pi second prompts
When you first start to read the book it is slightly confusing. You sit and wonder why some parts are italicized and others aren’t? Why are the chapters so short? What is the purpose behind the detail of Pi’s life, but as you read you begin to put the pieces together. Pi is fascinated with the underlying messages that religious stories provide. When he talks with the father about why Jesus did the things he did, he keeps asking why and only getting one response, love. This is the reason I believe the book starts off with explaining his interests in religion. It teaches you to look beyond the words, beyond what is spelled in front of you and find a deeper meaning. I began to think that all of Pi’s religious endeavors were going to be the reasons why this book will make you believe in God but I am now convinced it is not. I believe it is the personal struggles he had to go through in the boat and more importantly the underlying messages of his story. By telling us so much of Pi’s history in the zoo environment, his struggle with his name and all those other things you begin to understand the way this book is written.
Life of Pi set I prompts
The first time that I read through chapters 21 and 22 in Life of Pi I did not really understand the meaning of his words. I had to read them over and over again, slowly letting the understanding creep into my mind a little at a time. After many times reviewing and thinking about those words I believe that it has a lot to do with religion, the use of your imagination and the impact those things can have on your life. In Chapter 21 Yann Martel, the author says something that really caught my attention. He talks about how his visits with Pi always leave him feeling the “glum contentment that characterizes” his life. How he refers to his life, though outwardly admitting his contentment, he doesn’t seem to be satisfied with the life he has, the way he is going about it. Martel then realizes what makes such a difference in Pi’s life, which is the imagination and belief of religion. With imagination and religion it allows people to step outside of themselves and see what is around them, never really feeling alone because they do not believe they are alone. It is “an alignment of the universe along moral lines, not intellectual ones.” To me it is the thread that can hold people together in times of dire circumstances.
Survival
As I'm reading the next section of pages for this book, I'm trying to think about what Martel has written for us at the beginning. I agree with a lot of previous comments that if it wasn't for the beginning explanations about Pi growing up around the zoo and also his love for religion, we would be totally lost in how this little boy could end up in a lifeboat with all these animals! I will mention just a few parts that really stuck out to me:
Pi exclaims many times, "Jesus, Mary, Muhammad and Vishnu..." If we hadn't been "taught" by Martel about Pi and his three religions, we would think Pi is nuts. These are all different symbols of "gods" or religious icons. Further on Pi says, "Oh My God!". (this is singular) The mentioning of religion in profound in this book; but since Martel has already explained this, we come to understand all the different religious outbursts.
I love the way Pi describes Orange Juice. First of all, what a cute name! After thinking about Orange Juice and re-reading chapter 42 where Orange Juice first appears before the lifeboat, I really come to appreciate the feelings Pi has for Orange Juice. Pi explained to us how on page 174 that the color orange was a Hindu color that meant survival. I believe this relates back to chapter 42 where Orange Juice appears. Pi describes her as "Oh blessed Great Mother, Pondicherry fertility goddess, provider of milk and love, wondrous arm spread of comfort, ..." It's almost as if Orange Juice is a symbol of survival. Pi has already been in the lifeboat thinking about his family and animals, who may have survived, and Orange Juice comes floating up on an island of bananas. Besides the animals he is already with and himself, Orange Juice is the only other survivor of the wreck. Pi invites Orange Juice onto the lifeboat whose next stop is oblivion. This brings out Pi's struggle to survive. He is contimplating whether it is even worth it. It's destine that they are all going to die sooner or later. But this little glimps of Orange, in the boat, on the boat, all over the boat, is what holds Pi together towards survival.
Pi exclaims many times, "Jesus, Mary, Muhammad and Vishnu..." If we hadn't been "taught" by Martel about Pi and his three religions, we would think Pi is nuts. These are all different symbols of "gods" or religious icons. Further on Pi says, "Oh My God!". (this is singular) The mentioning of religion in profound in this book; but since Martel has already explained this, we come to understand all the different religious outbursts.
I love the way Pi describes Orange Juice. First of all, what a cute name! After thinking about Orange Juice and re-reading chapter 42 where Orange Juice first appears before the lifeboat, I really come to appreciate the feelings Pi has for Orange Juice. Pi explained to us how on page 174 that the color orange was a Hindu color that meant survival. I believe this relates back to chapter 42 where Orange Juice appears. Pi describes her as "Oh blessed Great Mother, Pondicherry fertility goddess, provider of milk and love, wondrous arm spread of comfort, ..." It's almost as if Orange Juice is a symbol of survival. Pi has already been in the lifeboat thinking about his family and animals, who may have survived, and Orange Juice comes floating up on an island of bananas. Besides the animals he is already with and himself, Orange Juice is the only other survivor of the wreck. Pi invites Orange Juice onto the lifeboat whose next stop is oblivion. This brings out Pi's struggle to survive. He is contimplating whether it is even worth it. It's destine that they are all going to die sooner or later. But this little glimps of Orange, in the boat, on the boat, all over the boat, is what holds Pi together towards survival.
Everything is viewed through glass.
I felt that the most important thing the beginning of the book illustrated was how Pi, himself, functions. Using the prior knowledge, the reader can almost predict Pi’s next move. This serves two elements. The reader will envision what Pi’s actions will be before they happen, making the experience more real. It could go the other way as the reader may think he knows what Pi’s actions will be, however, things happen another way, giving an element of surprise.
His father taught him all about how dangerous the animals, specifically the tiger, truly are. This forces the reader to assume Pi’s innate fear of the predators. Pi doesn’t have to state that, “I’m so scared of the tiger eating me,” it is just assumed that way. Now, whenever Pi is forced to go against this fear, uncertainty of the reader creeps in; I simply couldn’t predict how the situation would unfold.
The beginning of the book also helped me derive a personal symbolism in the new events that Pi is facing and would inevitably face. There was so much religious journeying of Pi before, and now as he is pitted for survival, religion created the glasses he looks through. The animals are no longer mere creatures of survival, but pieces of his religious past interacting with each other.
His father taught him all about how dangerous the animals, specifically the tiger, truly are. This forces the reader to assume Pi’s innate fear of the predators. Pi doesn’t have to state that, “I’m so scared of the tiger eating me,” it is just assumed that way. Now, whenever Pi is forced to go against this fear, uncertainty of the reader creeps in; I simply couldn’t predict how the situation would unfold.
The beginning of the book also helped me derive a personal symbolism in the new events that Pi is facing and would inevitably face. There was so much religious journeying of Pi before, and now as he is pitted for survival, religion created the glasses he looks through. The animals are no longer mere creatures of survival, but pieces of his religious past interacting with each other.
Religious Pi
The most striking thing, for me, that connected the buildup to after the inciting incident, was the use of so many religious symbols as description for the things he saw. When describing how Orange Juice looked after she was killed, he said that she looked like Christ hanging upon the cross, that was an excellent way for me to get a feeling for what he meant. He described the cans of water as the "wine of life." Or when he makes a list of things that he has aboard, he adds "1 God" to the list. Things like that really connect how he was, to how he is.
Hiearchy of a Lifeboat; details through the description
- 1 boy with a complete set of light clothing but for one lost shoe
- 1 spotted hyena
- 1 bengal tiger
- 1 lifeboat
- 1 ocean
- 1 God
As many people have already discussed, the author has given us descriptive detail of all of these items as well as a Part I to Pi's previously life before the life-changing shipwreck. We know that these items are more than just items, they're possibilities, that there is more happening than just the animals inside of the lifeboat.
Like his inclusion of the last three items on that list: lifeboat, ocean, God; all of these, except the lifeboat itself, of course, are outside of the lifeboat. From previous reading we know that Pi is anything but short sighted in the world around him because of his long descriptions of the various animals, of the people he met, and of his religious views really help us to understand where he is coming from and how he's thinking. Knowing this, it's easy to forshadow that those items, particularly God, are going to play a huge part in the story to come because they already have played a role in Pi's life before the shipwreck.
These details and the significance of these three items and the rest of the list really pulls the reader into the story because we know that there has to more to the situation than just a quick snap of the neck; with so many different components there are so many possible outcomes. It creates mystery, tension, and questions of what will happen next. The author has already hooked us with his various references to situations involving Richard Parker and Mexico, now we want to see what will happen with all of these various components to the situation Pi is in.
Tigers and Fish
When you read your poem in class I wanted to respond; you always respond to us,to our thoughts, feelings and comments. The reasons I didn't was first because it takes me reading a poem two or three times to really digest it, second it was on a very sensitive subject; but I think we all should of known the first day of class that you have no problem delving into sensitive subjects. I was really moved by your poem, in multiple ways. It freaked me out at first, just like it freaked me out that Pi's dad showed him the tiger and his killing habits. I think you were right when you said your mom and Pi's mom probably wouldn't have let it happen. I think it was a good poem to go along with The Life of Pi because it does show us that our experiences and people in our lives prepare us for future events. Things that will help us carry on through a rough sea. You could not have started your poem with killing the fish until you set an emotional setting. We needed to feel the sudden surprise of the fish's arrival, the anxiety of knowing it couldn't breath and the knowledge that that you wanted to help it. The same with Martel he could not have started the story with the ship sinking...well he could have, but it would not have had the same emotional setting. This helps us know what is at stake for Pi. It helps us care for him, and the emotional roller coaster he is going through. Martel writes on p.93" This story has a happy ending" Does it? Because Pi has a home and kids and he survived, or does he carry a load of turmoil with him? Does he lose certain things that he was sure of before he was shipwrecked? Did his dad prepare him for what the animals truly were, or did his dad taint his view of the tiger?
I think one of the things that Martel help us with in the first half of the book was prepare us on how attached Pi would be to the things that happened to him in the second half, like on p.6 he writes. " Richard Parker has stayed with me. I've never forgotten him. Dare I say I miss him? I do. I miss him. I still see him in my dreams. They are nightmares mostly, but nightmares tinged with love. Such is the strangeness of the human heart. I still cannot understand how he could abandon me so unceremoniously, without any sort of goodbye, without looking back even once. That pain is like an axe that chops at my heart." We all tell stories a certain way, but most of the time we add a beginning before the pivotal moment because it adds to the heart of the story.
I think one of the things that Martel help us with in the first half of the book was prepare us on how attached Pi would be to the things that happened to him in the second half, like on p.6 he writes. " Richard Parker has stayed with me. I've never forgotten him. Dare I say I miss him? I do. I miss him. I still see him in my dreams. They are nightmares mostly, but nightmares tinged with love. Such is the strangeness of the human heart. I still cannot understand how he could abandon me so unceremoniously, without any sort of goodbye, without looking back even once. That pain is like an axe that chops at my heart." We all tell stories a certain way, but most of the time we add a beginning before the pivotal moment because it adds to the heart of the story.
It's In The Details
Because of our discussion last week about world and character building, I find that I am trying to pay more attention to the details that Martel drops in. It's the little intriguants that fill the story with its richness, making easier for me to connect to the story. When I think about it, I realize that life is similar, it's the details, the connections between our pasts and present state of being. When we look back it's easy for us to find the connections, the decisions that brought us to our current point. That's the way the first half of the book works, the past informing the present. The example I think of is when Pi's father takes him to the zoo to watch the tiger kill, and then after rotates to all of the zoo animals. When they come to the hyenas Pi's father says, "The strongest jaws in nature." And then what does he end up with in the life boat, a hyena, among other animals in the boat. I have to think that because of that experience his father gave him at the zoo, Pi's thoughts and actions are governed in part by that memory.
There is another intriguant that I think is important in how it sets things up for Pi's situation on the boat. At the top of page 44, when Pi is talking about animals, he says," Social rank is central to how it leads its life. Rank determines whom it can associate with and how; where and when it can it; where it can rest; where it can drink; and so on." I think when Pi is in the boat with the zoo animals, he is placed into a ranking system. At the point where I am in the book, Pi seems, at least to me, to be in the lowest position, the socially inferior animal in the boat.
Those two examples just show me how the story is built, and that nothing is written randomly or for arbitrary reasons, there is point for what is written. I think everything in the first half of the book is there to help move the story forward. Which makes me wonder about the writing process. It makes me wonder what kind of plan the author had before he started writing the story? Does the author know at what point in the story he wants to drop an intriguant? Just a couple of things I wonder about when I think of story/world building.
To wrap up real quick, I think the first half of the book is essential to the story, it's the guide that prepares us for the journey. All of the things that Pi relates help to drive the story forward, and show us how his past informs his future. Without the world and character building we would be lost, we wouldn't care about Pi and his story.
There is another intriguant that I think is important in how it sets things up for Pi's situation on the boat. At the top of page 44, when Pi is talking about animals, he says," Social rank is central to how it leads its life. Rank determines whom it can associate with and how; where and when it can it; where it can rest; where it can drink; and so on." I think when Pi is in the boat with the zoo animals, he is placed into a ranking system. At the point where I am in the book, Pi seems, at least to me, to be in the lowest position, the socially inferior animal in the boat.
Those two examples just show me how the story is built, and that nothing is written randomly or for arbitrary reasons, there is point for what is written. I think everything in the first half of the book is there to help move the story forward. Which makes me wonder about the writing process. It makes me wonder what kind of plan the author had before he started writing the story? Does the author know at what point in the story he wants to drop an intriguant? Just a couple of things I wonder about when I think of story/world building.
To wrap up real quick, I think the first half of the book is essential to the story, it's the guide that prepares us for the journey. All of the things that Pi relates help to drive the story forward, and show us how his past informs his future. Without the world and character building we would be lost, we wouldn't care about Pi and his story.
Monday, September 21, 2009
The Tiger within PI
The way Martel started the book was brilliant. For me I have a deeper understanding, and in a since love, for the character PI. I put my self in the characters position and thoughts because I can relate to him and know his background; Young, inquisitive mind, wanting to understand and know the things in this world. In a way we all can understand those things about him and ourselves. But I think we get this understanding of the character early on to be able to feel the struggle that will happen on the boat.
For me I tend to side with PI more than the tiger because that's the way Martel showed me it needs to be. Martel tells a tale of when PI's dad showed him the nature of the tiger. Where as PI is an intellectual being and has chosen religion and kindness. I find my self more sympathetic to PI knowing his background, where as I wouldn't so much if Martel started with the wreck. One thing I see Martel doing is makes comparison that the two characters are quite similar. On page 160 for example;PI is on the raft and looking at the life boat and sees Richard Parker looking back at him on the hull. He says, "Richard Parker is afraid of the sea right now. It was nearly his grave. But crazed with thirst and hunger....he will do whatever is necessary..." isn't that what Martel is telling us about PI? Martel ultimately has taught us to side with PI because of the similarities we have, but now hes throwing similarities of the 'good' character (PI) and the 'bad' character (Richard Parker).
For me I tend to side with PI more than the tiger because that's the way Martel showed me it needs to be. Martel tells a tale of when PI's dad showed him the nature of the tiger. Where as PI is an intellectual being and has chosen religion and kindness. I find my self more sympathetic to PI knowing his background, where as I wouldn't so much if Martel started with the wreck. One thing I see Martel doing is makes comparison that the two characters are quite similar. On page 160 for example;PI is on the raft and looking at the life boat and sees Richard Parker looking back at him on the hull. He says, "Richard Parker is afraid of the sea right now. It was nearly his grave. But crazed with thirst and hunger....he will do whatever is necessary..." isn't that what Martel is telling us about PI? Martel ultimately has taught us to side with PI because of the similarities we have, but now hes throwing similarities of the 'good' character (PI) and the 'bad' character (Richard Parker).
"π"
Yann Martel's way of starting Life of Pi is a bit confusing. I actually had to read some of it over again to completely understand who was talking about what. After doing this though I understood the story so much better. I think in order for the story to really make sense Martel needed to surround it with all these details.
One of the biggest details is that Pi grew up at a zoo. He learned all about the different animals and all the strange things that "work" in the animal world like the goats and the rhinocerus. I think these details needed to be brought out so that the reader would understand that Pi wasn't just some random kid stuck out on a boat in the middle of the ocean with a tiger. Pi understood animals probably better than he understood anything else. He understood that animals can be trained and taught to be a certain way. Obviously with this knowledge he was able to train Richard Parker. Without this background knowledge of Pi's life the reader would not find the story as believable. Pi is also able to be developed as a character quite quickly in the readers mind because of all the background information.
A lot of the humor in the middle section of the book has a base in the beginning section. For example in the first part of the book Pi talks about how was teased as a child for having been named Piscine. Later on he talks about how anybody who had been called "pissing" as a child would never think of drinking urine even if they were in the middle of the ocean and dehydrated.
There definately is a method to Martel's madness. He has a way of capturing the reader in the story because they want to figure out who is who and what is being referenced to in the first part of the book.
One of the biggest details is that Pi grew up at a zoo. He learned all about the different animals and all the strange things that "work" in the animal world like the goats and the rhinocerus. I think these details needed to be brought out so that the reader would understand that Pi wasn't just some random kid stuck out on a boat in the middle of the ocean with a tiger. Pi understood animals probably better than he understood anything else. He understood that animals can be trained and taught to be a certain way. Obviously with this knowledge he was able to train Richard Parker. Without this background knowledge of Pi's life the reader would not find the story as believable. Pi is also able to be developed as a character quite quickly in the readers mind because of all the background information.
A lot of the humor in the middle section of the book has a base in the beginning section. For example in the first part of the book Pi talks about how was teased as a child for having been named Piscine. Later on he talks about how anybody who had been called "pissing" as a child would never think of drinking urine even if they were in the middle of the ocean and dehydrated.
There definately is a method to Martel's madness. He has a way of capturing the reader in the story because they want to figure out who is who and what is being referenced to in the first part of the book.
Pifried and roy
The reader having knowledge of a happy ending before getting into the meat of the conflict is a way Martel puts emphasis on a more analytical reading of the story. Rather than just being an enthralling and remarkable story of a boy trapped on a boat with a tiger and what he does to survive, which it is, the story becomes a medium for him to show anything he wants. Just about everything in the story from the sinking ship on it feels like has a deeper meaning, most of these elude my grasp but I felt I could get a few of them. Pi’s ceaseless hoping for personal salvation is a testament to the love of life he gained through religion prior to the ship. The Zebra enduring the suffering as it’s eaten alive brings home the reality of savage animal nature, something his father tried to show him when the Tiger ate the goat. Pi kind of see’s himself in the orangutan Orange Juice, a very humanlike animal, placed in a life and death situation, stricken with grief and doing the remarkable to attempt survival. Pi isn’t the only one on the boat faced with the prospect of death, and each does what it has to do in order to survive.
Religion
Personally for me the way Martel started the book the way he did help add deeper meaning and respect to the things that Pi thought and said while he was on the boat. For instance when Pi explains his thirst for water he compares it to Christ and when Pi had to go near Richard Parker to find water he said "God preserve me!" If Martel started the book at the ship wreck we wouldn't have know at Pi was religious and it would have taken us time to figure that out which would have made Pie's comparison to Christ meaningless and his exclaim "God preserve me!" shallow. These religious statements wouldn't have had any personal meaning to Pi or to us.
God and The Zoo.
I love the way "Life Of Pi' starts. I love learning about the back round of Pi's life including his life in the Pondicherry Zoo, his name, and his great desire to love God through many different religions. I thought that this was a brilliant way to set up the novel. Pi's story is truly unbelievable, truly a story to 'make you believe in God'. However, if Yann Martel had begun this story with the shipwreck and Richard Parker we as readers would already have had our "Yeah right" faces securely in place and thereby would have been unable to truly enjoy the story. By giving us a foundation to start with Martel gives us much more reason to believe.
God and spirituality plays a great part in Pi's life. It's one of my favorite things about him. He wants to love God and finds no greater joy than in that. His parents sit astounded as he joins two different religions in addition to his own for the sole purpose of being able to draw closer to God in as many ways as possible. He uses faith and spirituality as a first resort to carry him along the pathway of life. In the very first part of the book it becomes apparent to the reader that despair, doubt, and disbelief are not things that Pi sets a great deal of store by. In fact, as he says "to choose doubt as a philosophy of life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation". So we see in such a desperate and hopeless situation as being stranded on a lifeboat with a Bengal tiger Pi has hope held in his living soul so he may always rely on that even and most especially when the world is offering him none.
The other thing Martel sets up is Pi's great knowledge of animals and there attributes. Having grown up in a Zoo owned by his father Pi gets to know the characteristics and habits of animals much better than the average person would. Animals and their territory becomes especially significant. Pi teaches us how respectful animals are of territory and a ranking system of power. A lion tamer at the circus need only establish the ring as his territory, establish himself as the Alpha, to keep the lions at bay. This knowledge becomes of greater significance to us and certainly to Pi when he must later establish boundaries with Richard Parker. Because of his already extensive knowledge of animals he knows how to do this.
It goes back to books that teach you how to read them. Martel teaches you how to read this story and how to believe it by giving you powerful reason to. He seems to be saying this is a story that is fantastic, incredible, and mind-blowing. But not impossible. It's a brilliant way to write. We are invested. We believe.
God and spirituality plays a great part in Pi's life. It's one of my favorite things about him. He wants to love God and finds no greater joy than in that. His parents sit astounded as he joins two different religions in addition to his own for the sole purpose of being able to draw closer to God in as many ways as possible. He uses faith and spirituality as a first resort to carry him along the pathway of life. In the very first part of the book it becomes apparent to the reader that despair, doubt, and disbelief are not things that Pi sets a great deal of store by. In fact, as he says "to choose doubt as a philosophy of life is akin to choosing immobility as a means of transportation". So we see in such a desperate and hopeless situation as being stranded on a lifeboat with a Bengal tiger Pi has hope held in his living soul so he may always rely on that even and most especially when the world is offering him none.
The other thing Martel sets up is Pi's great knowledge of animals and there attributes. Having grown up in a Zoo owned by his father Pi gets to know the characteristics and habits of animals much better than the average person would. Animals and their territory becomes especially significant. Pi teaches us how respectful animals are of territory and a ranking system of power. A lion tamer at the circus need only establish the ring as his territory, establish himself as the Alpha, to keep the lions at bay. This knowledge becomes of greater significance to us and certainly to Pi when he must later establish boundaries with Richard Parker. Because of his already extensive knowledge of animals he knows how to do this.
It goes back to books that teach you how to read them. Martel teaches you how to read this story and how to believe it by giving you powerful reason to. He seems to be saying this is a story that is fantastic, incredible, and mind-blowing. But not impossible. It's a brilliant way to write. We are invested. We believe.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Floating Mortality
When I first started reading Life of Pi I found it very annoying because Martel repeated everything with an overabundance of repeated detail, and kept falling asleep in the quagmire of details. However, last night I got so enthralled in reading about Pi's dilemas that I couldn't stop reading. If the book started with the shipwreck, I would have found it more captivating, but I would have not fallen asleep, but it would have been too unbelievable and made no sense. How would a young boy possibly be able to cope with the horifying eating frenzies of these animals. He would have been too hysterical to think or plan. His thoughts about the animals would have been hard to belive in because we wouldn't have had his long history with the zoo and his relationship growing up with these animals.
Martel had to provide us with a lot of detail to set the stage so that we understood Pi's close association with animals and his great knowledge of their instincts and behaviors. I reflected back on the scene where his dad made him watch the tiger eat the goat. Although at the time this felt cruel, it helped Pi be able to watch the hyena and the tiger eat their prey with understanding. Just like your father's having you take care of the fish helped you later cope with his death. Pi understood the hyena, so although it was upsetting to watch the Zebra being eaten alive, he understood and coped with it. All of his experiences with his dad and the zoo helped him deal with his dilema, to step back and think through his options, and then create a plan. If he had not bonded with the zoo animals as a youngster, he would never have been able to come up with Plan 7 to train Richard Parker. He would not have had the skills and it would not have any credibility to the readers that this young man could know or execute on this plan. All that sleepy detail gave us the confidence that this could actually happen.
Pi's religious background helped us believe that he had enough faith in God to believe that he could survive, that there was a reason to want to survive, and allow him to cope with the intense pain of his loss. He hangs onto his hope in finding his family, even though I believe in his heart that it is just a dream.
Martel's writing skills reaffirm that you have to give the reader enough information that it all makes sense. You don't have to give every detail, but you do have to provide enough answers that it is credible enough to stretch our imagination and believe and to hook us so we can be reeled in till the end. Now I can't wait to continue reading to find out what happens next!
Martel had to provide us with a lot of detail to set the stage so that we understood Pi's close association with animals and his great knowledge of their instincts and behaviors. I reflected back on the scene where his dad made him watch the tiger eat the goat. Although at the time this felt cruel, it helped Pi be able to watch the hyena and the tiger eat their prey with understanding. Just like your father's having you take care of the fish helped you later cope with his death. Pi understood the hyena, so although it was upsetting to watch the Zebra being eaten alive, he understood and coped with it. All of his experiences with his dad and the zoo helped him deal with his dilema, to step back and think through his options, and then create a plan. If he had not bonded with the zoo animals as a youngster, he would never have been able to come up with Plan 7 to train Richard Parker. He would not have had the skills and it would not have any credibility to the readers that this young man could know or execute on this plan. All that sleepy detail gave us the confidence that this could actually happen.
Pi's religious background helped us believe that he had enough faith in God to believe that he could survive, that there was a reason to want to survive, and allow him to cope with the intense pain of his loss. He hangs onto his hope in finding his family, even though I believe in his heart that it is just a dream.
Martel's writing skills reaffirm that you have to give the reader enough information that it all makes sense. You don't have to give every detail, but you do have to provide enough answers that it is credible enough to stretch our imagination and believe and to hook us so we can be reeled in till the end. Now I can't wait to continue reading to find out what happens next!
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Terminology
Today Sarah asked for a list of literary terms, so I thought I would point you toward a good one. There are many websites that list literary terms, and some are way more comprehensive than we would ever need in this class. I can point you to some of these if you want something meatier, but for the purpose of our class, a good list that covers the basics of fiction terminology (without being excessively thorough) is Robert DiYanni's Glossary of Fiction Terms.
Life of Pi Prompts II
As I mentioned in class today, I'm only giving you one prompt for your next reading assignment, and it's this:
In class today we talked about the arc of a story's plot. We talked about exposition, that first part of the story where "world building" and, perhaps even more importantly, character building occurs. We had a nice discussion about the world Martel creates and the way that this world helps to shape Pi's character. We talked about narrative framework and how details, images, and incidents are shaped by that framework (a caged animal is more than a caged animal, etc.). We talked about intriguants and point of view and Martel's narrative techniques (the italicized sections, for example). And much of our time was spent talking about the way that descriptions of zoology and spirituality inform each other. So...
Now that you have gotten to what might be called the "inciting incident" of the plot, or that initial event that kicks the rising action into gear (in this case a shipwreck that leaves Pi stranded on a lifeboat with Richard Parker), I want you to pay attention to all of the things that Martel was preparing you for even without your knowing it. I shared a poem today about an experience I had as a boy, one that I didn't understand until much later, and I compared this to the way that novels often work; they prepare us for things that happen later. How, then, was Yann Martel teaching you to read this story? Or, asked in another way, how do you read the story differently than you would if the book started with the shipwreck? How does the earlier material inform what is now happening? Point to specific things in the book that are more meaningful because of what you have already read. What is this experience teaching you about fiction?
Thanks! See you on Tuesday.
In class today we talked about the arc of a story's plot. We talked about exposition, that first part of the story where "world building" and, perhaps even more importantly, character building occurs. We had a nice discussion about the world Martel creates and the way that this world helps to shape Pi's character. We talked about narrative framework and how details, images, and incidents are shaped by that framework (a caged animal is more than a caged animal, etc.). We talked about intriguants and point of view and Martel's narrative techniques (the italicized sections, for example). And much of our time was spent talking about the way that descriptions of zoology and spirituality inform each other. So...
Now that you have gotten to what might be called the "inciting incident" of the plot, or that initial event that kicks the rising action into gear (in this case a shipwreck that leaves Pi stranded on a lifeboat with Richard Parker), I want you to pay attention to all of the things that Martel was preparing you for even without your knowing it. I shared a poem today about an experience I had as a boy, one that I didn't understand until much later, and I compared this to the way that novels often work; they prepare us for things that happen later. How, then, was Yann Martel teaching you to read this story? Or, asked in another way, how do you read the story differently than you would if the book started with the shipwreck? How does the earlier material inform what is now happening? Point to specific things in the book that are more meaningful because of what you have already read. What is this experience teaching you about fiction?
Thanks! See you on Tuesday.
The Story Truth
Having just come from The Things They Carried I felt a sense of release and freedom. A palpable lightening of my soul as though the novel itself was something that I was carrying. With this new-found liberty I began Life of Pi, eager for a book that would uplift rather than depress. However reading it again I was happy to find that this book has even more richness on the second go around. A depth that I wasn’t paying attention to when I first read the book. This was augmented by the Author’s note, which I had merely skimmed. I must say that I loved the author’s note, in fact I believe I would have noticed more of the literary aspects of this book had I originally delved into it.
Unlike The Things They Carried Yann Martel inserting himself into the narrative did not frustrate me, in fact it lent an air of legitimacy to the story. Those were some of my favorite parts of the book, when Martel is at home with Pi. I love the beginning story of how the book came about, and whether I not it is true I hope it is. One of the things I brought away from O’Brien’s book was that story truth can be more important than happening truth. In the end, I don’t care whether or not Martel’s beginning story is story truth or happening truth. It’s beautiful and it brings the very beginning to life because you care what the author has to say because you come to believe in the author.
Unlike The Things They Carried Yann Martel inserting himself into the narrative did not frustrate me, in fact it lent an air of legitimacy to the story. Those were some of my favorite parts of the book, when Martel is at home with Pi. I love the beginning story of how the book came about, and whether I not it is true I hope it is. One of the things I brought away from O’Brien’s book was that story truth can be more important than happening truth. In the end, I don’t care whether or not Martel’s beginning story is story truth or happening truth. It’s beautiful and it brings the very beginning to life because you care what the author has to say because you come to believe in the author.
Lists
One of the first things I really noticed when I began to read "Life of Pi" was the lists. In "The Things They Carried" the lists were heavy, often dark, and evoked extreme emotions. As we discussed in class, the list of the various things they carried placed an emotional burden on the reader. As I was reading "Life of Pi" I noticed that there were also lists, especially of when Pi introduces the animals in the zoo. I think why the lists of animals really caught my attention was because of the contrast of emotion his list invokes compared to O'brien's.
"My alarm during my childhood was a pride of lions...Breakfast was punctuated by the shrieks and cries of howler monkeys, hill mynahs and Moluccan cockatoos. On my way out I might stop by the terraria to look at some shiny frogs glazed bright, bright green, or yellow and deep blue, or brown and pale green. Or it might be birds taht caught my attention: pink flamingoes or black swans or one wattled cassowaries, or something smaller, silver diomond doves, Cape glossy starlings, peach-faced love birds, Nanday conures, orange-fronted parakeets." (pg 14)
There are so many bright and colorful words! It can't help the reader feel light and airy and weightless, whereas O'brien's description succeeded in tugging your emotions down.
"They shared the weight of memory. They took up what others could no longer bear. Often, they carried each other, the wounded or weak. They carried infections... They carried diseases, among them malaria and dysentery. they carried lice and ringworm and leeches and paddy algae and various rots and molds." (pg 14)
Both lists give serious tone and mood to the literature, but both lists seem almosty like black and white.
"My alarm during my childhood was a pride of lions...Breakfast was punctuated by the shrieks and cries of howler monkeys, hill mynahs and Moluccan cockatoos. On my way out I might stop by the terraria to look at some shiny frogs glazed bright, bright green, or yellow and deep blue, or brown and pale green. Or it might be birds taht caught my attention: pink flamingoes or black swans or one wattled cassowaries, or something smaller, silver diomond doves, Cape glossy starlings, peach-faced love birds, Nanday conures, orange-fronted parakeets." (pg 14)
There are so many bright and colorful words! It can't help the reader feel light and airy and weightless, whereas O'brien's description succeeded in tugging your emotions down.
"They shared the weight of memory. They took up what others could no longer bear. Often, they carried each other, the wounded or weak. They carried infections... They carried diseases, among them malaria and dysentery. they carried lice and ringworm and leeches and paddy algae and various rots and molds." (pg 14)
Both lists give serious tone and mood to the literature, but both lists seem almosty like black and white.
Life of Lie
In the previous book O'brien admits that much of his work was invented, that a lot of what he wrote did not actually happen. Since the Life of Pi starts with the author telling us about how he came to write the book, it is natual to be suspicious. But I am very suspicious.
When I read The Things They Carried I liked the stories, wanted them to be true. I also picked up on the emoitonal truth. The more I read the more I questioned the truth, but I forced myself to beleive that at least parts of the story happened. I felt connected to the author and trusted him. I knew his purpose.
Having read the first few delightful chapters of Life of Pie, I am finding myself more suspicious than I was when I read O'Brien. I think the reason for my increased skeptisism is that I am not yet sure of Martel's purpose. In the previous book I felt I knew the reason for each story. I have theories for what parts are invented. I have not found a reason for that in the Life of Pi. I am planning to find out if Yann Martel's previous book was even the horrible failure he claims it was.
When I read The Things They Carried I liked the stories, wanted them to be true. I also picked up on the emoitonal truth. The more I read the more I questioned the truth, but I forced myself to beleive that at least parts of the story happened. I felt connected to the author and trusted him. I knew his purpose.
Having read the first few delightful chapters of Life of Pie, I am finding myself more suspicious than I was when I read O'Brien. I think the reason for my increased skeptisism is that I am not yet sure of Martel's purpose. In the previous book I felt I knew the reason for each story. I have theories for what parts are invented. I have not found a reason for that in the Life of Pi. I am planning to find out if Yann Martel's previous book was even the horrible failure he claims it was.
Why a Happy Ending?
I was not surprised that the ending would be a happy one. Just look at the setting. He lives in a relatively nice home, his son is going to baseball practice, he has a daughter, a dog, and a cat. And from the interactions that he has with his family it is clear that he is genuinely happy.
I do, however, find it interesting that the author chooses to inform us that the story does indeed have a happy ending. I think that this is a very deliberate action on his part, with the intent of having you read the story in that light. If a story has a happy ending, and you know about it beforehand you read the story differently. By the same token, if you know that the story has an unhappy ending, you also read it differently. You look at every bit of material in a different light. You look at things and say to yourself, "Oh, yeah, I can see how that's going to bite you in the butt." Whereas if you read a story and you know it has a happy ending, even when things go wrong you look at it and say, "Oh no, but it's okay, it'll all work out in the end."
You really do read it differently. I believe that it is the authors way of doing what parents do for little kids when they say, "Now, this movie has some scary parts in it, but remember, it's only a movie, it's just people wearing costumes and playing pretend, okay." Of course the context is a bit different, but you understand my point.
All in all, I thought that it was a very clever and intriguing literary device.
I do, however, find it interesting that the author chooses to inform us that the story does indeed have a happy ending. I think that this is a very deliberate action on his part, with the intent of having you read the story in that light. If a story has a happy ending, and you know about it beforehand you read the story differently. By the same token, if you know that the story has an unhappy ending, you also read it differently. You look at every bit of material in a different light. You look at things and say to yourself, "Oh, yeah, I can see how that's going to bite you in the butt." Whereas if you read a story and you know it has a happy ending, even when things go wrong you look at it and say, "Oh no, but it's okay, it'll all work out in the end."
You really do read it differently. I believe that it is the authors way of doing what parents do for little kids when they say, "Now, this movie has some scary parts in it, but remember, it's only a movie, it's just people wearing costumes and playing pretend, okay." Of course the context is a bit different, but you understand my point.
All in all, I thought that it was a very clever and intriguing literary device.
Just Delightful
As I begin Life of Pi, I think to myself—I’m ready for a new book. I took a lot from The Things They Carried, and I hope to bring those elements of analyzing to this book. The main thing I love so far about this book is that it doesn’t seem to way you down emotionally. When Pi tells his story about the zoo life and running back and forth to the different temples or churches, you can feel the zeal in the young boy’s heart. You are excited to see what question he will ask next or what he felt during a certain experience.
Pi talks about all the animals in the zoo with such intelligence and meaning. He puts you in the cages of the animals and shows you their individuality. He shows you the close bond these animals have for one another and also for people. I really like when he makes comments about what he thinks the animals are thinking. He is making them come to life in the pages of the book.
I think by telling us about creation, the animals, he helps you step up to that point of talking about religions. If the book would have started out by talking about religion, I’m sure a lot of people would shy away or not read those parts in depth. But as I’m reading the book I get this climax of emotion learning about creation and the amazing way it all works, how the animals behave and why. It really makes you think of God and all that he has put into even the animals, let alone humans.
You almost giggle to yourself when Pi is scrambling between all these religions. He is so excited about all he is learning and his new way of praying. You can really feel the spiritual power this little boy has. When his parents and others ask him why he is doing these things, all he has to say is, “I just want to love God”. I think this story is going to bring out a lot of different experiences, emotions, and lessons in everyone.
Pi talks about all the animals in the zoo with such intelligence and meaning. He puts you in the cages of the animals and shows you their individuality. He shows you the close bond these animals have for one another and also for people. I really like when he makes comments about what he thinks the animals are thinking. He is making them come to life in the pages of the book.
I think by telling us about creation, the animals, he helps you step up to that point of talking about religions. If the book would have started out by talking about religion, I’m sure a lot of people would shy away or not read those parts in depth. But as I’m reading the book I get this climax of emotion learning about creation and the amazing way it all works, how the animals behave and why. It really makes you think of God and all that he has put into even the animals, let alone humans.
You almost giggle to yourself when Pi is scrambling between all these religions. He is so excited about all he is learning and his new way of praying. You can really feel the spiritual power this little boy has. When his parents and others ask him why he is doing these things, all he has to say is, “I just want to love God”. I think this story is going to bring out a lot of different experiences, emotions, and lessons in everyone.
Of Animals and Men
I am really intrigued by the way Pi continues to link the behaviors of man to that of the animals in the zoo. Perhaps more intriguing is that my logic seeking brain can completely agree with Pi in his personal critique of human behavior. I had to laugh aloud as I was reading chapter 4 where he is teaching his new instructors what his name is. He makes the comment that, "Repitition is important in the training not only of animals but also of humans." I think it was so funny to me because it is true but also because I get the feeling that he is relating this information as though they are dry facts, basically information that is widely accepted and understood. It's almost as though he is saying to us, "This is just the way it is. Accept it." I love it.
Pi's explanation of the reality of zoo life for the animals was interesting because it challenged me to think about caged animals in a new way. He outlines many benefits to animals being in a zoo rather than in the wild. I suppose it is called the wild for a reason. It really is a fight every day for animals in the wild to have shelter, food, and protection. Pi offers a view that most animal-lovers would balk at, but his points are valid and if animals are like humans in the sense that "home is home," than it makes perfect sense that they would adapt and eventually come to prefer their life in the zoo, so long as they are taken care of, as opposed to life in the wild.
I'm excited to finish this book because I hope that it will continue to challenge my accepted perceptions of the world and perhaps make room for a bit of a paradigm shift on my part. I'm always enthralled when a text can force me to consider possibilities outside of my norm.
Pi's explanation of the reality of zoo life for the animals was interesting because it challenged me to think about caged animals in a new way. He outlines many benefits to animals being in a zoo rather than in the wild. I suppose it is called the wild for a reason. It really is a fight every day for animals in the wild to have shelter, food, and protection. Pi offers a view that most animal-lovers would balk at, but his points are valid and if animals are like humans in the sense that "home is home," than it makes perfect sense that they would adapt and eventually come to prefer their life in the zoo, so long as they are taken care of, as opposed to life in the wild.
I'm excited to finish this book because I hope that it will continue to challenge my accepted perceptions of the world and perhaps make room for a bit of a paradigm shift on my part. I'm always enthralled when a text can force me to consider possibilities outside of my norm.
A Happy Edning is One That Makes Sense
By ending chapter 36 with "This story has a happy ending," Yann Martel is getting the reader engaged in the story. As soon as a I read that last line, I felt a fleeting sense of comfort, because I like happy endings as well, but then I became a little skeptical, wondering if the author's idea of a happy ending is different than mine. Given what I had learned from the first part of the book, I began to speculate on possible endings. Will Pi's ending be happy because he finds a resolution to loving God in his own way? Will Pi suffer through many hardships and eventually gain wisdom and understanding about love? Such were my questions after finished reading.
Introducing "the happy ending" so early in the story is, I think is a good writing technique, in that it brings the reader into the story. Now I have to go on and finish the book because I want to know what kind of "happy ending" it will be. What Martel is doing is similar to O'Brien, asking for the readers trust, to trust that the author will guide us to some emotional experience, and that we will learn a bit more about the art of fiction.
Martel's writing device is a good hook for another reason. Most people like happy endings, we're raised them. When we become attached to a character are emotions kick-in and as the character goes from one conflict to the next, our emotions build and build until we reach the climax with the character, and then we hang onto the precipice, waiting for the resolution, hoping that it will be the resolution that our character needs. We also want the ending to be a catharsis for us as readers, a purging of the emotions we have built up through the journey of the story. I think the "happy ending" is whatever is proper for the completion the characters change or development at the end of the story. For that reason I am trusting Martel, and I'm interested to discover what Pi's "happy ending" will be.
Introducing "the happy ending" so early in the story is, I think is a good writing technique, in that it brings the reader into the story. Now I have to go on and finish the book because I want to know what kind of "happy ending" it will be. What Martel is doing is similar to O'Brien, asking for the readers trust, to trust that the author will guide us to some emotional experience, and that we will learn a bit more about the art of fiction.
Martel's writing device is a good hook for another reason. Most people like happy endings, we're raised them. When we become attached to a character are emotions kick-in and as the character goes from one conflict to the next, our emotions build and build until we reach the climax with the character, and then we hang onto the precipice, waiting for the resolution, hoping that it will be the resolution that our character needs. We also want the ending to be a catharsis for us as readers, a purging of the emotions we have built up through the journey of the story. I think the "happy ending" is whatever is proper for the completion the characters change or development at the end of the story. For that reason I am trusting Martel, and I'm interested to discover what Pi's "happy ending" will be.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Not Hard for Me
I wanted to say this in class about Tim O'Brien's book but I didn't know how to start the conversation. Every time someone in the class said that things in the book where hard to read, that the dark humor and the descriptions where difficult to digest. For me though when I read through those things didn't faze me, it didn't bother me, because even though I didn't go to Nam I knew and understood what everyone of those soldiers where going through. I was born and lived in a war zone and nearly drowned in my own shit field for 18 years. I have been free of that life for two years and it's interesting looking back. I never went to Nam, I haven't even left the country, but I understand the dark humor, the madness, the emptiness inside, the darkness, not having the ability or even the chance to talk to someone; I felt, experienced, and did all those things, even the evilness that O'Brien felt when he was trying to get even took life inside of me.
Because of all of this I knew I had the ability to read between the lines and some what imagine what they where thinking and feeling, but I mostly avoided doing that because it made me feel depressed and some what dark inside because I had to use my own understand and feelings to do that.
When you come out of dark places like the soldiers and myself you know you lost you innocence and purity. You come out of it feeling dark and dirty, but you don't have to stay that way. Even though purity and innocence stand hand in hand they are still very separate. In time if your willing you can turn your dark knowledge into clear,pure, wisdom that's untainted. Like good things can be used and turned into bad, bad sometimes can be changed and used for good when it has been tampered. When this happens purity exists and an adult sense of innocence comes to life.
Because of all of this I knew I had the ability to read between the lines and some what imagine what they where thinking and feeling, but I mostly avoided doing that because it made me feel depressed and some what dark inside because I had to use my own understand and feelings to do that.
When you come out of dark places like the soldiers and myself you know you lost you innocence and purity. You come out of it feeling dark and dirty, but you don't have to stay that way. Even though purity and innocence stand hand in hand they are still very separate. In time if your willing you can turn your dark knowledge into clear,pure, wisdom that's untainted. Like good things can be used and turned into bad, bad sometimes can be changed and used for good when it has been tampered. When this happens purity exists and an adult sense of innocence comes to life.
Happening-truth in dialogue
The theme of story-truth and happening-truth is very significant throughout the book.
O'Brien doesn't keep it back in mystery as a symbolic message. Instead he openly talks
about the differences between the two in the book itself. He also addresses this subject in
his interview when he says, "...whose going to remember every scrap of dialogue? Most
of that speech has to be made up." So, O'Brien understood this, and whether consciously
or not, he gave us a fantastic example of it amidst one of his personal stories.
I have already returned the book, but I'll do my best to remember the details.
This example is given during his story about his adolescent girlfriend, Linda. It comes in
the dialogue by Nick Veenhof. The old bully now reformed friend, told Tim at school the
terrible news that Linda had died. I wish I had the book on me, but Nick's dialogue,
including word choice, sentence structure, pauses etc., shot me back to O'Brien's old Nam
buddies. His dialogue was a clear reflection of Rat or Azar or any of the other guys.
"Kicked the can...", "bag of cement...", really took me off my seat to see such a resemblance
between this 4th grade kid and O'Brien's comrades. Did O'Brien structure the dialogue
like that on purpose? With his caliber of writing, I would like to think so. I think the
reason he did it was to show the point above. Realistically, a 4th grader wouldn't
naturally approach such a horrible subject with such abruptness or metaphoric
symbolism. I would say, however, that it would be something a worn down Nam vet
would say.
This one line of dialogue shows how even this supposed "unattached" story's truth was
worn away by forgetfulness. Just like many of his other stories, he did the best he could
putting it together despite accuracy. O'Brien wanted us to read this and understand it so
that the themes of the book could remain solid. In the end, his theme of happening-truth
was maintained as the emotions and feelings still came through the dialogue.
O'Brien doesn't keep it back in mystery as a symbolic message. Instead he openly talks
about the differences between the two in the book itself. He also addresses this subject in
his interview when he says, "...whose going to remember every scrap of dialogue? Most
of that speech has to be made up." So, O'Brien understood this, and whether consciously
or not, he gave us a fantastic example of it amidst one of his personal stories.
I have already returned the book, but I'll do my best to remember the details.
This example is given during his story about his adolescent girlfriend, Linda. It comes in
the dialogue by Nick Veenhof. The old bully now reformed friend, told Tim at school the
terrible news that Linda had died. I wish I had the book on me, but Nick's dialogue,
including word choice, sentence structure, pauses etc., shot me back to O'Brien's old Nam
buddies. His dialogue was a clear reflection of Rat or Azar or any of the other guys.
"Kicked the can...", "bag of cement...", really took me off my seat to see such a resemblance
between this 4th grade kid and O'Brien's comrades. Did O'Brien structure the dialogue
like that on purpose? With his caliber of writing, I would like to think so. I think the
reason he did it was to show the point above. Realistically, a 4th grader wouldn't
naturally approach such a horrible subject with such abruptness or metaphoric
symbolism. I would say, however, that it would be something a worn down Nam vet
would say.
This one line of dialogue shows how even this supposed "unattached" story's truth was
worn away by forgetfulness. Just like many of his other stories, he did the best he could
putting it together despite accuracy. O'Brien wanted us to read this and understand it so
that the themes of the book could remain solid. In the end, his theme of happening-truth
was maintained as the emotions and feelings still came through the dialogue.
Another Man's Cage...
I was having a hard time deciding which prompt I wanted to respond. I struggled with maybe coming up with my own, but I think I will just write about what the book means to me so far. I am going into Wildlife and Wildlands Conservation and the thoughts of zoo's that are addressed in this book have opened my eyes.
Are animals really happy in those cages? Wouldn't they want to be in the wild roaming free? These questions are answered by simple means of... home is home. These animals see the zoo as their home they are free from all the hardships of predators and the constant fight for food and survival. They are guarded from a life of fear. I felt really good about this explanation. When I started to look for symbolism since that is now engraved into all my reading ever since The Things They Carried it completely spoke to me.
How many people complain about religion as being stunting and limiting? So often I hear people say oh I can't do that... But really if they chose to they could. Religion is for a persons benefit. I think if it is not making you happy and if it's not making you a better person, look for something new. As I read about the animals being safer and happier in cages then out in the wild I thought about my religious views as a safety "cage." If I were to think in symbolic terms... I would be one of the caged animals not caged from roaming free and doing as I choose but barred from the scares of the outside world. I can still see everything that goes on and could find an escape if i so chose, but the world is much brighter on the inside of my "cage."
The cruelty of animals is a representation of religious intolerance or persecution of religion. There have been many times especially as I think back on my years in junior high. My friends would want to go and do something and then they would say... " Oh we can't do that Kimi is here." It hurt back then, but now I am proud of it. I am glad that people know who I am and what I want from life. Some may taunt me through the bars, but my "cage" is my home and I will not abandon it. My "cage" or religion is what makes me free. Because of heading the direction of my religious leaders and the teachings of my parents I am not addicted to anything, I don't have any terrible habits, my mind and conscience are clear, I am FREE. Some may say there is no living in that, no adventure, no mystery! But one man's "cage" could be another man's "freedom."
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
First Set of Life of Pi Prompts
I want to thank all of you again for the thoughtful responses on the blog and the rewarding discussions in class. I believe in letting your ideas drive class discussion and dictate the direction of our class, but in order for this to work, you have to be invested and engaged in your own learning. I can see that you are, and I appreciate that. It makes my job much easier.
As we begin to discuss Life of Pi, please feel free to venture away from these prompts and write about other things that are important to you. I am under no illusions that what I want to talk about is necessarily important to you, so if what I ask is interesting to you, I'm glad. If it isn't, please write about something that is, and we'll talk about that. I only ask that those of you who have already finished the novel not talk about things beyond our current reading assignment. Try to limit your comments to what we are reading that day, or have read before.
1. In the Author's Note, Martel tells a story about how he came to write Life of Pi. According to Martel, he first heard the story while in India, from a man named Francis Adirubasamy, and then later, in Canada, from Pi himself. Also, throughout the novel we are given italicized chapters from time to time. These take place years in the future and are in the voice of Yann Martel. Does having just finished The Things They Carried make you read these chapters, and the description of the book's origin, with skepticism, or are you willing to believe Martel's story about how the book came about? Why does Martel include them?
2. One thing that Martel is doing in this first section of the novel is setting you up for things that will happen later. You can't know this, of course. The details just seem like details. Lives of zoo creatures, descriptions of swimming pools, details about Pi's undergraduate thesis, the story of training his peers to call him Pi, a tiger ripping a goat apart--these things can seem random and even pointless. And yet, every book has to have what we might call a narrative engine, something that makes you want to keep turning pages. What does Martel do in this first part of the novel to keep you interested even when you are unsure where the book is going?
3. Much of this first part of the book yokes zoology and religion. In what ways is religion like a zoo? In what way is zoo life like religion? For example, look at the way zoos are described (and defended) in Chapter 4. How might these descriptions relate to an individual's religous beliefs? Or, alternatively, how might the strange and even violent acts of the animals in this section of the novel relate to elements of religion?
4. Interpret Chapter 21, Chapter 22, or both. Your interpretation(s) will probably change as you read further, but what do you make of these chapters now? Martel has said that despite their brevity, these are some of the most important chapters in the novel. Pay particular attention to the phrases “dry, yeastless factuality” and “the better story.”
5. At the end of Chapter 30, Martel meets Pi's wife. He had never seen signs of her before, but now he sees them all over the house and wonders how he could have missed them. "They were there all along, but I hadn't seen them because I wasn't looking for them," he says. Can this sentence extend beyond its context and be considered thematic? How so?
6. At the end of Chapter 36, Martel writes, "The story has a happy ending." Why tell the reader this so early in the book? Is this going to spoil your reading experience? Do you even believe it? Isn't it a bad idea to tell the reader about the ending? I realize most of you haven't read past this point, but what do you think about the strategy?
That's probably enough for now. Happy reading.
As we begin to discuss Life of Pi, please feel free to venture away from these prompts and write about other things that are important to you. I am under no illusions that what I want to talk about is necessarily important to you, so if what I ask is interesting to you, I'm glad. If it isn't, please write about something that is, and we'll talk about that. I only ask that those of you who have already finished the novel not talk about things beyond our current reading assignment. Try to limit your comments to what we are reading that day, or have read before.
1. In the Author's Note, Martel tells a story about how he came to write Life of Pi. According to Martel, he first heard the story while in India, from a man named Francis Adirubasamy, and then later, in Canada, from Pi himself. Also, throughout the novel we are given italicized chapters from time to time. These take place years in the future and are in the voice of Yann Martel. Does having just finished The Things They Carried make you read these chapters, and the description of the book's origin, with skepticism, or are you willing to believe Martel's story about how the book came about? Why does Martel include them?
2. One thing that Martel is doing in this first section of the novel is setting you up for things that will happen later. You can't know this, of course. The details just seem like details. Lives of zoo creatures, descriptions of swimming pools, details about Pi's undergraduate thesis, the story of training his peers to call him Pi, a tiger ripping a goat apart--these things can seem random and even pointless. And yet, every book has to have what we might call a narrative engine, something that makes you want to keep turning pages. What does Martel do in this first part of the novel to keep you interested even when you are unsure where the book is going?
3. Much of this first part of the book yokes zoology and religion. In what ways is religion like a zoo? In what way is zoo life like religion? For example, look at the way zoos are described (and defended) in Chapter 4. How might these descriptions relate to an individual's religous beliefs? Or, alternatively, how might the strange and even violent acts of the animals in this section of the novel relate to elements of religion?
4. Interpret Chapter 21, Chapter 22, or both. Your interpretation(s) will probably change as you read further, but what do you make of these chapters now? Martel has said that despite their brevity, these are some of the most important chapters in the novel. Pay particular attention to the phrases “dry, yeastless factuality” and “the better story.”
5. At the end of Chapter 30, Martel meets Pi's wife. He had never seen signs of her before, but now he sees them all over the house and wonders how he could have missed them. "They were there all along, but I hadn't seen them because I wasn't looking for them," he says. Can this sentence extend beyond its context and be considered thematic? How so?
6. At the end of Chapter 36, Martel writes, "The story has a happy ending." Why tell the reader this so early in the book? Is this going to spoil your reading experience? Do you even believe it? Isn't it a bad idea to tell the reader about the ending? I realize most of you haven't read past this point, but what do you think about the strategy?
That's probably enough for now. Happy reading.
Thanks to Nam
So I wanted to say this in class, but we ran out of time.
I got the chance on 9/11 to play with my bagpipe band in West Jordan at a TATOO. this is were the military current and past come along with the air force band and the Scottish pipe bands from around Utah come to pay tribute to those fallen in past and current wars and their families.
A relevant side note: For me, and a few other I would imagine, the Vietnam war is something we learn about in high school and have never really had too much to do with that war. Its not widely talked about in some circles were other wars are. I study WWII because I have a direct relationship with it because my great grandfather died. so for me this book, however real or fake, introduced me to a history that I've never embraced before.
While at the TATOO I went over to 4 men, who were in their later years of their lives, and thanked them for their service for my freedoms. The men lite up immediately to see that someone was thanking them for there sacrifice. One man fought in WWII, and the 3 others fought in Vietnam. I'm a very patriotic person, because I've seen some things in my life that made me realize how truly lucky I am to be an American, so as I listen to these men tell me stories about their experience I immediately thought about The Things They Carried. I know many people who serve this country at war and who have served. Many Americans don't appreciate the things these men and women go through to keep us in a safe state of mind and for us to be free to say what we wish about politics and war. Many of the soldiers of Vietnam came home to a country that seemed to reject what they did. As I listen to the voices of these veterans and went through the program of that patriotic day, my heart felt joy for my American freedoms,and ached for those who would never come home.
this book will be something i always carry with me because i don't want to forget there sacrifices and the ugly things they did for me and for their country. that's what i want to say in class but did have the time or the right words.
I got the chance on 9/11 to play with my bagpipe band in West Jordan at a TATOO. this is were the military current and past come along with the air force band and the Scottish pipe bands from around Utah come to pay tribute to those fallen in past and current wars and their families.
A relevant side note: For me, and a few other I would imagine, the Vietnam war is something we learn about in high school and have never really had too much to do with that war. Its not widely talked about in some circles were other wars are. I study WWII because I have a direct relationship with it because my great grandfather died. so for me this book, however real or fake, introduced me to a history that I've never embraced before.
While at the TATOO I went over to 4 men, who were in their later years of their lives, and thanked them for their service for my freedoms. The men lite up immediately to see that someone was thanking them for there sacrifice. One man fought in WWII, and the 3 others fought in Vietnam. I'm a very patriotic person, because I've seen some things in my life that made me realize how truly lucky I am to be an American, so as I listen to these men tell me stories about their experience I immediately thought about The Things They Carried. I know many people who serve this country at war and who have served. Many Americans don't appreciate the things these men and women go through to keep us in a safe state of mind and for us to be free to say what we wish about politics and war. Many of the soldiers of Vietnam came home to a country that seemed to reject what they did. As I listen to the voices of these veterans and went through the program of that patriotic day, my heart felt joy for my American freedoms,and ached for those who would never come home.
this book will be something i always carry with me because i don't want to forget there sacrifices and the ugly things they did for me and for their country. that's what i want to say in class but did have the time or the right words.
Letting go
On page 187 of the book Tim O’Brian writes, “Twenty years. A lot like yesterday, a lot like never. In a way maybe, I’d gone under with Kiowa and now after two decades I’d finally worked my way out….I felt something go shut in my hear t while something else swung open.” To me this is the point where Tim O’Brian is finally able to let go of the war. He is finally able to let go of the pain and he no longer lets the memories of the war consume him.When he says he’d gone under with Kiowa and now after two decades he’d finally worked his way out, to me he is saying that he was in a way stuck in the past, the war and the memories. In the interview Tim O’Brian says, “I was examining myself essentially, my own terror inside.”I think he allowed this terror to continue to live in his heart and allowed that terror to hinder him from enjoying life as it should. I think that once he was able to go back to the scene where some of that terror came to haunt him, he was in a way able to let some of it go.He was finally able to dig his way out of his own pit and live once again. At that moment the desire to live in the past in a way shut and the desire to live life and move on opened.
Someone Somewhere
I believe we could all sense that O'Brien would bring the story about Linda to us, because of the Rainy River chapter, just like we could tell that he would eventually tell us about Kiowa. Out of all the characters in this book Linda is the one I'm least likely to believe really existed, her and Azar. I don't know why, but I felt these two character help bring the other characters together. Azar being a soldier which Nam seems to bring the out the worst in. Azar says things that the others wouldn't. Things they might be thinking but would never say and he bring out the irritation and irreverence of the moment, he brings out conflict and then guides it along. I think Azar was a useful tool in O'Brien's storytelling. Linda helps wrap things up. She is the reason for why he keeps the others so close; why he writes, creates, and breaths life into these other characters. Like all the other events in the book you wonder if Linda is the real thing. In my opinion it doesn't matter, when reading the story Linda is real. Because that's what we are living at the time, we are living this book and these are the people we are interacting with in that moment. I also think that this book is so real because of the fact that even if it didn't happen to O'Brien it happened to someone, somewhere, sometime. He brings the realities of war up in your face.
The quote I like out of the interview with O'Brien is probably the one where he states " I really couldn't care less that the book was nonfiction. Its is presented in this way, but any person with an I.Q. over 84 knows that any narrative has to be--at least in part--invented."
I like this first because it shows his attitude towards it, he is protective as if all these things he wrote really did happen. Second because he is telling the realities of writing.
Relation
The last chapter that tells the story of Timmy and Linda reaffirm the book in its emotional truth. The whole book has motifs of life and death, of war and peace, and of love and hate; some very innate ideas that most can relate to. The childhood flash back rewinds the reader to those first experiences and is a reminder why these motifs mean anything at all to the reader.
The story did a good illustration of the first footsteps in understanding specifically love, war, and death and the emotional weight these ideas carry. Timmy’s first true love was Linda. Tim didn’t just say, “Oh I love her, she’s swell,” but addressed the mystery and enticement of his love. Why was she always smiling? Nick Veenof was the war, or more specifically, the enemy. A brutal animal that wasn’t always mean, but wasn’t always nice either. And finally Linda’s death and the hole it left, even if just a memory. Timmy was the one who learned these lessons first, and essentially taught Tim O’Brien the lessons down the line.
Then Tim O’Brien brings the story to the present and to its final step of relevance. He dreams of her in an even more abstract way. She is no longer Linda, but merely someone to preserve Timmy. With that said, it is possible this childhood memory outlines the metaphor of this book; the whole book is an attempt to save the Timmy and all that Timmy embodies.
In the interview, Tim O’Brien speaks about making sure that the “legend is still going on somewhere”, and the story of Timmy and Linda at the end of the book makes everything happen all over again. Yes, the war is over, but the things he felt are still alive because of Timmy and Linda. That’s what relevance does.
The story did a good illustration of the first footsteps in understanding specifically love, war, and death and the emotional weight these ideas carry. Timmy’s first true love was Linda. Tim didn’t just say, “Oh I love her, she’s swell,” but addressed the mystery and enticement of his love. Why was she always smiling? Nick Veenof was the war, or more specifically, the enemy. A brutal animal that wasn’t always mean, but wasn’t always nice either. And finally Linda’s death and the hole it left, even if just a memory. Timmy was the one who learned these lessons first, and essentially taught Tim O’Brien the lessons down the line.
Then Tim O’Brien brings the story to the present and to its final step of relevance. He dreams of her in an even more abstract way. She is no longer Linda, but merely someone to preserve Timmy. With that said, it is possible this childhood memory outlines the metaphor of this book; the whole book is an attempt to save the Timmy and all that Timmy embodies.
In the interview, Tim O’Brien speaks about making sure that the “legend is still going on somewhere”, and the story of Timmy and Linda at the end of the book makes everything happen all over again. Yes, the war is over, but the things he felt are still alive because of Timmy and Linda. That’s what relevance does.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Under Pressure
In the interview O'Brien states, "My content is not bombs and bullets and airplanes and strategy and tactics. ... It too is about the human heart and the pressures put on it." These pressures are shown throughout the book. Kiowa sinking into the "shit field" I think demonstrates one of O'Brien's personal heart pressures.
"Twenty years. A lot like yesterday, a lot like never. In a way, maybe, I'd gone under with Kiowa, and now after two decades I had worked my way out. " In this quote O'Brien captures what I feel quite often. He is shocked at how long it has been since Kiowa and the war. He can remember it all so vividly yet it still doesn't feel like it ever happened. He feels like in some ways when Kiowa sunk into the "shit field" he lost some of himself and maybe even some of his innocence with him. Now he feels like he is starting to find that part and innocence of himself again.
Last fall I heard the words that changed my life and will continue to change my life. "Mallory, your mom has cancer." As I sit here now I can still hear it echoing through my head in a distinct rhythm. cancer, Cancer, CANCER. Every moment of that day will be permanently etched in my brain for eternity. It is so vivid yet it feels like a lifetime ago since last fall. I look in the mirror sometimes and am shocked to see my twenty year old self when really I feel like I have aged 20 years in the past year. When I heard those words and in the months that followed I really did loose part of myself to the "shit field".
"I felt something go shut inside my heart while something else swung open." I think that the something going shut while something else swung open is a letting go of the pressure on his heart. He has been carrying this pressure around for twenty years and it finally is able to leave and he has some closure with the death of Kiowa and the emotional burden that was placed upon him.
I can't say that I have a had a complete shutting and opening in my heart. Partially because I am in the midst of it still. However, when I finally get to the moment in time I want to be able to say, "All that's finished."
"Twenty years. A lot like yesterday, a lot like never. In a way, maybe, I'd gone under with Kiowa, and now after two decades I had worked my way out. " In this quote O'Brien captures what I feel quite often. He is shocked at how long it has been since Kiowa and the war. He can remember it all so vividly yet it still doesn't feel like it ever happened. He feels like in some ways when Kiowa sunk into the "shit field" he lost some of himself and maybe even some of his innocence with him. Now he feels like he is starting to find that part and innocence of himself again.
Last fall I heard the words that changed my life and will continue to change my life. "Mallory, your mom has cancer." As I sit here now I can still hear it echoing through my head in a distinct rhythm. cancer, Cancer, CANCER. Every moment of that day will be permanently etched in my brain for eternity. It is so vivid yet it feels like a lifetime ago since last fall. I look in the mirror sometimes and am shocked to see my twenty year old self when really I feel like I have aged 20 years in the past year. When I heard those words and in the months that followed I really did loose part of myself to the "shit field".
"I felt something go shut inside my heart while something else swung open." I think that the something going shut while something else swung open is a letting go of the pressure on his heart. He has been carrying this pressure around for twenty years and it finally is able to leave and he has some closure with the death of Kiowa and the emotional burden that was placed upon him.
I can't say that I have a had a complete shutting and opening in my heart. Partially because I am in the midst of it still. However, when I finally get to the moment in time I want to be able to say, "All that's finished."
Ghostly Revenge
Tim O'Brien's revenge encompasses getting even for more than just not reacting to the fact that he was going into shock. O'Brien had to suffer the humiliation of having to deal with diaper rash and the teasing from his buddies. Deeper still, once he returned, it was never the same - they treated him like an outcast, but accepted Jorgensen. The only person who would talk to him was Azar who was a stand alone soldier because he liked to behave in extreme behaviors, like trick or treating painted but basically naked. We sense that O'Brien feel betrayed by Jorgensen and his buddies. After all, it wasn't his fault he got shot or that Jorgensen allowed him to lay there near death.
O'Brien feels that he has "gone wrong" that he has lost his innocence, ideals, the side of him that was thoughtful and had the capacity to understand and forgive. He was now col and evil and full of revenge. He couldn't get past his consuming desire for revenge unless he somehow got even with Jorgensen, made him feel scared and vulnerable.
In the interview, O'Brien discusses the book as a life metaphor for our own mortality's which take on "added resonance" because it takes place in war time where every sense is heightened and you life on the edge. Although as a reader we might sympathize with O'Brien in his revenge, this is a morale dilemma that everyone faces - what do you do when someone wrongs you. I think he uses this chapter to allow the reader to walk this path for themselves and analyze our own anger, tendencies toward revenge, or our desire to not walk this path and forgive.
O'Brien feels that he has "gone wrong" that he has lost his innocence, ideals, the side of him that was thoughtful and had the capacity to understand and forgive. He was now col and evil and full of revenge. He couldn't get past his consuming desire for revenge unless he somehow got even with Jorgensen, made him feel scared and vulnerable.
In the interview, O'Brien discusses the book as a life metaphor for our own mortality's which take on "added resonance" because it takes place in war time where every sense is heightened and you life on the edge. Although as a reader we might sympathize with O'Brien in his revenge, this is a morale dilemma that everyone faces - what do you do when someone wrongs you. I think he uses this chapter to allow the reader to walk this path for themselves and analyze our own anger, tendencies toward revenge, or our desire to not walk this path and forgive.
Boy in the Field
When I first read “In the Field” I got two impressions from the boy soldier. I at first felt like the character was O’Brien himself, but reading it again I felt like O’Brien was using the boy “In the Field” as a representative figure in a larger meaning. This part of his interview showed how O’Brien uses his stories in kind of a grand scheme, to say something larger than just the characters, setting, or events. Q: “Now that you are looking at the war in that way, how have you found this terrain of Vietnam a convenient metaphor?”A: “That’s mostly how I look at it- though I’m not sure I’d call it a convenient metaphor. I’d say an essential metaphor or a life-given metaphor that, for me, is inescapable.” O’Brien describes the boy as hooded by a poncho, totally caked with mud, with impossible to make out facial features. It very well could actually be O’Brien, but I don’t think it matters. The boy to me, was every soldier in the war, caked in mud, standing in a shit field, something I felt O’Brien used to show how needlessly disgusting and horrible war is. The boys search for his lost picture to me was O’Brien showing how soldiers struggle not to lose apart of themselves in the muck.
Kiowa V Rat
I think that Rat losing his mind affects me more than Kiowa’s death going under the “shit field”. This wasn’t an easy decision for me to make; I had to think about it for a while before I settled on Rat. It is not that I am saying Kiowa’s death is not significant or emotional in any sense but with Rat his struggle didn’t end as quickly as Kiowa’s did. Kiowa went under physically and then dies, ending his struggle. Rat went under slowly and in a more cruel way. Rat’s mind became the mud, sucking him under slowly but never really finishing him off in a sense. Rat became a prisoner of his own thoughts, delusions, and he could do nothing to stop it. I cannot imagine the horror of being sucked down into a field of mud and not being able to get out, but having that same feeling everyday would be far worse for me. The enemy in Rat’s case was his own brain, an ally that helped him so many times before turned against him in the end. To me I think this explains me as a reader in a couple of ways. I feel more secure and safe when I know what the enemy is and if its tangible or not. The mud is tangible, it is physical, it is seen and you can touch it. The mud is physically Kiowa’s enemy he has to fight against to stay alive. The mind is not something tangible. Sure you can physically touch the brain and see a brain but the idea of the mind is not. You cannot wrap your hands around the mind; you cannot touch it or see it. It is a universally believed concept but is not physical. To me, the mind is a lot of who you are. Everyone trusts their mind to show them things that are real, not illusions. Everyone trusts that the sounds they hear are real sounds and not a lie coming from bad wires in their brain. All in all, as I reader I like the enemy to be clear, shown to me almost physically apparent instead of the struggle of not really knowing what to be afraid of. In regards to the interview with Tim I don't think it matters one bit that he made some stories up or he didn't personally witness them happening. Like he had mentioned in the interview it is not about the real truth sometimes but the story truth. Sometimes the story truth is a lot more meaningful and affective than the real truth.
Live with insanity or lose your life in Death?
I am probably a little slower than most of you, but I finally understand for myself why it doesn't matter if the stories are true. The characters need to be, and that's why stories are told. At the beginning of the last chapter O'Brien writes "They're all dead. But in a story, which is a kind of dreaming, the dead sometimes smile and sit up and return to the world." Through out this book and the diverse stories you relate to a character or two.
I, in a way, developed my own since of relationship with Rat Kiley and Kiowa. They fascinated me and I wanted to keep reading the book just to see what happened to them. I almost wanted to skip all the other stories told just to sit at there feet and listen to them tell stories. It was like I was in Nam, in the dark sitting around Rats hole as he told his tail of Mary Anne Bell. I reacted to it in the same way the others did in the story. I was scared and horrified me. I couldn't believe it, and I could here Rat's sighs begging for us to believe his tale, however tall it may have been.
It is hard for me to choose between Kiowa's horrific death and Rat Kiley's mind going. I really enjoyed Kiowa's strait-forwardness and connected with him as you learned more about his character and I felt the respect for him that the other men did. In the story Church when Dobbins recognises the things that Kiowa did differently from the rest of them, there was a feeling of respect and small amount of envy, I felt. It was hard for me to 'watch' his death happen as I read the words and finally discovered his fatal end. In all honesty his death was gruesome, but he didn't have to suffer after that. He's dead and I choose to believe his soul is in a better place.
Rat Kiley's story on the other had brings sorrow into my heart. Thinking of how a great strong and smart mind was tainted by the things he'd been treating through out the war. I find it a form of humor and terror that in the beginning of the book O'Brien says that no one would blame him for shooting his own foot just to get out of the war and go home..... then Rat actually acts upon that jester because he can't handle the hallucinations in his head. To live with the knowledge and memories of the 'normal' life you lived before and be able to go back to that sanity would bother me to no end. As a reader I don't know if that makes me insensitive to death or overly sensitive to what tricks the mind can play. I also think that O'Brien put it in words better than I could, he said in the interview, "I was examining myself essentially, my own terror inside." That's what I felt as I read the account of Rat. My heart sank.
I, in a way, developed my own since of relationship with Rat Kiley and Kiowa. They fascinated me and I wanted to keep reading the book just to see what happened to them. I almost wanted to skip all the other stories told just to sit at there feet and listen to them tell stories. It was like I was in Nam, in the dark sitting around Rats hole as he told his tail of Mary Anne Bell. I reacted to it in the same way the others did in the story. I was scared and horrified me. I couldn't believe it, and I could here Rat's sighs begging for us to believe his tale, however tall it may have been.
It is hard for me to choose between Kiowa's horrific death and Rat Kiley's mind going. I really enjoyed Kiowa's strait-forwardness and connected with him as you learned more about his character and I felt the respect for him that the other men did. In the story Church when Dobbins recognises the things that Kiowa did differently from the rest of them, there was a feeling of respect and small amount of envy, I felt. It was hard for me to 'watch' his death happen as I read the words and finally discovered his fatal end. In all honesty his death was gruesome, but he didn't have to suffer after that. He's dead and I choose to believe his soul is in a better place.
Rat Kiley's story on the other had brings sorrow into my heart. Thinking of how a great strong and smart mind was tainted by the things he'd been treating through out the war. I find it a form of humor and terror that in the beginning of the book O'Brien says that no one would blame him for shooting his own foot just to get out of the war and go home..... then Rat actually acts upon that jester because he can't handle the hallucinations in his head. To live with the knowledge and memories of the 'normal' life you lived before and be able to go back to that sanity would bother me to no end. As a reader I don't know if that makes me insensitive to death or overly sensitive to what tricks the mind can play. I also think that O'Brien put it in words better than I could, he said in the interview, "I was examining myself essentially, my own terror inside." That's what I felt as I read the account of Rat. My heart sank.
Stories Can Save
When O'Brien said "too" I believe he was referring to the true and not so true stories he told us at the beginning of the book and he is trying to tell us that this is one of the true facts.
Stories being able to save us is true. They allow parts of our character, emotions and our souls to live or in some cases live again. For instance when Timmy was imagining Linda not only was he giving her a sense of life he was helping his feelings for her to keep on living and not die when she died. In stories you can bring back things about your self that you thought you had lost. For instance when O'Brien went to war he felt dirty, like he had lost every bit of his innocence and purity, but at the end of the book he sees himself as a young boy again and that innocence and purity gain life again. I think personally that such things never truly die, they just get buried, they are forced to go to sleep and in stories they are unburied and reawakened. We are brought back to a sense of our old self and we then learn how to blend, create a balance, with the old and the new to make you.
Stories being able to save us is true. They allow parts of our character, emotions and our souls to live or in some cases live again. For instance when Timmy was imagining Linda not only was he giving her a sense of life he was helping his feelings for her to keep on living and not die when she died. In stories you can bring back things about your self that you thought you had lost. For instance when O'Brien went to war he felt dirty, like he had lost every bit of his innocence and purity, but at the end of the book he sees himself as a young boy again and that innocence and purity gain life again. I think personally that such things never truly die, they just get buried, they are forced to go to sleep and in stories they are unburied and reawakened. We are brought back to a sense of our old self and we then learn how to blend, create a balance, with the old and the new to make you.
Death and How We Carry It.
Tim O'Brien has an interesting philosophy. He says "Stories, retold, carry the force of a legend....the story is still going out there somewhere. Huck is still going down the river, Ahab is still chasing that whale.....I'm fascinated by the fact that every time this story is read, the whole thing happens again and again and again". Here he states with finality that "The Things They Carried " is a book about telling stories. Its a book about many things, filled with emotion and the pain of living but in its essentials, the book is a story of story telling. It defines the truth that even fiction brings to us and explains how telling a story can help you survive.
It is for this reason that I believe O'Brien ends with the story of Linda. When the character O'Brien sees his first dead body in Vietnam he is unwilling to participate in the other soldier's "funeral without sadness'. We then find out that this is not the first body he has seen. Linda was a girl that he loved and she died. I want to focus for a minute on O'Brien's attention paid to words. Nick Veenhof delivers the news of Linda's death with "Your girlfriend kicked the bucket." I like O'Brien's comparison with this moment and the idea of toasting a dead man. Kicking the bucket isn't the same as being dead. Shaking hands with a dead man turns him less a dead body, more a prop. One you take the dead part out of death it's not that heavy anymore. It's a way of carrying something and making it lighter that I recognize very much.
The last chapter of "The Things They Carried" I believe, is teaching us how to carry people, carry experience, carry emotion, through story telling. Timmy deals with the death of Linda by telling himself a story where she is alive. Because stories are something that never die. People can leave your life many ways. Death being prominent among them. But I believe that you carry people around in your heart and mind. You carry their stories and they live through you. That's why story telling is such a powerful thing.
It is for this reason that I believe O'Brien ends with the story of Linda. When the character O'Brien sees his first dead body in Vietnam he is unwilling to participate in the other soldier's "funeral without sadness'. We then find out that this is not the first body he has seen. Linda was a girl that he loved and she died. I want to focus for a minute on O'Brien's attention paid to words. Nick Veenhof delivers the news of Linda's death with "Your girlfriend kicked the bucket." I like O'Brien's comparison with this moment and the idea of toasting a dead man. Kicking the bucket isn't the same as being dead. Shaking hands with a dead man turns him less a dead body, more a prop. One you take the dead part out of death it's not that heavy anymore. It's a way of carrying something and making it lighter that I recognize very much.
The last chapter of "The Things They Carried" I believe, is teaching us how to carry people, carry experience, carry emotion, through story telling. Timmy deals with the death of Linda by telling himself a story where she is alive. Because stories are something that never die. People can leave your life many ways. Death being prominent among them. But I believe that you carry people around in your heart and mind. You carry their stories and they live through you. That's why story telling is such a powerful thing.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
The Things They Carried, Final Set of Prompts
I am going to make this blog post a little trickier for you (and a little more fun, hopefully). As before, you should choose one of these prompts and respond to it. However, your response will be a little different this time in that regardless of which prompt you choose, you should include, as part of your response, something from the O’Brien interview I gave you in class. You might quote a line, or lines, from the interview, or you might paraphrase some part of it, or you might use it in some other way. Please remember, though, that your response should primarily be an expression of original thought.
1. In “In the Field,” there is a young boy that is not named. Why not give this character a name? Any ideas? Does the chapter give you any clues?
2. On page 187, O’Brien writes, “Twenty years. A lot like yesterday, a lot like never. In a way, maybe, I’d gone under with Kiowa, and now after two decades I’d finally worked my way out. [. . .] I felt something go shut in my heart while something else swung open.” Interpret these lines.
3. Talk about the idea of blame in these chapters. Find examples anywhere you wish, but look especially on pages 168, 176, 185.
4. What happens to O’Brien as he is enacting his revenge on Bobby Jorgenson? What do we learn about him in those chapters? How would you describe his emotional state?
5. In “Good Form,” O’Brien writes about the difference between “happening-truth” and “story-truth.” Why does he make this distinction? Hasn’t he just told us that everything is made up? Do you believe that he could tell his daughter that he did, or did not, kill anyone, and that either one would be true? Isn’t this just a way to rationalize? Or is it something else?
6. Which affected you more, Kiowa going under, or Rat Kiley beginning to lose his mind? Why? What does this teach you about yourself as a reader?
7. The story of Timmy and Linda is probably symbolic of many things. What does it symbolize to you? What is its significance? And why does O’Brien include it, even conclude with it, when it seems to be outside the framework of the book?
8. The last chapter, “The Lives of the Dead,” begins with the sentence, “But this, too, is true: stories can save us.” Why the word “too”? What other “truth” is he referring back to? And, perhaps more importantly, what do you think O’Brien means? After all you have read, respond to the idea that a story can save us.
1. In “In the Field,” there is a young boy that is not named. Why not give this character a name? Any ideas? Does the chapter give you any clues?
2. On page 187, O’Brien writes, “Twenty years. A lot like yesterday, a lot like never. In a way, maybe, I’d gone under with Kiowa, and now after two decades I’d finally worked my way out. [. . .] I felt something go shut in my heart while something else swung open.” Interpret these lines.
3. Talk about the idea of blame in these chapters. Find examples anywhere you wish, but look especially on pages 168, 176, 185.
4. What happens to O’Brien as he is enacting his revenge on Bobby Jorgenson? What do we learn about him in those chapters? How would you describe his emotional state?
5. In “Good Form,” O’Brien writes about the difference between “happening-truth” and “story-truth.” Why does he make this distinction? Hasn’t he just told us that everything is made up? Do you believe that he could tell his daughter that he did, or did not, kill anyone, and that either one would be true? Isn’t this just a way to rationalize? Or is it something else?
6. Which affected you more, Kiowa going under, or Rat Kiley beginning to lose his mind? Why? What does this teach you about yourself as a reader?
7. The story of Timmy and Linda is probably symbolic of many things. What does it symbolize to you? What is its significance? And why does O’Brien include it, even conclude with it, when it seems to be outside the framework of the book?
8. The last chapter, “The Lives of the Dead,” begins with the sentence, “But this, too, is true: stories can save us.” Why the word “too”? What other “truth” is he referring back to? And, perhaps more importantly, what do you think O’Brien means? After all you have read, respond to the idea that a story can save us.
Hope Never Faileth
O'Brien sets the stage in Stockings by comparing Henry Dobbins to America, how he is full of good intentions, dependable, a "believer in the virtues of simplicity and directness and hard labor. . . and drawn toward sentimentality." This creates an image of a man full of hope and faith in man's basic inherent goodness; someone you can trust, and have faith that he will always be there when you need him doing good.
I feel that Henry starts out using the stockings as a means to hang onto memories. These memories give him hope and faith that he is loved and missed by his girlfriend, and that after the war he can return to create new memories with her. It also provides a means of escape to that world of hope by having them as a close reminder. As the war progresses and he escapes the ravages of war, he begins to believe they have mystical powers. We all have something that we hang onto - a belief in something that brings us happiness and a better future.
His faith in the stockings, though transform into something bigger than his girlfriend, though and become representative of his deep sense of faith that everything will be all right. Even after she dumps him, he beleves in their magical powers of protection. So strong is his faith that his fellor soldiers believe in their power as well. This makes sense to the reader because Henry is an optimist and came to the war with a strong foundation of goodness. They symbolize his faith in a safe return to his past and the ability to have a bright future.
In the church O'Brien relays a second story of belief in man's basic inherent goodness. Here are soldiers and monks thrown in each other's paths under the shelter of an abandoned church. There is a respect for the sacredness of what the church stands for and of the monks and their mission in life. Even though they are in the midst of a terrible war in enemy territory, because they find the monks in a church, they automatically trust them and have faith that they are really monks. They could have been the enemy in disguise - I actually kept waiting while reading about the monks cleaning the guns for the moment they shoot everyone. I was quite surprised that they were actually monks and the scene ended without death. I think the purpose of these chapters was to share their inner faith and hope.
Being in the church triggers conversations about faith, belief and life goals, and Dobbins discusses his initial thoughts of being a minister because he wanted to be nice to people. Even though he doesn't really talk about believing in religious philosophies, he has faith in human beings and life.
I think that this story demonstrates a great deal of faith on the part of the monks because they never seem to be threatened by their presence. They, in fact, endear themselves to the soldiers. If they did not have faith in a higher power, or believe they were destined for a better place, they would have hidden.
I also feel that in the chapter about The Man I Killed there is some hidden symbolism of faith. Intertwined in the detailed description about the actual body, we are given very detailed images of a butterfly and flowers. Faith and hope have to do with understanding that mortality is not in our control, and that even when one thing dies there are other living things that continue. I wondered if the butterfly being present up until the point of the blood stopping and the body functions all ceasing was symbolic of a belief in a Christ who died on the cross, or of the holy ghost being represented in the form of a dove. It seems that the butterfly represented life and disappeared when the blood and body functions stopped. In a non-religious aspect, it could be faith that life goes on even in the midst of darkness.
All of these men have faith in something, and that faith is what gave the survivors the strength to carry on. It allowed them to escape the reality of their situation and go back to their past and use that to hope for the future. I believe that Tim is demonstrating that all of us have something we need to cling to, whether it is a belief in a God, a super power, each other, something that makes us feel that we are important, that what we are doing in this life is worth something, and we are making a difference in bringing about good of some sort.
I feel that Henry starts out using the stockings as a means to hang onto memories. These memories give him hope and faith that he is loved and missed by his girlfriend, and that after the war he can return to create new memories with her. It also provides a means of escape to that world of hope by having them as a close reminder. As the war progresses and he escapes the ravages of war, he begins to believe they have mystical powers. We all have something that we hang onto - a belief in something that brings us happiness and a better future.
His faith in the stockings, though transform into something bigger than his girlfriend, though and become representative of his deep sense of faith that everything will be all right. Even after she dumps him, he beleves in their magical powers of protection. So strong is his faith that his fellor soldiers believe in their power as well. This makes sense to the reader because Henry is an optimist and came to the war with a strong foundation of goodness. They symbolize his faith in a safe return to his past and the ability to have a bright future.
In the church O'Brien relays a second story of belief in man's basic inherent goodness. Here are soldiers and monks thrown in each other's paths under the shelter of an abandoned church. There is a respect for the sacredness of what the church stands for and of the monks and their mission in life. Even though they are in the midst of a terrible war in enemy territory, because they find the monks in a church, they automatically trust them and have faith that they are really monks. They could have been the enemy in disguise - I actually kept waiting while reading about the monks cleaning the guns for the moment they shoot everyone. I was quite surprised that they were actually monks and the scene ended without death. I think the purpose of these chapters was to share their inner faith and hope.
Being in the church triggers conversations about faith, belief and life goals, and Dobbins discusses his initial thoughts of being a minister because he wanted to be nice to people. Even though he doesn't really talk about believing in religious philosophies, he has faith in human beings and life.
I think that this story demonstrates a great deal of faith on the part of the monks because they never seem to be threatened by their presence. They, in fact, endear themselves to the soldiers. If they did not have faith in a higher power, or believe they were destined for a better place, they would have hidden.
I also feel that in the chapter about The Man I Killed there is some hidden symbolism of faith. Intertwined in the detailed description about the actual body, we are given very detailed images of a butterfly and flowers. Faith and hope have to do with understanding that mortality is not in our control, and that even when one thing dies there are other living things that continue. I wondered if the butterfly being present up until the point of the blood stopping and the body functions all ceasing was symbolic of a belief in a Christ who died on the cross, or of the holy ghost being represented in the form of a dove. It seems that the butterfly represented life and disappeared when the blood and body functions stopped. In a non-religious aspect, it could be faith that life goes on even in the midst of darkness.
All of these men have faith in something, and that faith is what gave the survivors the strength to carry on. It allowed them to escape the reality of their situation and go back to their past and use that to hope for the future. I believe that Tim is demonstrating that all of us have something we need to cling to, whether it is a belief in a God, a super power, each other, something that makes us feel that we are important, that what we are doing in this life is worth something, and we are making a difference in bringing about good of some sort.
The emotions from the man I killed
The chapter titled The Man I Killed was a chapter that struck me most out of all of the reading thus far. The style of writing seems to be a very emotional and almost surreal type of writing. Throughout the rest of the book, Tim O’Brien speaks as the narrator or detaches himself somewhat from the situation but in The Man I Killed he seems sucked into the situation. By using the situation, repeating it many times and not speaking you really feel as if you were experiencing exactly what Tim was. I believe the combination between the shock of the situation and the horror of seeing that young man’s body and then the “what if” scenario’s causes you to relate to the feelings described. Another thing I feel Tim did differently in this chapter that’s different from the rest of the book is really embellish this young man’s back-story. Tim in his mind came up with an elaborate story of where this man came from, what the ring on his finger meant, what interests he had, his inner most feelings about the war and so on. He personalized the man in such great detail that it is hard not to feel the sorrow for the fallen soldier.
The Man I Killed
The chapter "The Man I Killed" and also "Ambush" showed to me the comparison of O'Brien before the war and during the war. It also shows the struggle that O'Brien is still dealing with: the regrets, the sorrow, the crude humor, the killing.
O’Brien describes the man he killed; the way he looked after the explosion and also his life. The way that O’Brien describes the man’s life--a life that O'Brien cannot prove-- is sort of a flash back for him. The way his life was or could have ended up. He talks about the man’s feelings towards war. The man didn’t want to go to war; he wanted to be a teacher of mathematics, a scholar, not a fighter. He keeps ‘hoping and hoping, always’ that he won’t have to fight. This relates to the chapter “On the Rainy River” where O’Brien fights with his internal feelings. He didn’t want to fight; he didn’t want to go to war. He even writes that he was interested in other things, a scholar in his own way. O’Brien felt that the war was not for him. I think this is coming out through his pain and emotions when he kills this man. This isn’t what he wanted to do. This man was just walking through the jungle, minding his own business, and yet O’Brien killed him.
Kiowa asks O’Brien, “You want to trade places with him?” This strikes fear into O’Brien. What if that was him? What if he was scattered in pieces in the jungle? In “Ambush” you can feel the tension that O’Brien has bottled away. He admits that his actions where just automatic; that he pulled the pin on the grenade and threw it because that’s what you do in war. Those actions don’t describe the character that O’Brien is, but his thoughts do. He admits he didn’t hate the man; he didn’t consider him an enemy. Even when he through the grenade it was because he just wanted the situation to end. He wanted to warn the man!
O’Brien describes the man he killed; the way he looked after the explosion and also his life. The way that O’Brien describes the man’s life--a life that O'Brien cannot prove-- is sort of a flash back for him. The way his life was or could have ended up. He talks about the man’s feelings towards war. The man didn’t want to go to war; he wanted to be a teacher of mathematics, a scholar, not a fighter. He keeps ‘hoping and hoping, always’ that he won’t have to fight. This relates to the chapter “On the Rainy River” where O’Brien fights with his internal feelings. He didn’t want to fight; he didn’t want to go to war. He even writes that he was interested in other things, a scholar in his own way. O’Brien felt that the war was not for him. I think this is coming out through his pain and emotions when he kills this man. This isn’t what he wanted to do. This man was just walking through the jungle, minding his own business, and yet O’Brien killed him.
Kiowa asks O’Brien, “You want to trade places with him?” This strikes fear into O’Brien. What if that was him? What if he was scattered in pieces in the jungle? In “Ambush” you can feel the tension that O’Brien has bottled away. He admits that his actions where just automatic; that he pulled the pin on the grenade and threw it because that’s what you do in war. Those actions don’t describe the character that O’Brien is, but his thoughts do. He admits he didn’t hate the man; he didn’t consider him an enemy. Even when he through the grenade it was because he just wanted the situation to end. He wanted to warn the man!
In the Eyes of the Beholder
A broad definition of faith is "confidence or trust in a person or thing." What really defines our faith is what we specifically have faith in. Dobbins had faith that while wearing his girlfriend's stockings he was untouchable, invincible. Kiowa's symbol of faith was in the New Testament and how he always had it tucked away. I think what makes both symbols of faith so real is the power that both men seemed to trust in. The stockings were just stockings, man-made, but reading this chapter seemed to hint that Dobbins believed in some higher power that protected him through the stockings. Kiowa and his relationship with the New testament also hints that he had faith in some higher power, especially just knowing the contents of the New Testaments.
Both Kiowa and Dobbins recognize a higher power when they set up camp in the church. It wasn't necessarily a religion that they agreed with but both felt the imminent power of a higher being. "It feels good when you just sit there, like you're in a forest and everything's really quiet, except there's still this sound you can't hear."
"Yeah."
"You ever feel that?"
"Sort of."
"Stockings" and "Church" both seem to show that faith isn't in one certain object or person, but rather in a higher power that virtually anyone can believe in, regardless of specific religion or denomination.
Both Kiowa and Dobbins recognize a higher power when they set up camp in the church. It wasn't necessarily a religion that they agreed with but both felt the imminent power of a higher being. "It feels good when you just sit there, like you're in a forest and everything's really quiet, except there's still this sound you can't hear."
"Yeah."
"You ever feel that?"
"Sort of."
"Stockings" and "Church" both seem to show that faith isn't in one certain object or person, but rather in a higher power that virtually anyone can believe in, regardless of specific religion or denomination.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)