William Shakespeare bestowed Hamlet upon the world at a time when his audience was highly concerned with the relationship between religion, politics and the universe. Written around 1600, the play emerged at a tense time in English history when uncertainty loomed regarding the shift of power from Elizabeth I to a new heir. Philosophical studies from the early 17th century tell us that Shakespeare’s audience was focused on issues such as Christian obedience to God, the moral significance of social institutions, and the human fascination with revenge. The Elizabethan audience embraced Shakespeare’s revenge tragedy, utilizing it as a venue to interpret their own morals regarding religious tradition, political corruption and social structures. The play no doubt struck a chord with the audience members’ innermost desires, fears and morals as being very personal, but acting on those emotions can create a domino effect on the outside world. Shakespeare borrowed elements from previous revenge tragedy writers to make Hamlet a very introspective, philosophical drama. Through Shakespeare’s revenge play, the Elizabethan audience was able to explore the notions of revenge and justice between individuals as well as political structures.
Shakespeare followed the standards for a revenge play that were set by Seneca, a Roman statesman and philosopher who lived in the 1st century (Barnet lxvi). Senecan tragedies featured ample amounts of murder and blood followed by a quest to seek revenge on the villain (Kasbekar). Several elements define a Senecan revenge play, and Shakespeare utilized these elements when writing Hamlet. First, the story revolves around a tragic hero whose intentions and inner voice will be self-dramatized (Kasbekar). Shakespeare’s Hamlet is such a character, elaborating on his own philosophical ponderings through lengthy, poetic soliloquies. Second, an obsession with crime and a preoccupation with torture, mutilation, incest and corpses are prominent (Kasbekar). These themes are evident in imagery and dialogue throughout the play. From Claudius’ incestual marriage to Gertrude to Hamlet’s encounter with Yorrick’s skull, symbols of death remind the viewer of the immorality of the characters and the bloody finale that’s ultimately looming. Shakespeare borrowed from another writer of revenge tragedies for the third element of revenge in Hamlet. Thomas Kyd, who produced an earlier version of the Hamlet tale, the Ur-Hamlet, as early as 1589, introduced a revenge-seeking ghost to the mix (Barnet lxvi). In Shakespeare’s version, Hamlet is visited by his late father who informs him that he was murdered by Claudius, and asks Hamlet to seek vengeance for his death. Hamlet hatches a plan to feign madness in order to catch Claudius admitting his guilt. An avenger feigning madness is an element of the revenge tragedy, as well (Kasbekar). The prince orchestrates a play dramatizing events strikingly similar to those surrounding King Hamlet’s murder, hoping that Claudius’ guilt will surface as he watches the performance. While Hamlet is busy scheming against Claudius, the king is doing the same against Hamlet, attempting to have him murdered. A play-within-a-play and double-crossing are both indicative of the revenge tragedy (Kasbekar). Elizabethan audiences loved the heightened emotional drama this formula offered, as it made them consider revenge, death, honor and morality on a both personal and governmental level.
Shakespeare also explores the theme of revenge as opposed to reason through Hamlet’s internal struggle. A university student who is extremely philosophical and contemplative, Hamlet becomes obsessed with the challenge of revenge when he learns of his father’s murder. He wants to seek revenge for his father’s death, but wants to be sure “beyond a reasonable doubt” that his uncle is indeed guilty of the crime. Hamlet ponders the afterlife, suicide, and what happens to the physical body after a person has died, while simultaneously trying to bring himself to kill another human being. The act of thinking actually holds Hamlet back from acting on his desires. This delay of action is a prominent element in the revenge tragedy. But even though Hamlet thinks obsessively, he behaves impulsively, like when he stabs Polonius through the curtain. It is at this point Hamlet’s feigned madness becomes something rather tangible. In this way, Shakespeare makes the case that one can think too much, and excessive introspection can only leave one lost in his own thoughts. It is rather ironic that it is Hamlet’s fear of death which ultimately leads him to his own.
This introspection sends Hamlet into a deep melancholy; he is disturbed by the state of affairs in his own family and in the state of Denmark in general. His father has been murdered and his uncle has been pitted against him as his arch rival. His mother has disgraced his father by quickly marrying his uncle despite popular opinion that incest is immoral. Because of his mother’s actions, he is so disgusted by women that he even shuns and demoralizes Ophelia, a woman he once claimed to love. His spirit is broken, and he regularly contemplates suicide. Because Hamlet is so concerned with his own self-loathing and misery, he spares no time worrying about the stability of Denmark. Even though Denmark is being threatened both from the outside by the Norwegian prince, Fortinbras, and from the inside by Claudius, a murderous adulterer, Hamlet cannot bring himself to set aside philosophical ruminations to act on the single notion of revenge that he set out to accomplish. Instead, the prince’s introspection leads to his inaction, and mayhem, rather than justice or revenge, is the result.
The welfare of the royal family in Hamlet is reflective of the state as a whole. The play begins with a sense of anxiety and dread, brought on by the uncertain transfer of one power to another. Claudius has just taken over the throne, having murdered King Hamlet. Throughout the play, characters repeatedly assert connections between a ruler’s legitimacy and his nation’s health. In the first act, Marcellus announces, “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark” (1.4.90). The late King Hamlet was seen by his kingdom as a strong, capable leader, but once Claudius takes the reins, corruption abounds within the country. The audience is given the message that the state cannot be revitalized until the corruption comes to an end. At play’s finale, Fortinbras declares that Denmark will rise again. Since Shakespeare was writing during the reign of Elizabeth I, it is likely that his intentions were, at least in part, to strengthen the trust between the people of England and the monarchy, even though the tale’s setting is Denmark. Despite the bloodshed and gore on the stage, viewers would go home knowing that their country was secure and that evil would not prevail even in a most unjust world.
While the Elizabethan audience enjoyed Shakespeare’s revenge play, it was their aversion to such morals that enticed them. Neither the church nor the state accepted revenge as a moral reaction regardless of the circumstances at that time. Revenge was simply not tolerated because Christian principles dictated that God was the ultimate judge, and also because it was considered a violation of the political authority of the state for an individual to seek revenge on their own terms (Belsey 234). So, while Shakespeare’s audience enjoyed the notion of revenge, they were well aware that the playwright was pointing out a major character flaw within Hamlet – the inability to distinguish between where introspection ends and action begins. They were also well aware of the immoral implications associated with pondering the act of revenge. Many Christians believe that simply thinking a sin is equivalent to committing a sin. But since Hamlet was thinking about murder to avenge his father’s death, perhaps his sin is canceled out. Would Hamlet’s murder of Claudius been more justified than Claudius’ murder of King Hamlet? True Christian thought would conclude that neither Claudius nor Hamlet should be forgiven for the murder of another human being. If Hamlet had succeeded in murdering Claudius, then his soul should be damned. Failing to avenge his father’s death, and, in turn, dying while still in mourning, Hamlet ends up looking like a tragically heroic martyr. This is something the audience would have appreciated the most, knowing that the soul of the protagonist could still possibly be saved despite his earthly failures.
Shakespeare’s tragedies certainly offered the Elizabethan audience a variety of moral issues to examine. By utilizing the common elements of a revenge play – the self-dramatization of the hero, consistent images of death, a revenge-seeking ghost, the feigned madness of the avenger, a delay of action, and a bloody finale – Shakespeare successfully presented his audience with a plethora of ruminations to consider. At a time when people were concerned with the changing hands of power, religious righteousness, and philosophical introspection, Elizabethan minds were playgrounds for Shakespeare. His brilliance lies in the ability to connect with his audience by dramatizing the moral and philosophical aspects of the world around them.
Works Cited
Barnet, Sylvan. “Introduction.” Hamlet. 2nd ed. New York: Signet Classics, 1998.
Belsey, Catherine. “From ‘The Subject of Tragedy.’” Hamlet. 2nd ed. New York: Signet Classics, 1998.
Kasbekar, Veena. Ohio University-Chillicothe. Chillicothe, Ohio. February 2008.
Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. Ed. Sylvan Barnet. 2nd ed. New York: Signet Classics, 1998.
Showing posts with label junior. Show all posts
Showing posts with label junior. Show all posts
Saturday, March 21, 2009
POLS 354 Final
Section 1 – Question 1
Approaches to National Security – Cold War to Present
During the Cold War, the realist school of international relations rose to prominence, guided by fears of nuclear weaponry and a fundamental responsibility to protect the nation-state from an external military attack. Since this era, however, the security of the nation-state has been redefined to encapsulate the personal security of the citizens residing within it. Brian C. Schmidt explains that there is a “mainstream understanding of national security as an armed defense of territory and core values from foreign threats,” but that this belief does not define which grand theory best preserves a state's national security (164). Even though mainstream America agrees that its core values should be defended by arms, the concepts of “core values” and “armed defense” are both subjective. Because national security is now conceptualized in terms of human security, the realist approach to international relations is no longer sufficient.
The highly subjective concept of “core values” is best conveyed through the Jacksonian approach to national security. Through this approach, America is viewed as a “folk community with a strong sense of common values and common destiny.” Its people respond to notions such as “honor, independence, courage and military pride,” and they are dedicated to the unified camaraderie associated with protecting the “homeland,” Christian principles, and gun ownership. Jacksonian ideals, however, were exploited after 9/11, as the event was interpreted by Jacksonians as a clear battle between good and evil, the civilized versus the uncivilized (Kiersey). The initial ideology that the United States had a right to retribution faded once evidence began surfacing indicating that the factors surrounding the conflict were not black and white, and that moral ambiguities were inevitable in such a climate. The United States invaded Iraq under the “mainstream understanding” that it was deploying armed defense to protect the nation's “core values.” However, this war is not being fought in the same climate as the Cold War. No nuclear weaponry was located in Iraq, and mainstream America's “core values” have been exploited for some other purpose. The Jacksonian approach to foreign policy, then, has been discredited because it has been abused. Walter Russell Mead, who identified the four various approaches to national security, claimed that “Jacksonian political philosophy is often an instinct rather than an ideology, a culturally shaped outlook that the individual may not have worked out intellectually, a set of beliefs and emotions rather than a set of ideas.” This is also evident in the Jacksonian disdain for intellectualism (Kiersey). Had Bush reacted more ideologically and less emotionally, the Iraq debacle may have been averted.
The second subjective issue with Schmidt's argument is that of “armed defense.” Each different grand theory offers a different interpretation of the limitations associated with “armed defense.” Does the “mainstream understanding” of national security allow for first-strike wars? It must not be forgotten that both security and threats to it are conceptualized differently by each individual. For example, the Jeffersonian approach to national security stresses caution in foreign affairs and prefers “the least costly and dangerous methods” of protecting the United States in the dangerous state of globalization (Kiersey). This approach would rather avoid possible conflicts with other nations before they begin. The Wilsonian approach, however, claims that it is the United States' responsibility to bring civilization to less developed parts of the world, and in doing so, we must interact with other nation-states. Under this ideology, the United States is not immune from military threats, therefore, they must attempt to create as many democracies as possible in the world, as democracies are more reliable partners in ascertaining world peace than are tyrannies (Kiersey). The fact that there are such varying opinions on how threats are perceived only further demonstrates the need for a clear definition of “armed defense” in relation to national security.
President Obama's approach to foreign policy is mostly Wilsonian, as he recognizes how necessary it is to engage with other nation-states in pursuit of common goals. Now that the country is deeply embedded in an economic crisis, Hamiltonian ideas are making their way into new policies. This approach to foreign policy stresses the importance of industry and commerce as a way of creating peace (Kiersey). Certainly the new administration is focused on rebuilding the world's faith in American commerce. A Wilsonian approach with a hint of Hamiltonianism is most feasible for national security preservation today. The realist approach to international relations, coupled with the Jacksonian approach to national security, has expired. These emotional responses, inevitably, do not protect the “core values” in relation to human security. More intellectual, resolute analyses must now be made about national security, and, today, the Wilsonian approach is more reasonable than the other three identified by Mead.
Section 2 – Question 2
Neoconservative Ideeologies Damaged United States Foreign Policy
During George W. Bush's presidency, Neoconservative ideologies hijacked a Jacksonian view of national security in the attempt to seek moral vengeance on a major foreign policy actor. This action has had an immensely negative effect on United States foreign policy, as it has damaged the administration both domestically and internationally. Foong Khong lists the administration's biggest international failures as: “The failure to find weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq, the US mistreatment of prisoners in Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison, and the eruption of a vicious civil war in Iraq.” Domestically, “US casualties in the inconclusive Iraq war” have damaged the American public's opinion of the administration (252). Bush surrounded himself with a host of fellow Neoconservatives, whose ideologies guided the hand of the United States government for eight long years. The United States' new administrators, and subsequently the new foreign policy actors, have the responsibility to employ a new grand theory in order to restore dignity to foreign policy.
The origins of Neoconservatism were located by Irving Kristol “among the disillusioned liberal intellecutals of the 1970s” (qtd. 253). The liberals, he explained, were disillusioned due to sharp tilt to the left following the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War. This was when Jacksonian “core values” were questioned, and liberals began refusing to defend themselves regarding traditional values. Neoconservatives like Kristol found this separation from moral values to be dangerous to the political system (253).
Kristol and Robert Kagan classified Neoconservatives as “fervent anti-communists, emphasizing the ideological and moral superiority of democracy, while advocating the maintenance of a strong military” (qtd. 254). Neoconservatives will advocate bigger military budgets even in times of financial hardship just to preserve “prestige and power of the United States military” (254). More than $600 billion has been spent on the war in Iraq thanks to Neoconservative ideologies, however, the United States military is less prestigious than ever before. Both domestically and internationally, the military in Iraq is viewed as an extension of Neoconservativism.
Krisol and Kagan identified four major tenets of Neoconservative foreign policy thought. The first tenet is the Neoconservative desire for moral clarity in the international arena. Neoconservatives believe that “democratic leaders and liberal democracies are good; tyrants and tyrannical regimes are bad” (qtd. 256). Therefore, morality and the interests of the state should be joined with diplomacy, and the United States has a moral responsibility to act against foreign policy actors who threaten either the interests or the morals of the United States. Furthermore, Neoconservatives conclude that the United States, as a moral institution, has the right to pass judgment on foreign nations it considers immoral. The second tenet of Neoconservative ideology is that the United States should “preserve its military preeminence in the post-Cold War world,” capitalizing on a monopoly of power by acting as “a benevolent US hegemony (256). This also relates to the third tenet, which is that the United States “should leverage its military power” to pursue foreign policy goals. Neoconservatives are quick to employ the United States as a prominent international actor because of the fourth tenet, their skepticism about the ability of international law and institutions to bring about world peace (256-7). During Bush's presidency, all of these Neoconservative tenets were applied to foreign policy.
Foong Khong discusses the various enabling “factors” and “events” which lead to the Neoconservatives' rise to preeminence during the past eight years. First, when Bush was elected president, he appointed at least eight fellow Neoconservatives to important positions in this administration. It was at this juncture that Neoconservative political thought moved from the political fringe to the political spotlight (258). Second, 9/11 gave the Bush administration a new lease to use military force in Iraq. Targeting Afghanistan was symbolic to the preservation of moral clarity in the wake of the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks, and Iraq posed a similar possible threat to United States national security. Third, suspicions regarding WMDs in Iraq were announced, giving the administration further decree to take action. The one per cent doctrine cleared up any insecurities about the invasion; it stated that “even with a one percent chance of a grave threat materialzing, the US should treat that threat as a certainty and act to eliminate it” (261). One final “factor” related to the Neoconservatives' reign is that since the invasion of Iraq, they have seemingly abandoned the idea of reconstruction. They may push for forceful regime change, but they are not concerned with the idea of nation-building (262). This conflicts the Neoconservatives idea that the United States should be a benevolent arbitrator in such moral situations.
The problem with Neoconservatism is the idea of moral clarity. What is moral and in the eyes of whom? Neoconservatives maintain the United States should act as a benevelent hegemon to the world because it has the military reputation and power to do so. However, these core ideologies have been undermined by a failure to succeed in Iraq. Both internationally and domestically, there is a need for a new approach to United States foreign policy. The Bush administration's reign and the failure in Iraq is a crucial testament to the ineffectiveness of Neoconservatism in foreign policy.
Section 3
Book Review: Samantha Power's Chasing the Flame: One Man's Fight to Save the World
Chasing the Flame: One Man's Fight to Save the World by Samantha Power is the biography of Sergio Vieira de Mello, a diplomat and humanitarian whose contradictions and failures were rooted in the institution he so loyally served, the United Nations. Vieira de Mello, who climbed the UN food chain from assistant editor at the UN High Commissioner for Refugees in 1969 to Special Representative of the Secretary General in Iraq in 2003, embraced international law and the UN as elements of global justice. He insisted that the only way to bring about lasting global stability is to press countries to play by international UN rules (9). But while Vieria de Mello worked diligently to spread the UN's reach to those in need, the organization's internal contradictions consistently prevented flawless peacekeeping. Power's intention is to flush out these contradictions by telling about Vieira de Mello's experiences. Ironically, Vieria de Mello was killed in a suicide bombing attack on the UN headquarters in Baghdad in August 2003, marking the end of a personal evolution that tracked the UN's achievements and failures (xviii).
Power focuses particularly on the UN's mistakes which were exposed in the genocidal crisis of the mid-1990s. Time and time again, she cites instances where the UN's authority prevented, rather than maintained or created, peacekeeping. A general ethic of strict political neutrality ended up favoring aggressors like the Hutu extremists in Rwanda and the Serbs in Bosnia and Kosovo. In 1994, the UN mandated that soldiers in the area were not allowed to use their weapons, even in self-defense. This lead to Hutu militias massacring some 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutu (pg. xvi). In 1995, the UN discouraged the use of NATO air power to end the conflict in Bosnia, therefore prolonging the devastation on the ground. Eventually, the Croatian Army and NATO forces attacked the Serbs, and the ethnic cleansing of Bosnian men and boys was halted by the UN bombing of Serbia, proving that some conflicts cannot be solved without resort to power (xvi).
Power claims that Americans today have two principles: 1) Retreat from global engagement altogether. Or 2) Go abroad to stamp out threats in the hopes of achieving full security. By the end of the 1990s, Vieria de Mello had determined that the best route to world peace is a mixture of the two. He had also concluded, by this point, that the UN needed to shift from peacekeeping to peace enforcement as a part of a new global “responsibility to protect.” The 1990s provided foreign policy with some difficult lessons. Of most importance, hard power is sometimes needed to resolve political conflicts. Because, aside from the UN, we do not have international institutions to resolve such conflicts, the UN must be willing to take a hard line with international criminals.
While it is easy to lay blame on the UN for it's peacekeeping failures, we must realize that the nation-states behind the organization fail to supply it with adequate resources, attention and manpower. Today, as the world is watching the Iraq debacle unfold, the idea that strong countries like the US should use their power to defend human rights or promote democracy around the world has become widely debated. Now focused on an overmilitarized foreign policy, we tend to forget the lessons of the 1990s, that sometimes, hard power is necessary to resolve political conflicts. However, until we have a set of international institutions and legislation intact, this type of diplomacy cannot be effectively deployed. Power describes the UN's failures well through Vieira de Mello's biography, and she provides the substance for a healthy debate on the role of international institutions in foreign policy.
Works Cited
Foong Khong, Yuen. “Neoconservativism and the Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy: The Role of Ideas in Operation Iraqi Freedom.” Foreign Policy: Theories, Actors, Cases. Ed. Steve Smith, Amelia Hadfield, Tim Dunne. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2008. 252-265.
Kiersey, Nicholas. Ohio University-Chillicothe, Chillicothe, Ohio. March 2009.
Power, Samantha. Chasing the Flame: One Man's Fight to Save the World. New York: Penguin Books, 2008.
Schmidt, Brian C. “The Primacy of National Security.” Foreign Policy: Theories, Actors, Cases. Ed. Steve Smith, Amelia Hadfield, Tim Dunne. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2008. 162-164.
Approaches to National Security – Cold War to Present
During the Cold War, the realist school of international relations rose to prominence, guided by fears of nuclear weaponry and a fundamental responsibility to protect the nation-state from an external military attack. Since this era, however, the security of the nation-state has been redefined to encapsulate the personal security of the citizens residing within it. Brian C. Schmidt explains that there is a “mainstream understanding of national security as an armed defense of territory and core values from foreign threats,” but that this belief does not define which grand theory best preserves a state's national security (164). Even though mainstream America agrees that its core values should be defended by arms, the concepts of “core values” and “armed defense” are both subjective. Because national security is now conceptualized in terms of human security, the realist approach to international relations is no longer sufficient.
The highly subjective concept of “core values” is best conveyed through the Jacksonian approach to national security. Through this approach, America is viewed as a “folk community with a strong sense of common values and common destiny.” Its people respond to notions such as “honor, independence, courage and military pride,” and they are dedicated to the unified camaraderie associated with protecting the “homeland,” Christian principles, and gun ownership. Jacksonian ideals, however, were exploited after 9/11, as the event was interpreted by Jacksonians as a clear battle between good and evil, the civilized versus the uncivilized (Kiersey). The initial ideology that the United States had a right to retribution faded once evidence began surfacing indicating that the factors surrounding the conflict were not black and white, and that moral ambiguities were inevitable in such a climate. The United States invaded Iraq under the “mainstream understanding” that it was deploying armed defense to protect the nation's “core values.” However, this war is not being fought in the same climate as the Cold War. No nuclear weaponry was located in Iraq, and mainstream America's “core values” have been exploited for some other purpose. The Jacksonian approach to foreign policy, then, has been discredited because it has been abused. Walter Russell Mead, who identified the four various approaches to national security, claimed that “Jacksonian political philosophy is often an instinct rather than an ideology, a culturally shaped outlook that the individual may not have worked out intellectually, a set of beliefs and emotions rather than a set of ideas.” This is also evident in the Jacksonian disdain for intellectualism (Kiersey). Had Bush reacted more ideologically and less emotionally, the Iraq debacle may have been averted.
The second subjective issue with Schmidt's argument is that of “armed defense.” Each different grand theory offers a different interpretation of the limitations associated with “armed defense.” Does the “mainstream understanding” of national security allow for first-strike wars? It must not be forgotten that both security and threats to it are conceptualized differently by each individual. For example, the Jeffersonian approach to national security stresses caution in foreign affairs and prefers “the least costly and dangerous methods” of protecting the United States in the dangerous state of globalization (Kiersey). This approach would rather avoid possible conflicts with other nations before they begin. The Wilsonian approach, however, claims that it is the United States' responsibility to bring civilization to less developed parts of the world, and in doing so, we must interact with other nation-states. Under this ideology, the United States is not immune from military threats, therefore, they must attempt to create as many democracies as possible in the world, as democracies are more reliable partners in ascertaining world peace than are tyrannies (Kiersey). The fact that there are such varying opinions on how threats are perceived only further demonstrates the need for a clear definition of “armed defense” in relation to national security.
President Obama's approach to foreign policy is mostly Wilsonian, as he recognizes how necessary it is to engage with other nation-states in pursuit of common goals. Now that the country is deeply embedded in an economic crisis, Hamiltonian ideas are making their way into new policies. This approach to foreign policy stresses the importance of industry and commerce as a way of creating peace (Kiersey). Certainly the new administration is focused on rebuilding the world's faith in American commerce. A Wilsonian approach with a hint of Hamiltonianism is most feasible for national security preservation today. The realist approach to international relations, coupled with the Jacksonian approach to national security, has expired. These emotional responses, inevitably, do not protect the “core values” in relation to human security. More intellectual, resolute analyses must now be made about national security, and, today, the Wilsonian approach is more reasonable than the other three identified by Mead.
Section 2 – Question 2
Neoconservative Ideeologies Damaged United States Foreign Policy
During George W. Bush's presidency, Neoconservative ideologies hijacked a Jacksonian view of national security in the attempt to seek moral vengeance on a major foreign policy actor. This action has had an immensely negative effect on United States foreign policy, as it has damaged the administration both domestically and internationally. Foong Khong lists the administration's biggest international failures as: “The failure to find weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq, the US mistreatment of prisoners in Baghdad's Abu Ghraib prison, and the eruption of a vicious civil war in Iraq.” Domestically, “US casualties in the inconclusive Iraq war” have damaged the American public's opinion of the administration (252). Bush surrounded himself with a host of fellow Neoconservatives, whose ideologies guided the hand of the United States government for eight long years. The United States' new administrators, and subsequently the new foreign policy actors, have the responsibility to employ a new grand theory in order to restore dignity to foreign policy.
The origins of Neoconservatism were located by Irving Kristol “among the disillusioned liberal intellecutals of the 1970s” (qtd. 253). The liberals, he explained, were disillusioned due to sharp tilt to the left following the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War. This was when Jacksonian “core values” were questioned, and liberals began refusing to defend themselves regarding traditional values. Neoconservatives like Kristol found this separation from moral values to be dangerous to the political system (253).
Kristol and Robert Kagan classified Neoconservatives as “fervent anti-communists, emphasizing the ideological and moral superiority of democracy, while advocating the maintenance of a strong military” (qtd. 254). Neoconservatives will advocate bigger military budgets even in times of financial hardship just to preserve “prestige and power of the United States military” (254). More than $600 billion has been spent on the war in Iraq thanks to Neoconservative ideologies, however, the United States military is less prestigious than ever before. Both domestically and internationally, the military in Iraq is viewed as an extension of Neoconservativism.
Krisol and Kagan identified four major tenets of Neoconservative foreign policy thought. The first tenet is the Neoconservative desire for moral clarity in the international arena. Neoconservatives believe that “democratic leaders and liberal democracies are good; tyrants and tyrannical regimes are bad” (qtd. 256). Therefore, morality and the interests of the state should be joined with diplomacy, and the United States has a moral responsibility to act against foreign policy actors who threaten either the interests or the morals of the United States. Furthermore, Neoconservatives conclude that the United States, as a moral institution, has the right to pass judgment on foreign nations it considers immoral. The second tenet of Neoconservative ideology is that the United States should “preserve its military preeminence in the post-Cold War world,” capitalizing on a monopoly of power by acting as “a benevolent US hegemony (256). This also relates to the third tenet, which is that the United States “should leverage its military power” to pursue foreign policy goals. Neoconservatives are quick to employ the United States as a prominent international actor because of the fourth tenet, their skepticism about the ability of international law and institutions to bring about world peace (256-7). During Bush's presidency, all of these Neoconservative tenets were applied to foreign policy.
Foong Khong discusses the various enabling “factors” and “events” which lead to the Neoconservatives' rise to preeminence during the past eight years. First, when Bush was elected president, he appointed at least eight fellow Neoconservatives to important positions in this administration. It was at this juncture that Neoconservative political thought moved from the political fringe to the political spotlight (258). Second, 9/11 gave the Bush administration a new lease to use military force in Iraq. Targeting Afghanistan was symbolic to the preservation of moral clarity in the wake of the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks, and Iraq posed a similar possible threat to United States national security. Third, suspicions regarding WMDs in Iraq were announced, giving the administration further decree to take action. The one per cent doctrine cleared up any insecurities about the invasion; it stated that “even with a one percent chance of a grave threat materialzing, the US should treat that threat as a certainty and act to eliminate it” (261). One final “factor” related to the Neoconservatives' reign is that since the invasion of Iraq, they have seemingly abandoned the idea of reconstruction. They may push for forceful regime change, but they are not concerned with the idea of nation-building (262). This conflicts the Neoconservatives idea that the United States should be a benevolent arbitrator in such moral situations.
The problem with Neoconservatism is the idea of moral clarity. What is moral and in the eyes of whom? Neoconservatives maintain the United States should act as a benevelent hegemon to the world because it has the military reputation and power to do so. However, these core ideologies have been undermined by a failure to succeed in Iraq. Both internationally and domestically, there is a need for a new approach to United States foreign policy. The Bush administration's reign and the failure in Iraq is a crucial testament to the ineffectiveness of Neoconservatism in foreign policy.
Section 3
Book Review: Samantha Power's Chasing the Flame: One Man's Fight to Save the World
Chasing the Flame: One Man's Fight to Save the World by Samantha Power is the biography of Sergio Vieira de Mello, a diplomat and humanitarian whose contradictions and failures were rooted in the institution he so loyally served, the United Nations. Vieira de Mello, who climbed the UN food chain from assistant editor at the UN High Commissioner for Refugees in 1969 to Special Representative of the Secretary General in Iraq in 2003, embraced international law and the UN as elements of global justice. He insisted that the only way to bring about lasting global stability is to press countries to play by international UN rules (9). But while Vieria de Mello worked diligently to spread the UN's reach to those in need, the organization's internal contradictions consistently prevented flawless peacekeeping. Power's intention is to flush out these contradictions by telling about Vieira de Mello's experiences. Ironically, Vieria de Mello was killed in a suicide bombing attack on the UN headquarters in Baghdad in August 2003, marking the end of a personal evolution that tracked the UN's achievements and failures (xviii).
Power focuses particularly on the UN's mistakes which were exposed in the genocidal crisis of the mid-1990s. Time and time again, she cites instances where the UN's authority prevented, rather than maintained or created, peacekeeping. A general ethic of strict political neutrality ended up favoring aggressors like the Hutu extremists in Rwanda and the Serbs in Bosnia and Kosovo. In 1994, the UN mandated that soldiers in the area were not allowed to use their weapons, even in self-defense. This lead to Hutu militias massacring some 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutu (pg. xvi). In 1995, the UN discouraged the use of NATO air power to end the conflict in Bosnia, therefore prolonging the devastation on the ground. Eventually, the Croatian Army and NATO forces attacked the Serbs, and the ethnic cleansing of Bosnian men and boys was halted by the UN bombing of Serbia, proving that some conflicts cannot be solved without resort to power (xvi).
Power claims that Americans today have two principles: 1) Retreat from global engagement altogether. Or 2) Go abroad to stamp out threats in the hopes of achieving full security. By the end of the 1990s, Vieria de Mello had determined that the best route to world peace is a mixture of the two. He had also concluded, by this point, that the UN needed to shift from peacekeeping to peace enforcement as a part of a new global “responsibility to protect.” The 1990s provided foreign policy with some difficult lessons. Of most importance, hard power is sometimes needed to resolve political conflicts. Because, aside from the UN, we do not have international institutions to resolve such conflicts, the UN must be willing to take a hard line with international criminals.
While it is easy to lay blame on the UN for it's peacekeeping failures, we must realize that the nation-states behind the organization fail to supply it with adequate resources, attention and manpower. Today, as the world is watching the Iraq debacle unfold, the idea that strong countries like the US should use their power to defend human rights or promote democracy around the world has become widely debated. Now focused on an overmilitarized foreign policy, we tend to forget the lessons of the 1990s, that sometimes, hard power is necessary to resolve political conflicts. However, until we have a set of international institutions and legislation intact, this type of diplomacy cannot be effectively deployed. Power describes the UN's failures well through Vieira de Mello's biography, and she provides the substance for a healthy debate on the role of international institutions in foreign policy.
Works Cited
Foong Khong, Yuen. “Neoconservativism and the Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy: The Role of Ideas in Operation Iraqi Freedom.” Foreign Policy: Theories, Actors, Cases. Ed. Steve Smith, Amelia Hadfield, Tim Dunne. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2008. 252-265.
Kiersey, Nicholas. Ohio University-Chillicothe, Chillicothe, Ohio. March 2009.
Power, Samantha. Chasing the Flame: One Man's Fight to Save the World. New York: Penguin Books, 2008.
Schmidt, Brian C. “The Primacy of National Security.” Foreign Policy: Theories, Actors, Cases. Ed. Steve Smith, Amelia Hadfield, Tim Dunne. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2008. 162-164.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
"Through Deaf Eyes" Movie Review
"Through Deaf Eyes" is a two-hour PBS documentary that details approximately 200 years of Deaf culture in America. In this expose, Deaf individuals give their first-person accounts of how deafness has affected each of them. Six documentaries, produced by Deaf artists and filmmakers, are also featured during the film. My favorite part of viewing Through Deaf Eyes was getting to see so many native signers using American Sign Language. I am now at the half-way mark in the Deaf Studies and Interpreting program, which I am taking to fulfill a foreign language requirement, and watching and interacting with Deaf individuals is the best thing for me at this point in time. It was encouraging to pick up on so many signs that the individuals portrayed in the film used. I took my midterm after watching this film, and I actually think it helped me!
I have to say, also, that this documentary helped me reevaluate my opinions. For a while now, or as long as I've been studying DSI, I've ridden the fence when it comes to the oralism/cochlear implant debate. I've always had an appreciation for those individuals who chose to learn to communicate with the hearing world. It must take great strength and patience to do so. Those who chose to learn oral methods may also be asked to avoid the use of sign language, and that's a huge investment. After seeing the first-hand accounts this film offered, I am much more inclined to express my opposition to oralism. For the Deaf, the ability to use sign language will always prevail in the battle to achieve clear communication. It's a no-brainer. Why would we want to deter people from using sign language if it really, truly will help them communicate? Whether a Deaf individual chooses to lipread or speak or obtain a cochlear implant, sign language is a necessary tool. In the film, Kristen Harmon explained why she chooses not to use her voice. “They assume that I can hear them. And that’s the problem with speaking,” she said. “It’s a two-way communication. That’s why I don’t. I don’t want people to assume that I can hear them because I can’t. It’s much easier just to turn off my voice.” She spoke about how hard she had been working, going to school as an oralist. Eventually, she realized sign language was her language, and that it was easier and more satisfying to stick to what came natural.
I really enjoyed the comedic elements of the film. I suppose, however, these same elements may not have been so comedic for Deaf people in the past. I liked the scene with Robert Panara, who explained how his father tried everything from airplane rides to taking him to meet Babe Ruth to “shock” his hearing back into him. Next, Jack Gannon talks about how his aunt took him to a revival to cure his deafness. Of course, the religious healing didn't work, either; they said he didn't have enough faith to be cured. It amazes me that people could be so ignorant that they thought these things might help. Then again, people today are still confused about what causes deafness and how to cope with and/or cure it. I mean, we're offering cochlear implants to people when there's only a 50/50 chance the highly expensive procedure will even work. It angers me that after 200 years, we haven't found a better solution. Or if there's no solution to be found, that we haven't learned to accept deafness as a very manageable condition. We should be beyond bickering about whether ASL is a language or not, and hearing people should be better educated in Deaf Culture. While I know progress has been made in the past 200 years, there is no excuse for the injustices that continue against the Deaf still today.
Marlie Matlin's contribution to the documentary was nice, because I've always liked her (If you haven't seen What the Bleep Do We Know? you should be ashamed of yourself!). I wasn't aware of the situation she encountered the year after she won the Oscar. She attended the ceremony and was presenting the nominees for Best Actor when she chose to speak the list of names rather than signing them. Deaf people everywhere were outraged! And now I'm outraged! Yes, she was a “pioneer” for the Deaf, like Mark Morales noted in the film, but why did that all go out the window the second she chose to use her voice? This woman worked hard to get to where she did, and she should have the opportunity to communicate with others however she chooses. That's what we all need to remember: Deafness is a very personal condition, and no one but that individual has the right to decide what is best for him or her. Whether a Deaf individual chooses to use sign language only, or to obtain a cochlear implant and utilize oral methods, or to use a combination of both, it is their choice, plain and simple.
I have to say, also, that this documentary helped me reevaluate my opinions. For a while now, or as long as I've been studying DSI, I've ridden the fence when it comes to the oralism/cochlear implant debate. I've always had an appreciation for those individuals who chose to learn to communicate with the hearing world. It must take great strength and patience to do so. Those who chose to learn oral methods may also be asked to avoid the use of sign language, and that's a huge investment. After seeing the first-hand accounts this film offered, I am much more inclined to express my opposition to oralism. For the Deaf, the ability to use sign language will always prevail in the battle to achieve clear communication. It's a no-brainer. Why would we want to deter people from using sign language if it really, truly will help them communicate? Whether a Deaf individual chooses to lipread or speak or obtain a cochlear implant, sign language is a necessary tool. In the film, Kristen Harmon explained why she chooses not to use her voice. “They assume that I can hear them. And that’s the problem with speaking,” she said. “It’s a two-way communication. That’s why I don’t. I don’t want people to assume that I can hear them because I can’t. It’s much easier just to turn off my voice.” She spoke about how hard she had been working, going to school as an oralist. Eventually, she realized sign language was her language, and that it was easier and more satisfying to stick to what came natural.
I really enjoyed the comedic elements of the film. I suppose, however, these same elements may not have been so comedic for Deaf people in the past. I liked the scene with Robert Panara, who explained how his father tried everything from airplane rides to taking him to meet Babe Ruth to “shock” his hearing back into him. Next, Jack Gannon talks about how his aunt took him to a revival to cure his deafness. Of course, the religious healing didn't work, either; they said he didn't have enough faith to be cured. It amazes me that people could be so ignorant that they thought these things might help. Then again, people today are still confused about what causes deafness and how to cope with and/or cure it. I mean, we're offering cochlear implants to people when there's only a 50/50 chance the highly expensive procedure will even work. It angers me that after 200 years, we haven't found a better solution. Or if there's no solution to be found, that we haven't learned to accept deafness as a very manageable condition. We should be beyond bickering about whether ASL is a language or not, and hearing people should be better educated in Deaf Culture. While I know progress has been made in the past 200 years, there is no excuse for the injustices that continue against the Deaf still today.
Marlie Matlin's contribution to the documentary was nice, because I've always liked her (If you haven't seen What the Bleep Do We Know? you should be ashamed of yourself!). I wasn't aware of the situation she encountered the year after she won the Oscar. She attended the ceremony and was presenting the nominees for Best Actor when she chose to speak the list of names rather than signing them. Deaf people everywhere were outraged! And now I'm outraged! Yes, she was a “pioneer” for the Deaf, like Mark Morales noted in the film, but why did that all go out the window the second she chose to use her voice? This woman worked hard to get to where she did, and she should have the opportunity to communicate with others however she chooses. That's what we all need to remember: Deafness is a very personal condition, and no one but that individual has the right to decide what is best for him or her. Whether a Deaf individual chooses to use sign language only, or to obtain a cochlear implant and utilize oral methods, or to use a combination of both, it is their choice, plain and simple.
"Sound and Fury" Movie Review
Deaf people face the inability to communicate with the world on a daily basis. Technology has allowed for many tools to make common interaction less difficult for these individuals. But, still, a communication barrier exists. Now, there is technology available which lends the possibility of making a deaf person capable of hearing. No matter how promising this device sounds, deaf people and the families of deaf children face many challenges in deciding if an implant is right for them. With this new hope of hearing comes the fear of failure and the possibility of being cast out of and judged by the Deaf community. Embracing this new technology isn't simple when an individual must fear losing their cultural identity and the support of others like them.
Sound and Fury is a Public Broadcasting Service documentary that follows two families on their quest for knowledge regarding cochlear implants. Heather Artinian, an intelligent and vibrant 6-year-old, asks her parents Peter and Nina for a cochlear implant. A deaf child, she wants to be able to communicate with the hearing world. Her frustrations trying to speak to her hearing friends, along with the desire to hear noises like a baby crying and cars crashing, provoke her to ask her parents about this technology. By the end of the film, Peter and Nina, who are both deaf as well, decide that a cochlear implant is not the best idea for their daughter. Instead, they relocate to Frederick, Maryland, a town with a high population of deaf people, where they feel they and their daughter will fit in and feel more comfortable.
The film also follows Peter's brother's family as they decide if a cochlear implant is a good decision for their 1 1/2-year-old son, also named Peter. Chris and Mari Artinian, both hearing, were devastated when they found out one of their twin boys was deaf. Now, it is their primary goal to give their son the best opportunity available to be a part of both the Deaf and hearing world. They decide that now is the time to give Peter the implant, before his language skills begin developing. At the film's end, Peter undergoes surgery to obtain the implant, and we see him at his first pathology appointment. The baby responds to sounds, and we see that the implant was a success.
Extended family plays a major role in this situation. This is a deaf family, with many deaf family members. Nancy and Michael Mancini, Mari's parents, are both deaf and are very opposed to Peter's cochlear implant. Nancy expresses her fear that Peter will only grow up hearing, that he won't be able to communicate with her, and that he'll lose his cultural identity.
The elder Peter's parents, Marianne and Peter Artinian, have a very different view regarding cochlear implants. However, they are both hearing. Marianne says that the cochlear implant is the “greatest miracle in medical science,” and that “we are on the brink of a revolution for those who cannot hear.” They tried their best to encourage Peter and Nina to let Heather have an implant. However, because Peter insists that his hearing mother couldn't possibly know what a deaf person goes through, he failed to take her advice.
Both sides of the coin have many valid points. I understand how the Deaf community can be harsh, turning on its members who chose cochlear implants to be a part of the hearing world. Many times, when cochlear implants are given to a child, the child's only option is to attend a school where oralism is encouraged. This definitely does detract from the deaf cultural norm of using sign language as a primary form of communication. It would be terribly difficult to no longer belong to the Deaf community, but to still not be entirely accepted in the hearing world, either. In the film, there is a scene when Mari tells people at a Deaf picnic of her choice to implant her son. They are outraged, telling her he'll never be accepted by their community. In that very scene, her own mother calls her a “lousy daughter” based on her decision to let her son hear. But the good must be taken with the bad. Someone who makes a decision to embrace the cochlear implant is also making the decision to face adversity from their own peers. Not to mention the risk factors involved with the surgery and the possibility that there is no residual hearing left to stimulate.
On the flip side, I think Marianne has a point. Technology isn't going anywhere. As long as there is this phenomenal advancement available that poses the possibility of hearing for a deaf person, people will embrace cochlear implants. Nancy says that deaf people with implants are no better than robots, but I've seen robots do some pretty cool things. That's not necessarily all that bad, in my book. I understand the operation is risky, at best, but I think it's a nice option for families dealing with deafness and finding it difficult to fit into the Deaf world. I was impressed that such a bright, young girl would ask her parents for a cochlear implant. Although I understand their reasons, I was a little discouraged that Peter and Nina simply decided against it. And instead of finding other ways for Heather to communicate with the hearing world, they pulled her out of it and moved her to a community where she'd be immersed in Deaf culture. I'm not sure it was the best move for her, but it seemed to be the best move for them. Yes, now she'll fit in more. She'll communicate more easily with her friends, because, they, too, are deaf and sign. However, her parents have closed the door on the hearing world, and she won't be a part of it until she's old enough to do so on her own. At one point, Peter even said he didn't care about the hearing world, to forget about them. This is a very closed-minded notion when he has a daughter who wants to be a part of everything.
This is what I fear the most. I long to see a world where the hearing and the Deaf can interact freely. I'm one small voice fighting for Deaf rights. There are many like me, I know. But our work is for naught if the Deaf community keeps closing the door on us. It seems as thought they want to be outcasts, but they also like to complain about it. I know this is not typical of all deaf people, but this film definitely conveyed the prejudices toward the hearing world that are felt by many in the Deaf community. I can only hope that technology continues to advance, and that someday, cochlear implants will be a safe and reliable option for those who choose to utilize it. But, I definitely appreciate the choice to steer clear of them and to embrace one's own very special Deaf identity as well.
Sound and Fury is a Public Broadcasting Service documentary that follows two families on their quest for knowledge regarding cochlear implants. Heather Artinian, an intelligent and vibrant 6-year-old, asks her parents Peter and Nina for a cochlear implant. A deaf child, she wants to be able to communicate with the hearing world. Her frustrations trying to speak to her hearing friends, along with the desire to hear noises like a baby crying and cars crashing, provoke her to ask her parents about this technology. By the end of the film, Peter and Nina, who are both deaf as well, decide that a cochlear implant is not the best idea for their daughter. Instead, they relocate to Frederick, Maryland, a town with a high population of deaf people, where they feel they and their daughter will fit in and feel more comfortable.
The film also follows Peter's brother's family as they decide if a cochlear implant is a good decision for their 1 1/2-year-old son, also named Peter. Chris and Mari Artinian, both hearing, were devastated when they found out one of their twin boys was deaf. Now, it is their primary goal to give their son the best opportunity available to be a part of both the Deaf and hearing world. They decide that now is the time to give Peter the implant, before his language skills begin developing. At the film's end, Peter undergoes surgery to obtain the implant, and we see him at his first pathology appointment. The baby responds to sounds, and we see that the implant was a success.
Extended family plays a major role in this situation. This is a deaf family, with many deaf family members. Nancy and Michael Mancini, Mari's parents, are both deaf and are very opposed to Peter's cochlear implant. Nancy expresses her fear that Peter will only grow up hearing, that he won't be able to communicate with her, and that he'll lose his cultural identity.
The elder Peter's parents, Marianne and Peter Artinian, have a very different view regarding cochlear implants. However, they are both hearing. Marianne says that the cochlear implant is the “greatest miracle in medical science,” and that “we are on the brink of a revolution for those who cannot hear.” They tried their best to encourage Peter and Nina to let Heather have an implant. However, because Peter insists that his hearing mother couldn't possibly know what a deaf person goes through, he failed to take her advice.
Both sides of the coin have many valid points. I understand how the Deaf community can be harsh, turning on its members who chose cochlear implants to be a part of the hearing world. Many times, when cochlear implants are given to a child, the child's only option is to attend a school where oralism is encouraged. This definitely does detract from the deaf cultural norm of using sign language as a primary form of communication. It would be terribly difficult to no longer belong to the Deaf community, but to still not be entirely accepted in the hearing world, either. In the film, there is a scene when Mari tells people at a Deaf picnic of her choice to implant her son. They are outraged, telling her he'll never be accepted by their community. In that very scene, her own mother calls her a “lousy daughter” based on her decision to let her son hear. But the good must be taken with the bad. Someone who makes a decision to embrace the cochlear implant is also making the decision to face adversity from their own peers. Not to mention the risk factors involved with the surgery and the possibility that there is no residual hearing left to stimulate.
On the flip side, I think Marianne has a point. Technology isn't going anywhere. As long as there is this phenomenal advancement available that poses the possibility of hearing for a deaf person, people will embrace cochlear implants. Nancy says that deaf people with implants are no better than robots, but I've seen robots do some pretty cool things. That's not necessarily all that bad, in my book. I understand the operation is risky, at best, but I think it's a nice option for families dealing with deafness and finding it difficult to fit into the Deaf world. I was impressed that such a bright, young girl would ask her parents for a cochlear implant. Although I understand their reasons, I was a little discouraged that Peter and Nina simply decided against it. And instead of finding other ways for Heather to communicate with the hearing world, they pulled her out of it and moved her to a community where she'd be immersed in Deaf culture. I'm not sure it was the best move for her, but it seemed to be the best move for them. Yes, now she'll fit in more. She'll communicate more easily with her friends, because, they, too, are deaf and sign. However, her parents have closed the door on the hearing world, and she won't be a part of it until she's old enough to do so on her own. At one point, Peter even said he didn't care about the hearing world, to forget about them. This is a very closed-minded notion when he has a daughter who wants to be a part of everything.
This is what I fear the most. I long to see a world where the hearing and the Deaf can interact freely. I'm one small voice fighting for Deaf rights. There are many like me, I know. But our work is for naught if the Deaf community keeps closing the door on us. It seems as thought they want to be outcasts, but they also like to complain about it. I know this is not typical of all deaf people, but this film definitely conveyed the prejudices toward the hearing world that are felt by many in the Deaf community. I can only hope that technology continues to advance, and that someday, cochlear implants will be a safe and reliable option for those who choose to utilize it. But, I definitely appreciate the choice to steer clear of them and to embrace one's own very special Deaf identity as well.
Obama vs. McCain on Foreign Policy
As long as I've been involved in politics, I've held a strong isolationist view regarding foreign policy. Why should we be the world's police? Here in America, at home, we have enough problems to worry about: a broken educational system, a crippling health care industry, and an embarrassing divide between the rich and the poor. Wars have always seemed foolish to me, especially when we aren't being threatened directly. I never understood Vietnam and I still don't understand Iraq. I always praised Bill Clinton for his ability to sit down with world leaders and draw up treaties. I don't think I've seen George W. Bush do that once in his eight long, miserable years as president. His internationalism has made him a bully – doing what he wants when he wants to, with disregard for the opinions of his fellow world leaders.
Therefore, when this election season came about, I was excited to hear all the candidates – particularly the Democrat candidates – had to offer regarding the war in Iraq and our involvement in other nations' problems. I declared my position as a Democrat when I turned 18 and started voting. It was at that point-in-time that I realized a little bit about how the world works, and I discovered that conservatives enjoy war more than liberals. I found that conservatives get their leg up on society by practicing war and by bullying others into a corner to get what they want. Liberals, on the other hand, tend to look out for the best interest of everyone involved, for the most part (I'm not saying there aren't bad Democrats.), and are more cautious about decisions affecting millions of lives. They are more willing to reach an agreement regarding any given situation. The Republicans call it weak; I call it smart. Who wants to be a bully, anyway?
My views regarding foreign policy changed somewhat, though, once I enrolled in Political Science 103. Never before had I seen foreign policy through the Mackin lens – a very clear, honest depiction of what is really going on in the world. The picture was painted nicely for me. Our forefathers set the stage for Manifest Destiny, creating the base of a nation powerful enough to rule the world. By doing that, it has been necessary to be visible worldwide. We've made ourselves visible worldwide by positioning our military forces where necessary – currently in about 100 countries. These forces work maritime magic, making trade possible, protecting weak borders, and keeping an eye on instabilities that might soon be a threat to the homeland. Never before did I have such an appreciation for our military. Now that I understand their purpose a little better, I have great pride in our military, and am grateful for their duties abroad, even if I still think we could reduce our military involvement in certain areas of the world.
Regarding Iraq, I have been itching for a candidate to come along and promise to withdraw our troops immediately. Americans are still unsure of exactly why we are there. It has something to do with oil, something to do with vengeance, and next-to-nothing to do with counter-terrorism. For heaven's sake, it was our Central Intelligence Agency that taught these terrorists the most effective ways to blow us up. I don't buy it. Then, a miracle happened. A man named Barack Obama came along, making his bid for the Presidency. He offers a fresh, new outlook on politics, promising to clean up Washington, eliminating power-hunger and the bullying tactics the conservatives have offered for so long. He also promises to end the War in Iraq, beginning with almost immediate troop withdrawals if he is elected. This is my one problem with Obama, whom I support very strongly. Obama will not bring all of our troops home immediately. With Iran already threatening both Iraq and the United States, we cannot pull out of this conflict without creating a worse situation. If we leave Iraq in a weakened state, Iran will invade, and we will be right back to square one, but in a much deeper situation. Then, thanks to the nuclear weaponry Vice President Dick Cheney and Haliburton set them up with, we will be an obvious target for Iran. Obama says if the problem in Iraq escalates once we begin withdrawing troops, we'll just send them back in. This might work, but like Mackin says, you can't move these people around like chess pieces on a board. It's dangerous and irresponsible. Still, I want to see us out of Iraq, but I don't think even Obama can do that just yet. It's going to take time, no matter what. I think, however, that Obama can regain the trust and support of fellow countries, which, I think, is the first step to winning any conflict.
In the remainder of this essay, I will outline the foreign policy views of both Obama and his Republican opponent, John McCain. The majority of this information comes directly from each candidate's Web site.
Barack Obama on Foreign Policy
“When I am this party's nominee, my opponent will not be able to say that I voted for the war in Iraq; or that I gave George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran; or that I supported Bush-Cheney policies of not talking to leaders that we don't like. And he will not be able to say that I wavered on something as fundamental as whether or not it is ok for America to torture — because it is never ok… I will end the war in Iraq… I will close Guantanamo. I will restore habeas corpus. I will finish the fight against Al Qaeda. And I will lead the world to combat the common threats of the 21st century: nuclear weapons and terrorism; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease. And I will send once more a message to those yearning faces beyond our shores that says, "You matter to us. Your future is our future. And our moment is now.”
Obama plans to end the war in Iraq with immediate troop withdrawal, bringing home one to two combat brigades each month, with all troops removed within sixteen months. He vows to build no permanent bases in Iraq, but will maintain some troops to protect our embassy and diplomats. The next step is to “press Iraq's leaders to take responsibility for their future ... to make it clear that we are leaving.” This part of the plan requires assistance from the United Nations to discuss issues like federalism and oil revenue-sharing. The remainder of this agenda involves working with Iraq's surrounding nations to build strong borders and safe havens for Iraqi refugees. As far as Iran goes, Obama wants to sit down and talk with its leaders, a move the Bush administration has failed to attempt.
Obama also promises to crack down on the proliferation of nuclear weapons. He wants to secure all loose nuclear materials throughout the world within four years, negotiate a verifiable ban on the production of new nuclear weapons, and take steps to create a world free of nuclear weapons altogether.
Obama also plans to aid foreign involvement by strengthening our military, adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines. He vows to give our troops new equipment, armor, training, and skills like language training.
Obama's Web site states, “Under the Bush administration, foreign policy has been used as a political wedge issue to divide us – not as a cause to bring America together. And it is no coincidence that one of the most secretive administrations in history has pursued policies that have been disastrous for the American people. Obama strongly believes that our foreign policy is stronger when Americans are united, and the government is open and candid with the American people.”
John McCain on Foreign Policy
“I know the pain war causes. I understand the frustration caused by our mistakes in this war. And I regret sincerely the additional sacrifices imposed on the brave Americans who defend us. But I also know the toll a lost war takes on an army and on our country's security. By giving General Petraeus and the men and women he has the honor to command the time and support necessary to succeed in Iraq we have before us a hard road. But it is the right road. It is necessary and just. Those who disregard the unmistakable progress we have made in the last year and the terrible consequences that would ensue were we to abandon our responsibilities in Iraq have chosen another road. It may appear to be the easier course of action, but it is a much more reckless one, and it does them no credit even if it gives them an advantage in the next election.”
McCain is clearly a military man, from military roots, and thinks that a strong military is the only way to international freedom. He says that to protect our homeland, our interests and our values, America must have the best-manned, best-equipped, and best-supported military in the world. He says that we should respond to any crisis that endangers American security militarily, and in doing so, we will prevail in any conflict we are forced to fight.
McCain is focused on fighting terrorism. He plans to do this, if elected, through quality intelligence, which he says will be used to uncover plots before they take root. He says this can be done without infringing on the rights of American citizens, and that restricting the freedoms for which our nation stands would give terrorists the victory they seek. However, with documents such as the Patriot Act, our rights are being taken away one by one. I feel that these “freedoms” are being taken away, contrary to what McCain seems to believe.
McCain also promises smarter defense spending, claiming the need to reform our defense acquisition process to ensure that taxpayers' dollars are actually spent on U.S. security rather than parochial interests. He says that military funds should be appropriated regularly, not by “emergency” supplementals that makes Congressional pork-barrel spending possible. Regarding Iraq, McCain says that the answer is not unconditional dialogues from a “position of weakness.” He says real pressure must be applied on Iran in order for it to change its behavior. Again, he insists on doing this with military posture.
In the end, I will vote for Barack Obama. While I have a greater appreciation for our military now, I still don't think forceful actions solve everything. I would like my President to exhaust every possibility necessary without going to war, and I believe Obama will do that. McCain, however, is a close second to Bush, and I'm ready to wave his administration and policies out the door. I won't be voting for four more years of the same tactics the conservatives have offered for the past eight. I honestly do understand that McCain has more military experience and that he may understand foreign policy better than Obama. However, I'm ready for a total change, and I have to hope that Obama will surround himself with leaders just as intelligent on the subject as McCain. I like Obama's approach, and to be honest, I'd take anything over the Republican school of thought in America today.
References
Associated Press. (2008, May 16.) Obama calls McCain foreign policy 'naïve.'
Barack Obama's Web site. Barack Obama's plan to secure America and restore our standing.
John McCain's Web site. National Security: A Strong Military in a Dangerous World.
John McCain's Web site. Strategy for Victory in Iraq.
Renewing American Leadership. (2007, July/August). Foreign Affairs.
Therefore, when this election season came about, I was excited to hear all the candidates – particularly the Democrat candidates – had to offer regarding the war in Iraq and our involvement in other nations' problems. I declared my position as a Democrat when I turned 18 and started voting. It was at that point-in-time that I realized a little bit about how the world works, and I discovered that conservatives enjoy war more than liberals. I found that conservatives get their leg up on society by practicing war and by bullying others into a corner to get what they want. Liberals, on the other hand, tend to look out for the best interest of everyone involved, for the most part (I'm not saying there aren't bad Democrats.), and are more cautious about decisions affecting millions of lives. They are more willing to reach an agreement regarding any given situation. The Republicans call it weak; I call it smart. Who wants to be a bully, anyway?
My views regarding foreign policy changed somewhat, though, once I enrolled in Political Science 103. Never before had I seen foreign policy through the Mackin lens – a very clear, honest depiction of what is really going on in the world. The picture was painted nicely for me. Our forefathers set the stage for Manifest Destiny, creating the base of a nation powerful enough to rule the world. By doing that, it has been necessary to be visible worldwide. We've made ourselves visible worldwide by positioning our military forces where necessary – currently in about 100 countries. These forces work maritime magic, making trade possible, protecting weak borders, and keeping an eye on instabilities that might soon be a threat to the homeland. Never before did I have such an appreciation for our military. Now that I understand their purpose a little better, I have great pride in our military, and am grateful for their duties abroad, even if I still think we could reduce our military involvement in certain areas of the world.
Regarding Iraq, I have been itching for a candidate to come along and promise to withdraw our troops immediately. Americans are still unsure of exactly why we are there. It has something to do with oil, something to do with vengeance, and next-to-nothing to do with counter-terrorism. For heaven's sake, it was our Central Intelligence Agency that taught these terrorists the most effective ways to blow us up. I don't buy it. Then, a miracle happened. A man named Barack Obama came along, making his bid for the Presidency. He offers a fresh, new outlook on politics, promising to clean up Washington, eliminating power-hunger and the bullying tactics the conservatives have offered for so long. He also promises to end the War in Iraq, beginning with almost immediate troop withdrawals if he is elected. This is my one problem with Obama, whom I support very strongly. Obama will not bring all of our troops home immediately. With Iran already threatening both Iraq and the United States, we cannot pull out of this conflict without creating a worse situation. If we leave Iraq in a weakened state, Iran will invade, and we will be right back to square one, but in a much deeper situation. Then, thanks to the nuclear weaponry Vice President Dick Cheney and Haliburton set them up with, we will be an obvious target for Iran. Obama says if the problem in Iraq escalates once we begin withdrawing troops, we'll just send them back in. This might work, but like Mackin says, you can't move these people around like chess pieces on a board. It's dangerous and irresponsible. Still, I want to see us out of Iraq, but I don't think even Obama can do that just yet. It's going to take time, no matter what. I think, however, that Obama can regain the trust and support of fellow countries, which, I think, is the first step to winning any conflict.
In the remainder of this essay, I will outline the foreign policy views of both Obama and his Republican opponent, John McCain. The majority of this information comes directly from each candidate's Web site.
Barack Obama on Foreign Policy
“When I am this party's nominee, my opponent will not be able to say that I voted for the war in Iraq; or that I gave George Bush the benefit of the doubt on Iran; or that I supported Bush-Cheney policies of not talking to leaders that we don't like. And he will not be able to say that I wavered on something as fundamental as whether or not it is ok for America to torture — because it is never ok… I will end the war in Iraq… I will close Guantanamo. I will restore habeas corpus. I will finish the fight against Al Qaeda. And I will lead the world to combat the common threats of the 21st century: nuclear weapons and terrorism; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease. And I will send once more a message to those yearning faces beyond our shores that says, "You matter to us. Your future is our future. And our moment is now.”
Obama plans to end the war in Iraq with immediate troop withdrawal, bringing home one to two combat brigades each month, with all troops removed within sixteen months. He vows to build no permanent bases in Iraq, but will maintain some troops to protect our embassy and diplomats. The next step is to “press Iraq's leaders to take responsibility for their future ... to make it clear that we are leaving.” This part of the plan requires assistance from the United Nations to discuss issues like federalism and oil revenue-sharing. The remainder of this agenda involves working with Iraq's surrounding nations to build strong borders and safe havens for Iraqi refugees. As far as Iran goes, Obama wants to sit down and talk with its leaders, a move the Bush administration has failed to attempt.
Obama also promises to crack down on the proliferation of nuclear weapons. He wants to secure all loose nuclear materials throughout the world within four years, negotiate a verifiable ban on the production of new nuclear weapons, and take steps to create a world free of nuclear weapons altogether.
Obama also plans to aid foreign involvement by strengthening our military, adding 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines. He vows to give our troops new equipment, armor, training, and skills like language training.
Obama's Web site states, “Under the Bush administration, foreign policy has been used as a political wedge issue to divide us – not as a cause to bring America together. And it is no coincidence that one of the most secretive administrations in history has pursued policies that have been disastrous for the American people. Obama strongly believes that our foreign policy is stronger when Americans are united, and the government is open and candid with the American people.”
John McCain on Foreign Policy
“I know the pain war causes. I understand the frustration caused by our mistakes in this war. And I regret sincerely the additional sacrifices imposed on the brave Americans who defend us. But I also know the toll a lost war takes on an army and on our country's security. By giving General Petraeus and the men and women he has the honor to command the time and support necessary to succeed in Iraq we have before us a hard road. But it is the right road. It is necessary and just. Those who disregard the unmistakable progress we have made in the last year and the terrible consequences that would ensue were we to abandon our responsibilities in Iraq have chosen another road. It may appear to be the easier course of action, but it is a much more reckless one, and it does them no credit even if it gives them an advantage in the next election.”
McCain is clearly a military man, from military roots, and thinks that a strong military is the only way to international freedom. He says that to protect our homeland, our interests and our values, America must have the best-manned, best-equipped, and best-supported military in the world. He says that we should respond to any crisis that endangers American security militarily, and in doing so, we will prevail in any conflict we are forced to fight.
McCain is focused on fighting terrorism. He plans to do this, if elected, through quality intelligence, which he says will be used to uncover plots before they take root. He says this can be done without infringing on the rights of American citizens, and that restricting the freedoms for which our nation stands would give terrorists the victory they seek. However, with documents such as the Patriot Act, our rights are being taken away one by one. I feel that these “freedoms” are being taken away, contrary to what McCain seems to believe.
McCain also promises smarter defense spending, claiming the need to reform our defense acquisition process to ensure that taxpayers' dollars are actually spent on U.S. security rather than parochial interests. He says that military funds should be appropriated regularly, not by “emergency” supplementals that makes Congressional pork-barrel spending possible. Regarding Iraq, McCain says that the answer is not unconditional dialogues from a “position of weakness.” He says real pressure must be applied on Iran in order for it to change its behavior. Again, he insists on doing this with military posture.
In the end, I will vote for Barack Obama. While I have a greater appreciation for our military now, I still don't think forceful actions solve everything. I would like my President to exhaust every possibility necessary without going to war, and I believe Obama will do that. McCain, however, is a close second to Bush, and I'm ready to wave his administration and policies out the door. I won't be voting for four more years of the same tactics the conservatives have offered for the past eight. I honestly do understand that McCain has more military experience and that he may understand foreign policy better than Obama. However, I'm ready for a total change, and I have to hope that Obama will surround himself with leaders just as intelligent on the subject as McCain. I like Obama's approach, and to be honest, I'd take anything over the Republican school of thought in America today.
References
Associated Press. (2008, May 16.) Obama calls McCain foreign policy 'naïve.'
Barack Obama's Web site. Barack Obama's plan to secure America and restore our standing.
John McCain's Web site. National Security: A Strong Military in a Dangerous World.
John McCain's Web site. Strategy for Victory in Iraq.
Renewing American Leadership. (2007, July/August). Foreign Affairs.
Book Log: "Hole in My Life" by Jack Gantos
Part A: Book Summary
Hole in My Life by Jack Gantos
Non-Fiction Book
Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2004, 200pgs., $16.00
ISBN 978-0374430894
Best known as the author of the Joey Pigza, Jack Henry, and Rotten Ralph children's series, Jack Gantos explores much more grown-up themes in Hole In My Life, a personal memoir of the author's incarceration as a young adult. The book explores mature subject matter and should be reserved for more sophisticated young readers. In particular, there are two violent sex scenes in the novel, and drug content is a major premise. Parents should be included in the decision to assign this book.
At the age of 20, Gantos could only be labeled an “aspiring” writer. He wrote all the time, but nothing significant. He had no method for arranging his thoughts, and a recent affection for a bowl of hashish had lead to severe procrastination. Stuck in a vicious cycle of smoking hash and dope, drinking too much alcohol, and writing whatever flowed out of the newly opened doors of perception, Gantos realized he had to get it together. Someone once said, “Do what you know,” and Gantos knew drugs. He decided to try his hand at the profit-making side of the business, and struck up a deal to smuggle 2,000 pounds of hash from St. Croix to New York. St. Croix is located in the Virgin Islands, where the drug is legal. Gantos thought his cut of $10,000 would be a nice down payment on a college education, and didn't see any harm nor fowl in the deed.
While on the journey, Gantos detailed the trip in the ship's log. He saw it as a nice way to relax. He had no idea his beloved pastime would land him in prison. Shortly after reaching the north eastern coast, Gantos was arrested for his role in the drug deal. In court, he pleaded guilty and hoped for probation, but the ship's log, which had been recovered during a search of the vessel, revealed Gantos' confession.
In prison, Gantos witnessed unimaginable acts of inhumanity. On his first day, he was faced with either helping a young man who'd just been gang raped in the bathroom or leaving him behind for personal fear of becoming the next target. “It was just twenty-four hours since I had been sentenced and I knew I was in way over my head,” he wrote. (Pg. 153) During his stay in prison, Gantos worked as an x-ray technician and was exposed to many acts of prison violence, as he worked to identify and heal inmates who had been involved in brawls and other incidents.
In his spare time, Gantos recorded his daily events between the lines of a copy of The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky. He soon gained a new lease on life, even refraining from drug use in prison. He longed to get back to the real world, to try again. He wanted to go to college more than anything, so he hatched an escape plan. Gantos' escape plan, however, was based on intellect, and this time, he didn't fail. With the help of his caseworkers, Mr. Wilcox and Mr. Bow, Gantos applied for college and was accepted, and then he drafted a letter to the parole board asking them to grant his parole so that he may attend. Fifteen months after entering the penitentiary, he was released.
After leaving prison, Gantos moved to New York, got a job and an education, and eventually, became a very successful author. “The mistakes I made, the pain I endured, the time I wasted were now the smallest part of me,” Gantos wrote in the book's concluding statements. (Pg. 199) “And I'm out in the open doing what I have always wanted to do. Write.” (Pg. 200)
Three quotes:
“He had helped to sail a boatload of hashish from the Virgin Islands to New York City, where he used a shopping cart to make the deliveries that his employers, Ken and Hamilton, had set up.” (Pg. 291)
While I'm very happy that the text references Hole In My Life, I'm very, very annoyed that they got the information wrong! Gantos' employers' names were Rik and Hamilton, not Ken and Hamilton! A previous editor, this really bothered me. I really just used this quotation analysis as an opportunity to point that out! I do think it is fantastic that this book stuck out as a favorite of the authors' in recent years.
“...he said that the book was as much a cautionary tale for adults as for kids. He wants adults to get the message that we should not give up on kids who are in trouble.” (Pg. 291)
This book certainly speaks to both young and old readers. The story is a cautionary tale for people of all ages because people of all ages make stupid decisions. That's exactly what happened to Gantos. And because he made a stupid decision, the court ruled against him. Not even his youthful age could save him from the jury's conviction. Gantos speaks to both young adults who have not yet had the opportunity to destroy the lives ahead of them, and to more mature individuals who may be faced with serving as a juror in a case against a youngster some day. High school educators should especially benefit from Gantos' message because they are in the prestigious position to have a positive influence on young adults faced with life decisions like Gantos.
“The success of personal experience books ... depends largely on the quality of the writing because there isn't a plot for readers to get excited about...” (Pg. 293)
Gantos' writing is lively, and he weaves a very exciting plot throughout Hole In My Life, regardless of what this statement says. The organization of the book is a little strange, and Gantos jumps back and forth in his story a few times. It works, though, and the story comes together nicely, and honestly, quite impressively. I really enjoyed this author's voice, and I would be very interested to read his works for younger children.
Part B: Creative Response
My Cautionary Tale
I thought, as a tribute to Jack Gantos, the once aspiring, now amazing writer, I would write my own “cautionary” tale, one that might both relieve me to get it all down and inspire others in situations similar to mine.
Almost nine years ago, I graduated from high school, and had absolutely no idea what to do with my life. I was the eleventh smartest student in my class, and I had just received a measly $500 scholarship to go to college and major in English. My parents, who, bless their hearts, only possessed high school diplomas, didn't know squat about getting their child into college; nor did they care. They thought I was smart enough already. I'd won the county spelling bee in eighth grade, for Christ's sake! I was a quiz bowl genius for a while! I was basically a straight-A kid! Surely, I knew enough about the world already, and I should just proceed to working so that I could generate an income. That's what my parents thought, anyway.
Their stern hands sent me into the arms of man I would marry at the age of 19, a man who would prove to be more stern than I can remember Mom and Dad ever being. The day after our wedding, I knew it was a mistake. He changed like night giving way to the day. I've read before that there is a characteristic male who, once he marries a woman, thinks he possesses her. I think he may have fit in that classification. The most positive thing that happened to me during this time is that, a year after graduating high school, I enrolled in college. I figured it out on my own and got in. But I didn't know what I was doing and used up credits that wouldn't count for a thing in the future. I was also in many classes with my husband, and he made me cry in public all the time, so college then was just no fun. After a couple years of fighting, we decided the best way to fix our marital issues was to have a child. (I would never call this particular decision a mistake, because I am forever grateful for our bright and beautiful five-year-old daughter. But, my life soon took a direction I did not expect. This could be a cautionary tale. I'm happy things turned out the way they did; I can handle it. But, some might not want their plans put on hold and for their life to take the route mine did.)
During this time, to support our family, I also took a job at our local newspaper. I started out making telemarketing calls from the office in the evenings for minimum wage, then was hired on as the legal clerk. One day, I looked upstairs, towards the editor's office, and said, “I want that.” Soon after, I was moved to a news desk, then a paginator's, then the editor's. I served as editor for three years, during which time I helped to vanquish a publisher who squandered money from the company by the truckloads. I also served on a corporate committee, with honest-to-god corporate managers. (I suppose they considered me one, too, since they selected me.) But in my house, at my newspaper, I had reached a “glass ceiling,” if you will. I was making a very low salary compared to other editors at papers my size and circulation, and upper management (all four layers of it) wasn't budging on the budget. I was fed up. I couldn't move up the ladder to a more prestigious news network, like Gannett, either, because they hire applicants with degrees, and I had none. I had put that all on hold three years prior when I took the editor's position and became pregnant. I couldn't do all three at the same time.
The marriage sent me into a downward spiral. I was manic depressive and stayed in the crazy hospital to get my medicines regulated a total of three times. The last time I was in there, I told them I couldn't go home without knowing that things would be different this time. I felt, all along, that I wasn't my problem, that my problems were my problem. They met with him and, I suppose he didn't get it. My husband told me he'd give me a week, to see how I acted after that, and then he'd decide if our marriage was worth saving. He obviously thought I was the problem, but it's funny – no one else in our lives thought I was.
One night (he worked the midnight shift and had been sleeping all day), he woke up for work, and I had cooked him Beenie Weenies and macaroni and cheese for dinner. This is the same man whom I'd seen on several occasions pour Beenie Weenies in a can, fresh from the gas station without microwaving, down his through because he didn't have a spoon. But tonight, he didn't want measly Beenie Weenies and mac and cheese. Man want meat and potatoes! He yelled at me, told me what a worthless bitch I was, and stormed off for work. By the time he called me to apologize, I had called my mother and asked her if leaving was the right thing to do. But I had already decided, by the time I dialed her number, that I was going to leave. When he called, I told him, somberly but defiantly, that I could no longer live this way and was going to divorce him.
We worked as a team to move of our apartment together, at the same time; I got a new place and he moved back in with his mother. We elected shared parenting of our daughter. He keeps her half the week, I keep her the other half. No one pays anyone anything. Today, we have a pretty stable relationship. It's all business with us. We're in the business of rearing a child together, and we work fine at that.
Soon after my divorce was final, I remarried to a man who nourishes my creative and intellectual sides, who supports virtually every decision I make, and who keeps me on track when I'm about to make or have made a bad one. Having been through a horrible relationship, I soon found out exactly what it was that I wanted in one. My husband today fits all the necessary criteria and then some. We just celebrated our second anniversary, and I seriously do still get butterflies when I think of him. In April of last year, I vacated my position at the paper to go back to college and pursue my degree in English. Since, I've earned a scholarship that pays pretty much all of my tuition and will as long as I desire to pursue education. I'm working as a writing tutor at my branch campus, and think I really have found my niche. I'm now looking forward to the possibility of obtaining my master's degree and maybe even teaching. Libraries are appealing to me as well. The thing is, so many doors have opened up for me! Best of all, I feel more vibrant and confident than I have in a long time. I haven't been treated for mental illness for over two years now, and I feel good about that, too. I know I wrote this as “My Cautionary Tale,” but I'm so satisfied with how my life has turned out, I don't know if caution is necessary. I suppose I'm well aware of the fact that won't kill one can make her stronger. I'm proud of my battle scars, and I'm a stronger person because of them. So, cautionary? Take it as you will. It's all in how much you enjoy the roller coaster of life.
Part C: Critical Response
1. Nonfiction helps students to read for “the application of facts/detail in the development and interpretation of thought.” What particular facts or details stand out in the book you read—were surprising or interesting—and what assertions did they support. Three examples would be nice here.
I'm going to focus here on Gantos' literary references. There are many details in the book that prove its historical accuracy, so I think lending credit to Gantos' intelligence regarding literature is called for.
Page 30 - “I wasn't buying it. It seemed to me that no amount of forgiveness would ever was away his need to be forgiven every day. He reminded me of the Flannery O'Connor story I loved, “ A Good Man is Hard to Find,” where the Misfit shoots the hugely annoying grandmother to death and then says she would have been a good woman, if somebody had been there to shoot her every minute of her life.”
I like this reference because I really love O'Connor's short story. Gantos makes this statement after watching a high school assembly where four prison inmates told their (highly staged) stories, and one of the men talks about his life as a sex criminal. The man half-heartedly breaks out in a plea for forgiveness, and Gantos makes this entertaining remark.
Page 158 – Gantos references a Zane Grey cowboy novel which was brought to him with a variety of other items by a service worker in the prison. This interests me because recently, my father-in-law read a Zane Grey triology and he was very wrapped up in it for some time. Grey was an Ohio native with ties to the Slone family. I thought it was neat to see the author referenced. In Hole In My Life, the presence of the cowboy novel is amusing, instilling suggestions of the Wild West in comparison to prison life.
Pages 138-139 - “Okay,” I said to myself. “Remember this spot and then this map.” I took thirty-nine steps to the west because I liked the movie The Thirty-nine Steps.” Then I took twenty steps north, one for each year of my life. That brought me into the bushes. “Take Fifteen Steps to Better Writing to the west then turn around and dig,” I whispered.
This is just a funny passage because Gantos created directions for finding where he buried a stash of hash by stringing together book titles. Clever, catchy, and I might just take him up on the Fifteen Steps to Better Writing reference.
2. A retired teacher, Ethel Webb, helped Hirth to see that nonfiction could allow him to “build a world and take command of my life.” What, in your book, connected to your life? If the book did not seem to work this way for you, why not? How, in other words, did your book help you to “make sense of the world.”
I connected to the book because I understood both Gantos' motivation to sell drugs and his writerly woes. First of all, my parents both barely earned their high school educations, and thought that I was smart enough, didn't need to go to college, and should get a job as soon as possible. They didn't know anything about college, and weren't about to learn how to help me go. The guidance counselor at my school was only concerned with sending the valedictorians in our class to college (even though they were the ones with full ride scholarships), and I was only 11th in my class. But I digress. My point is that I understand what it's like to be a young person on the verge of becoming a real, live, full-fledged adult. It's a scary time, and, like Gantos, I didn't know what I should do with my life. I had to live through a tumultuous first marriage, the birth of my daughter, a five-year job as the editor of a newspaper, my role in taking down an embezzling corporate manager, and getting remarried before getting back to college. It feels good, Jack, I know.
I also connected to Gantos because, while I'm not doing drugs all day long, I can't get my thoughts down in a coherent pattern, either. When it comes to writing for pleasure, I can't get myself motivated to write something I'm truly interested in. I'm a little hard on myself, too. I'm an awful critic and terribly cynical and it reflects in the amount of material I produce. Perhaps I'll have more room for leisurely writing once degrees are obtained. I'm glad Gantos finally got it together.
3. Hirth says “Whether you read a short passage…give a brief comment on why you found the excerpt exciting.” Please do that. Any passage from the book and why it was “exciting.”
Oh, I'm going to have to do a very controversial one. This just happened to be the one scene in the book that really made my jaw drop. It took my by surprise. Gantos' voice made it great; he's a fantastic story-teller. In this scene, a representative of the Muslim community at the prison approaches Gantos, a new inmate, and extends to him an offer to establish good race relations with their group members.
“So here is our offer,” he said. “Every Sunday is movie night up in the gym. During the movie the Muslim brothers will all gather in the bathroom for a little prayer meeting. What we would like once you are released into population is for you to join us in a ceremony of trust. Come meet the brothers and then we want you to pull your pants down around your knees and bend over.” (Pg. 160)
Additionally amusing is Gantos' response: “...I flipped open my journal and wrote down everything that had just happened. Nobody would believe it. I couldn't. That's why I had to write it down.” (Pg. 161) Gantos' astonishment and disbelief almost adds comic relief, although the subject matter is far from funny. Because Gantos was able to weasel his way out of the situation, as well, helps make the reader feel more comfortable at laughing with the author at this awkward and frightening situation. It's just the kind of scene you'd expect to see in a prison story, and I think Gantos, as a very intelligent writer, knows that and allows for the cliched reference.
4. He continues “just pass out a copy of a passage to be analyzed.” Choose a passage and talk about the writer’s style: verb use, figurative language, level of diction, sentence length, concrete sensory imagery—anything you can note.
“ In my writing classes, I first wrote brutal stories about prison, about New York street life, about the men I knew who had hard lives and hard hearts. And then one day I got tired of all the blood and guts and hard lives and hard hearts and began to write more stories about my childhood, like the ones I had started writing down in prison, stories which at one time I did not think were important, but suddenly had become to me the most important stories of all. They contained the hidden days of my innocence and happiness. And once I began retrieving the lost pleasures of my childhood, I began to write stories for children. And I laughed about that, too. Prison certainly wasn't funny, but with each new day it was receding into my past.” (Pg. 199)
There is beautiful parallelism displayed in this passage by Gantos. It reads like poetry. The yellow highlighted words, of course, are identical. Next, there are two instances of the phrase, “heard lives and hard hearts,” followed by a mix-up of the phrase, “important stories.” The passage ends with all words associated with positivity. Words like “innocence,” “childhood,” “pleasures,” and “laughed” help the author end his book on a high note.
5. I love Hirth’s sentence: “We teach less about more rather than more about less. We get so caught up in the what, that we forget the why. Only test makers are into recall.” How did your book address the why rather than the what?
Wow. I can't believe how perfectly this book does exhibit this question. Take a look at the following passages. Gantos' friend, Tim Scanlon, a medical student at Florida State, is going on and on about the ideology that all behavior is chemical and that the books he's reading in college is “the future.”
“It will take you back to the why of everything. Remember when you were a little kid and kept asking why and your parents gave you some half-baked answers? Well, these books get down to the root of the why. If you understand this stuff you will understand everything – religion, politics, psychology, art – the history of all human desire is entirely in our chemistry.” (Pg. 44)
And Gantos replies: “He knew great stuff about biology and chemistry and medicine. I knew something about literature and what people plotted in their hearts and thought and suspected, but he knew the secret why behind each though. I only knew how it looked once it happened, once it went splat in my face, and suddenly I wanted to know the why to everything. It seemed the most important desire I'd ever known.” (Pg. 45)
Gantos makes it abundantly clear that it's best to pursue why rather than what. I'm sure he hopes this message makes it through to his readers.
Jack Gantos is also the author of The Joey Pigza Books which include Joey Pigza Swallowed the Key, Joey Pigza Loses Control, and What Would Joey Do?
Hole in My Life by Jack Gantos
Non-Fiction Book
Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2004, 200pgs., $16.00
ISBN 978-0374430894
Best known as the author of the Joey Pigza, Jack Henry, and Rotten Ralph children's series, Jack Gantos explores much more grown-up themes in Hole In My Life, a personal memoir of the author's incarceration as a young adult. The book explores mature subject matter and should be reserved for more sophisticated young readers. In particular, there are two violent sex scenes in the novel, and drug content is a major premise. Parents should be included in the decision to assign this book.
At the age of 20, Gantos could only be labeled an “aspiring” writer. He wrote all the time, but nothing significant. He had no method for arranging his thoughts, and a recent affection for a bowl of hashish had lead to severe procrastination. Stuck in a vicious cycle of smoking hash and dope, drinking too much alcohol, and writing whatever flowed out of the newly opened doors of perception, Gantos realized he had to get it together. Someone once said, “Do what you know,” and Gantos knew drugs. He decided to try his hand at the profit-making side of the business, and struck up a deal to smuggle 2,000 pounds of hash from St. Croix to New York. St. Croix is located in the Virgin Islands, where the drug is legal. Gantos thought his cut of $10,000 would be a nice down payment on a college education, and didn't see any harm nor fowl in the deed.
While on the journey, Gantos detailed the trip in the ship's log. He saw it as a nice way to relax. He had no idea his beloved pastime would land him in prison. Shortly after reaching the north eastern coast, Gantos was arrested for his role in the drug deal. In court, he pleaded guilty and hoped for probation, but the ship's log, which had been recovered during a search of the vessel, revealed Gantos' confession.
In prison, Gantos witnessed unimaginable acts of inhumanity. On his first day, he was faced with either helping a young man who'd just been gang raped in the bathroom or leaving him behind for personal fear of becoming the next target. “It was just twenty-four hours since I had been sentenced and I knew I was in way over my head,” he wrote. (Pg. 153) During his stay in prison, Gantos worked as an x-ray technician and was exposed to many acts of prison violence, as he worked to identify and heal inmates who had been involved in brawls and other incidents.
In his spare time, Gantos recorded his daily events between the lines of a copy of The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky. He soon gained a new lease on life, even refraining from drug use in prison. He longed to get back to the real world, to try again. He wanted to go to college more than anything, so he hatched an escape plan. Gantos' escape plan, however, was based on intellect, and this time, he didn't fail. With the help of his caseworkers, Mr. Wilcox and Mr. Bow, Gantos applied for college and was accepted, and then he drafted a letter to the parole board asking them to grant his parole so that he may attend. Fifteen months after entering the penitentiary, he was released.
After leaving prison, Gantos moved to New York, got a job and an education, and eventually, became a very successful author. “The mistakes I made, the pain I endured, the time I wasted were now the smallest part of me,” Gantos wrote in the book's concluding statements. (Pg. 199) “And I'm out in the open doing what I have always wanted to do. Write.” (Pg. 200)
Three quotes:
“He had helped to sail a boatload of hashish from the Virgin Islands to New York City, where he used a shopping cart to make the deliveries that his employers, Ken and Hamilton, had set up.” (Pg. 291)
While I'm very happy that the text references Hole In My Life, I'm very, very annoyed that they got the information wrong! Gantos' employers' names were Rik and Hamilton, not Ken and Hamilton! A previous editor, this really bothered me. I really just used this quotation analysis as an opportunity to point that out! I do think it is fantastic that this book stuck out as a favorite of the authors' in recent years.
“...he said that the book was as much a cautionary tale for adults as for kids. He wants adults to get the message that we should not give up on kids who are in trouble.” (Pg. 291)
This book certainly speaks to both young and old readers. The story is a cautionary tale for people of all ages because people of all ages make stupid decisions. That's exactly what happened to Gantos. And because he made a stupid decision, the court ruled against him. Not even his youthful age could save him from the jury's conviction. Gantos speaks to both young adults who have not yet had the opportunity to destroy the lives ahead of them, and to more mature individuals who may be faced with serving as a juror in a case against a youngster some day. High school educators should especially benefit from Gantos' message because they are in the prestigious position to have a positive influence on young adults faced with life decisions like Gantos.
“The success of personal experience books ... depends largely on the quality of the writing because there isn't a plot for readers to get excited about...” (Pg. 293)
Gantos' writing is lively, and he weaves a very exciting plot throughout Hole In My Life, regardless of what this statement says. The organization of the book is a little strange, and Gantos jumps back and forth in his story a few times. It works, though, and the story comes together nicely, and honestly, quite impressively. I really enjoyed this author's voice, and I would be very interested to read his works for younger children.
Part B: Creative Response
My Cautionary Tale
I thought, as a tribute to Jack Gantos, the once aspiring, now amazing writer, I would write my own “cautionary” tale, one that might both relieve me to get it all down and inspire others in situations similar to mine.
Almost nine years ago, I graduated from high school, and had absolutely no idea what to do with my life. I was the eleventh smartest student in my class, and I had just received a measly $500 scholarship to go to college and major in English. My parents, who, bless their hearts, only possessed high school diplomas, didn't know squat about getting their child into college; nor did they care. They thought I was smart enough already. I'd won the county spelling bee in eighth grade, for Christ's sake! I was a quiz bowl genius for a while! I was basically a straight-A kid! Surely, I knew enough about the world already, and I should just proceed to working so that I could generate an income. That's what my parents thought, anyway.
Their stern hands sent me into the arms of man I would marry at the age of 19, a man who would prove to be more stern than I can remember Mom and Dad ever being. The day after our wedding, I knew it was a mistake. He changed like night giving way to the day. I've read before that there is a characteristic male who, once he marries a woman, thinks he possesses her. I think he may have fit in that classification. The most positive thing that happened to me during this time is that, a year after graduating high school, I enrolled in college. I figured it out on my own and got in. But I didn't know what I was doing and used up credits that wouldn't count for a thing in the future. I was also in many classes with my husband, and he made me cry in public all the time, so college then was just no fun. After a couple years of fighting, we decided the best way to fix our marital issues was to have a child. (I would never call this particular decision a mistake, because I am forever grateful for our bright and beautiful five-year-old daughter. But, my life soon took a direction I did not expect. This could be a cautionary tale. I'm happy things turned out the way they did; I can handle it. But, some might not want their plans put on hold and for their life to take the route mine did.)
During this time, to support our family, I also took a job at our local newspaper. I started out making telemarketing calls from the office in the evenings for minimum wage, then was hired on as the legal clerk. One day, I looked upstairs, towards the editor's office, and said, “I want that.” Soon after, I was moved to a news desk, then a paginator's, then the editor's. I served as editor for three years, during which time I helped to vanquish a publisher who squandered money from the company by the truckloads. I also served on a corporate committee, with honest-to-god corporate managers. (I suppose they considered me one, too, since they selected me.) But in my house, at my newspaper, I had reached a “glass ceiling,” if you will. I was making a very low salary compared to other editors at papers my size and circulation, and upper management (all four layers of it) wasn't budging on the budget. I was fed up. I couldn't move up the ladder to a more prestigious news network, like Gannett, either, because they hire applicants with degrees, and I had none. I had put that all on hold three years prior when I took the editor's position and became pregnant. I couldn't do all three at the same time.
The marriage sent me into a downward spiral. I was manic depressive and stayed in the crazy hospital to get my medicines regulated a total of three times. The last time I was in there, I told them I couldn't go home without knowing that things would be different this time. I felt, all along, that I wasn't my problem, that my problems were my problem. They met with him and, I suppose he didn't get it. My husband told me he'd give me a week, to see how I acted after that, and then he'd decide if our marriage was worth saving. He obviously thought I was the problem, but it's funny – no one else in our lives thought I was.
One night (he worked the midnight shift and had been sleeping all day), he woke up for work, and I had cooked him Beenie Weenies and macaroni and cheese for dinner. This is the same man whom I'd seen on several occasions pour Beenie Weenies in a can, fresh from the gas station without microwaving, down his through because he didn't have a spoon. But tonight, he didn't want measly Beenie Weenies and mac and cheese. Man want meat and potatoes! He yelled at me, told me what a worthless bitch I was, and stormed off for work. By the time he called me to apologize, I had called my mother and asked her if leaving was the right thing to do. But I had already decided, by the time I dialed her number, that I was going to leave. When he called, I told him, somberly but defiantly, that I could no longer live this way and was going to divorce him.
We worked as a team to move of our apartment together, at the same time; I got a new place and he moved back in with his mother. We elected shared parenting of our daughter. He keeps her half the week, I keep her the other half. No one pays anyone anything. Today, we have a pretty stable relationship. It's all business with us. We're in the business of rearing a child together, and we work fine at that.
Soon after my divorce was final, I remarried to a man who nourishes my creative and intellectual sides, who supports virtually every decision I make, and who keeps me on track when I'm about to make or have made a bad one. Having been through a horrible relationship, I soon found out exactly what it was that I wanted in one. My husband today fits all the necessary criteria and then some. We just celebrated our second anniversary, and I seriously do still get butterflies when I think of him. In April of last year, I vacated my position at the paper to go back to college and pursue my degree in English. Since, I've earned a scholarship that pays pretty much all of my tuition and will as long as I desire to pursue education. I'm working as a writing tutor at my branch campus, and think I really have found my niche. I'm now looking forward to the possibility of obtaining my master's degree and maybe even teaching. Libraries are appealing to me as well. The thing is, so many doors have opened up for me! Best of all, I feel more vibrant and confident than I have in a long time. I haven't been treated for mental illness for over two years now, and I feel good about that, too. I know I wrote this as “My Cautionary Tale,” but I'm so satisfied with how my life has turned out, I don't know if caution is necessary. I suppose I'm well aware of the fact that won't kill one can make her stronger. I'm proud of my battle scars, and I'm a stronger person because of them. So, cautionary? Take it as you will. It's all in how much you enjoy the roller coaster of life.
Part C: Critical Response
1. Nonfiction helps students to read for “the application of facts/detail in the development and interpretation of thought.” What particular facts or details stand out in the book you read—were surprising or interesting—and what assertions did they support. Three examples would be nice here.
I'm going to focus here on Gantos' literary references. There are many details in the book that prove its historical accuracy, so I think lending credit to Gantos' intelligence regarding literature is called for.
Page 30 - “I wasn't buying it. It seemed to me that no amount of forgiveness would ever was away his need to be forgiven every day. He reminded me of the Flannery O'Connor story I loved, “ A Good Man is Hard to Find,” where the Misfit shoots the hugely annoying grandmother to death and then says she would have been a good woman, if somebody had been there to shoot her every minute of her life.”
I like this reference because I really love O'Connor's short story. Gantos makes this statement after watching a high school assembly where four prison inmates told their (highly staged) stories, and one of the men talks about his life as a sex criminal. The man half-heartedly breaks out in a plea for forgiveness, and Gantos makes this entertaining remark.
Page 158 – Gantos references a Zane Grey cowboy novel which was brought to him with a variety of other items by a service worker in the prison. This interests me because recently, my father-in-law read a Zane Grey triology and he was very wrapped up in it for some time. Grey was an Ohio native with ties to the Slone family. I thought it was neat to see the author referenced. In Hole In My Life, the presence of the cowboy novel is amusing, instilling suggestions of the Wild West in comparison to prison life.
Pages 138-139 - “Okay,” I said to myself. “Remember this spot and then this map.” I took thirty-nine steps to the west because I liked the movie The Thirty-nine Steps.” Then I took twenty steps north, one for each year of my life. That brought me into the bushes. “Take Fifteen Steps to Better Writing to the west then turn around and dig,” I whispered.
This is just a funny passage because Gantos created directions for finding where he buried a stash of hash by stringing together book titles. Clever, catchy, and I might just take him up on the Fifteen Steps to Better Writing reference.
2. A retired teacher, Ethel Webb, helped Hirth to see that nonfiction could allow him to “build a world and take command of my life.” What, in your book, connected to your life? If the book did not seem to work this way for you, why not? How, in other words, did your book help you to “make sense of the world.”
I connected to the book because I understood both Gantos' motivation to sell drugs and his writerly woes. First of all, my parents both barely earned their high school educations, and thought that I was smart enough, didn't need to go to college, and should get a job as soon as possible. They didn't know anything about college, and weren't about to learn how to help me go. The guidance counselor at my school was only concerned with sending the valedictorians in our class to college (even though they were the ones with full ride scholarships), and I was only 11th in my class. But I digress. My point is that I understand what it's like to be a young person on the verge of becoming a real, live, full-fledged adult. It's a scary time, and, like Gantos, I didn't know what I should do with my life. I had to live through a tumultuous first marriage, the birth of my daughter, a five-year job as the editor of a newspaper, my role in taking down an embezzling corporate manager, and getting remarried before getting back to college. It feels good, Jack, I know.
I also connected to Gantos because, while I'm not doing drugs all day long, I can't get my thoughts down in a coherent pattern, either. When it comes to writing for pleasure, I can't get myself motivated to write something I'm truly interested in. I'm a little hard on myself, too. I'm an awful critic and terribly cynical and it reflects in the amount of material I produce. Perhaps I'll have more room for leisurely writing once degrees are obtained. I'm glad Gantos finally got it together.
3. Hirth says “Whether you read a short passage…give a brief comment on why you found the excerpt exciting.” Please do that. Any passage from the book and why it was “exciting.”
Oh, I'm going to have to do a very controversial one. This just happened to be the one scene in the book that really made my jaw drop. It took my by surprise. Gantos' voice made it great; he's a fantastic story-teller. In this scene, a representative of the Muslim community at the prison approaches Gantos, a new inmate, and extends to him an offer to establish good race relations with their group members.
“So here is our offer,” he said. “Every Sunday is movie night up in the gym. During the movie the Muslim brothers will all gather in the bathroom for a little prayer meeting. What we would like once you are released into population is for you to join us in a ceremony of trust. Come meet the brothers and then we want you to pull your pants down around your knees and bend over.” (Pg. 160)
Additionally amusing is Gantos' response: “...I flipped open my journal and wrote down everything that had just happened. Nobody would believe it. I couldn't. That's why I had to write it down.” (Pg. 161) Gantos' astonishment and disbelief almost adds comic relief, although the subject matter is far from funny. Because Gantos was able to weasel his way out of the situation, as well, helps make the reader feel more comfortable at laughing with the author at this awkward and frightening situation. It's just the kind of scene you'd expect to see in a prison story, and I think Gantos, as a very intelligent writer, knows that and allows for the cliched reference.
4. He continues “just pass out a copy of a passage to be analyzed.” Choose a passage and talk about the writer’s style: verb use, figurative language, level of diction, sentence length, concrete sensory imagery—anything you can note.
“ In my writing classes, I first wrote brutal stories about prison, about New York street life, about the men I knew who had hard lives and hard hearts. And then one day I got tired of all the blood and guts and hard lives and hard hearts and began to write more stories about my childhood, like the ones I had started writing down in prison, stories which at one time I did not think were important, but suddenly had become to me the most important stories of all. They contained the hidden days of my innocence and happiness. And once I began retrieving the lost pleasures of my childhood, I began to write stories for children. And I laughed about that, too. Prison certainly wasn't funny, but with each new day it was receding into my past.” (Pg. 199)
There is beautiful parallelism displayed in this passage by Gantos. It reads like poetry. The yellow highlighted words, of course, are identical. Next, there are two instances of the phrase, “heard lives and hard hearts,” followed by a mix-up of the phrase, “important stories.” The passage ends with all words associated with positivity. Words like “innocence,” “childhood,” “pleasures,” and “laughed” help the author end his book on a high note.
5. I love Hirth’s sentence: “We teach less about more rather than more about less. We get so caught up in the what, that we forget the why. Only test makers are into recall.” How did your book address the why rather than the what?
Wow. I can't believe how perfectly this book does exhibit this question. Take a look at the following passages. Gantos' friend, Tim Scanlon, a medical student at Florida State, is going on and on about the ideology that all behavior is chemical and that the books he's reading in college is “the future.”
“It will take you back to the why of everything. Remember when you were a little kid and kept asking why and your parents gave you some half-baked answers? Well, these books get down to the root of the why. If you understand this stuff you will understand everything – religion, politics, psychology, art – the history of all human desire is entirely in our chemistry.” (Pg. 44)
And Gantos replies: “He knew great stuff about biology and chemistry and medicine. I knew something about literature and what people plotted in their hearts and thought and suspected, but he knew the secret why behind each though. I only knew how it looked once it happened, once it went splat in my face, and suddenly I wanted to know the why to everything. It seemed the most important desire I'd ever known.” (Pg. 45)
Gantos makes it abundantly clear that it's best to pursue why rather than what. I'm sure he hopes this message makes it through to his readers.
Jack Gantos is also the author of The Joey Pigza Books which include Joey Pigza Swallowed the Key, Joey Pigza Loses Control, and What Would Joey Do?
Book Log: "FLCL" by Yoji Enokido and Gainax
Part A: Book Summary
FLCL by Yoji Enokido and Gainax
Sci-Fi Book
Tokyopop, 2007, 122p, $9.99
ISBN 978-1-4278-0498-3
FLCL (pronounced “Fooly Cooly”) is the first volume in a series of graphic novels about Nandaba Naota, a twelve-year-old boy on the verge of puberty, living in the Japanese suburb of Mabase. At the edge of town sits the strange iron-shaped Medical Mechanica factory, where medical machinery is produced. This element characterizes Mabase as an industrial community, and creates room for an odd turn of events in Naota's story.
The story begins with Naota meeting his brother's girlfriend under a bridge in town. His older brother Tasuku is playing baseball in America, and his girlfriend Mamimi is using Naota as a replacement boyfriend for the time being. Under the bridge, Mamimi starts kissing Naota. Suddenly, as Naota's prepubescent emotions are emerging, an alien girl named Haruko zooms past him on a Vespa, hitting him smack dab in the head with a bass guitar. Haruko's entrance to the story symbolizes the confusion of puberty, but Naota's trouble has just begun.
Later on, a large bump protrudes from the bullseye on Naota's head. A horn evolves from the bump, and eventually, a robot busts free and crawls out of his skull. Soon, more horns are protruding and two more robots emerge from his head. The horns and bumps are an obvious metaphor for an erection; they emerge during intense or sexually arousing situations.
As the story progresses, Naota finds himself running all over town, trying to avoid the strange Haruko, who is obviously targeting him. He goes home one evening for some peace and quiet to find that his father and grandfather have accepted Haruko into their house! And she's to be their new housekeeper! Both Kamon, Naota's father, and Shigekuni, his grandfather, are smitten by the beautiful Haruko. Despite Naota's protests, they let her use his room and even sleep in his bed! As if that wasn't bad enough, Naota's love interest, Mamimi, has become obsessed with Canti, the first robot to appear out of Naota's skull. She worships it as a god, which disturbs Naota very much.
While the story's overarching theme is very confusing to interpret, it is eventually revealed that Haruko is fighting against Medical Mechanica, the medical machinery giant in Mabase. The second two robots to spring from Naota's head were somehow manufactured by the company, and Haruko used his head as a portal to transport them to her.
The story culminates with an epic battle between Canti, the unexpected protector of Naota and his loved ones, and the final robot to emerge from the boy's skull. In the battle, Canti actually consumes Naota (possibly to protect him), defeats the Medical Mechanica robot, and then expels Naota from his rear end. (I'm not kidding.) Haruko becomes the unsuspecting heroine, and Naota is closer to Mamimi than ever. Mamimi, who witnessed the battle, seems to have transformed, as well, as she seems to think of Naota as a more mature individual now. In the final scene, the three ride away together on the Vespa. The story is all about coming of age, particularly for Naota and Mamimi.
Three quotes:
“...'rules' count, but ... plot and excitement count even more. The internal consistency and plausibility of a postulated imaginary society creates its own reality.” (Pg. 231) Much of FLCL is just so far-fetched you can't possibly believe it. But it's okay. This is the type of book that you want to be so completely far from the norm, if for nothing more than to take you away from your own everyday trials, which are more real than we'd often like. While Naota's story is hard to grasp, it's that kind of unbelievability that makes it so believable. To enjoy the tale, the reader has to let go and say, “Ok. Take me somewhere new and exciting. I'm ready for it.” Young readers will love the goofiness of this book for that exact reason.
“The most obvious type, and probably the first to be read by many later fans of science fiction, is the simpleminded but effective story of wild adventure, usually with a touch of sociological or environmental concerns.” (Pg. 235) While this book is fun-filled and action-packed, a moral story looms in the background. All kinds of crazy stuff is happening to Naota, and as the book progresses, the reader finds out that Medical Mechanica is behind everything. I'm sure this entity will play a major role in the second and third volumes, and I'm sure there will be both sociological and environmental concerns with the medical factory's operation.
“Another comforting thought about the books in this chapter is how truly international they are.” (Pg. 242) That's why I chose this book over Scott Westerfield's Peeps. I was reading both at the same time, but FLCL offered me something new: a closer look at a culture I wasn't previously familiar with. I've always been interested in manga, but had never picked any to read on my own. So, I chose it for this week's book. I'm glad I did, because I now see how truly international manga (not just sci-fi) is, as well.
Part B: Creative Response
Japanese Popular Culture Glossary
Because this is the first manga novel I've ever read, I thought I'd delve a bit deeper into the Japanime scene to understand it better. We have a Japanese Media Culture Club at OUC, and I've always found it very intriguing, however, I'm out of the loop. Here is some basic terminology that might help you, too, understand the wacky world of Japanese pop culture.
Anime: Hand-drawn or computer-animated artwork used in Japanese television shows, films, video games, commercials, and Internet-based releases.
Cosplay: A type of performance art in which individuals dress up like characters from Japanese manga, comic books, video games, films, television shows and other media.
Geinokai: The world of Japanese entertainment.
J-pop: Refers to Japanese pop music and musicians. Coined by Japanese media to distinguish Japanese musicians from foreign musicians.
Japanimation: More modernly called and a synonym for the word “anime.”
Kawaii: Basically, cuteness. Japanese popular culture is obsessed with cuteness. Women and girls are often described as “kawaii,” and the term lacks the infantile association we normally have with the word “cute.”
Manga: Japenese comic and print cartoons.
Otaku: Anyone obsessed with Japanese media, particularly manga, anime, and video games.
Tarento: Japanese entertainers.
Tokusatu: Special effects used in Japanese media.
Part C: Critical Response
On a scale of 1-10 where 1 is “not much” and 10 is “great job” how does your novel:
1.Make us consider the emotional, psychological and physical effects of futuristic ideas, conflict and change.
8 – The real story behind FLCL probably lies deeper in the series, but the menacing Medical Mechanica acts as a entity threatening futuristic ideas, conflict and change. The book starts by describing Medical Mechanica's ominous presence at the edge of Mabase, which is defined as an industrial city. The reader is given the impression that Mabase is an old-fashioned sort of place, and aliens on Vespas and robots popping out of boys' heads change all of that. Mabase becomes a locale for futuristic ideas, and the reader follows the effects of this story on Naota and his fellow characters. Although I haven't read the rest of the series, I'm sure that Medical Mechanica's shady practices will have a very large toll on the characters in it.
2.Encourage us to keep an open mind to consider unlimited possibilities.
10 – I can't imagine reading this book without an open mind. The book's opening scene is a 12-year-old boy messing around with a high school girl, then getting hit in the head with a guitar by a hot alien girl riding a Vespa at 400 miles per hour! Then, the reader is supposed to buy the fact that the boy sprouts horns and then robots bust out of his brain. In FLCL, the possibilities are endless. After reading the book, the content takes some time to sink in. There are so many overarching themes; I'm considering unlimited possibilities just analyzing this book!
3.Provoke questions regarding other forms of life, thereby bringing our own into perspective.
10 – FLCL does a good job of featuring other forms of life, from Haruko, the alien Vespa girl, to the three robots leaping from Naota's skull. I particularly liked when Canti displayed very human characteristics. Near the end of the story, just after Canti devoured Naota, Mamimi cries and pleads with the robot to release her friend.
“She pleaded with all her might. She was bawling. It was the first time since the night she'd met Naota that she had let anyone but Tasuku see her tears. Suddenly, Mamimi stopped beating Canti and looked up at the robot, surprised.
“The robot, now a crimson color, tenderly patted her head. Softly, as if it were offering her consolation, it said, 'You're a good girl, aren't you?'” (Pg. 115)
This scene humanizes both Canti, the robot, and Mamimi, a girl who had been afraid to show her emotions. This really did bring things into perspective for Mamimi. She realized at this moment that she cared for Naota more than she had let herself believe.
4.Stimulate curiosity and the capacity for invention.
7 – The Vespa, the robots and gaming were the technological elements of this story that piqued my interest most. I think Vespas are already on the market – or something of the sort. It's basically a scooter, but it can travel at least 400 mph. The robots were awesome, of course. I mean, who doesn't want a robot around? But these robots were a little creepy. If I can buy one at the store, then fine. But I don't want one busting out of my head any time soon. Another element I did not discuss in the summary is Mamimi's obsession with a certain video game. It's an entertaining aspect of the story, but not integral to the overarching theme, so I didn't mention it earlier. Most of my curiosity was stimulated by Medical Mechanica. Such vague information was given about the entity that I'll likely read the next two volumes just to find out what it's all about.
5.Present the reader with moral and ethical dilemmas that to some degree correspond to the real world.
10 – I think you could find ethical dilemmas in this tale all day long. First, Naota's mother is nowhere to be found. He is raised by his father and grandfather, who are both weak influences in Naota's life. His brother Tasuku, whom he looks up to most of all, is living in America playing baseball. Naota has no male influence in his life, which makes puberty all the more confusing. This leads to Naota messing around with Mamimi, his brother's girlfriend. Naota is the most true-to-life character in the book, and the poor boy is plagued by moral and ethical dilemmas. The worst part is he has no one to help keep him grounded. What do you do when you have robots coming out of your head, after all?
FLCL is the first of three volumes of a series. It was adapted from the original animation series written by Yoji Enokido.
FLCL by Yoji Enokido and Gainax
Sci-Fi Book
Tokyopop, 2007, 122p, $9.99
ISBN 978-1-4278-0498-3
FLCL (pronounced “Fooly Cooly”) is the first volume in a series of graphic novels about Nandaba Naota, a twelve-year-old boy on the verge of puberty, living in the Japanese suburb of Mabase. At the edge of town sits the strange iron-shaped Medical Mechanica factory, where medical machinery is produced. This element characterizes Mabase as an industrial community, and creates room for an odd turn of events in Naota's story.
The story begins with Naota meeting his brother's girlfriend under a bridge in town. His older brother Tasuku is playing baseball in America, and his girlfriend Mamimi is using Naota as a replacement boyfriend for the time being. Under the bridge, Mamimi starts kissing Naota. Suddenly, as Naota's prepubescent emotions are emerging, an alien girl named Haruko zooms past him on a Vespa, hitting him smack dab in the head with a bass guitar. Haruko's entrance to the story symbolizes the confusion of puberty, but Naota's trouble has just begun.
Later on, a large bump protrudes from the bullseye on Naota's head. A horn evolves from the bump, and eventually, a robot busts free and crawls out of his skull. Soon, more horns are protruding and two more robots emerge from his head. The horns and bumps are an obvious metaphor for an erection; they emerge during intense or sexually arousing situations.
As the story progresses, Naota finds himself running all over town, trying to avoid the strange Haruko, who is obviously targeting him. He goes home one evening for some peace and quiet to find that his father and grandfather have accepted Haruko into their house! And she's to be their new housekeeper! Both Kamon, Naota's father, and Shigekuni, his grandfather, are smitten by the beautiful Haruko. Despite Naota's protests, they let her use his room and even sleep in his bed! As if that wasn't bad enough, Naota's love interest, Mamimi, has become obsessed with Canti, the first robot to appear out of Naota's skull. She worships it as a god, which disturbs Naota very much.
While the story's overarching theme is very confusing to interpret, it is eventually revealed that Haruko is fighting against Medical Mechanica, the medical machinery giant in Mabase. The second two robots to spring from Naota's head were somehow manufactured by the company, and Haruko used his head as a portal to transport them to her.
The story culminates with an epic battle between Canti, the unexpected protector of Naota and his loved ones, and the final robot to emerge from the boy's skull. In the battle, Canti actually consumes Naota (possibly to protect him), defeats the Medical Mechanica robot, and then expels Naota from his rear end. (I'm not kidding.) Haruko becomes the unsuspecting heroine, and Naota is closer to Mamimi than ever. Mamimi, who witnessed the battle, seems to have transformed, as well, as she seems to think of Naota as a more mature individual now. In the final scene, the three ride away together on the Vespa. The story is all about coming of age, particularly for Naota and Mamimi.
Three quotes:
“...'rules' count, but ... plot and excitement count even more. The internal consistency and plausibility of a postulated imaginary society creates its own reality.” (Pg. 231) Much of FLCL is just so far-fetched you can't possibly believe it. But it's okay. This is the type of book that you want to be so completely far from the norm, if for nothing more than to take you away from your own everyday trials, which are more real than we'd often like. While Naota's story is hard to grasp, it's that kind of unbelievability that makes it so believable. To enjoy the tale, the reader has to let go and say, “Ok. Take me somewhere new and exciting. I'm ready for it.” Young readers will love the goofiness of this book for that exact reason.
“The most obvious type, and probably the first to be read by many later fans of science fiction, is the simpleminded but effective story of wild adventure, usually with a touch of sociological or environmental concerns.” (Pg. 235) While this book is fun-filled and action-packed, a moral story looms in the background. All kinds of crazy stuff is happening to Naota, and as the book progresses, the reader finds out that Medical Mechanica is behind everything. I'm sure this entity will play a major role in the second and third volumes, and I'm sure there will be both sociological and environmental concerns with the medical factory's operation.
“Another comforting thought about the books in this chapter is how truly international they are.” (Pg. 242) That's why I chose this book over Scott Westerfield's Peeps. I was reading both at the same time, but FLCL offered me something new: a closer look at a culture I wasn't previously familiar with. I've always been interested in manga, but had never picked any to read on my own. So, I chose it for this week's book. I'm glad I did, because I now see how truly international manga (not just sci-fi) is, as well.
Part B: Creative Response
Japanese Popular Culture Glossary
Because this is the first manga novel I've ever read, I thought I'd delve a bit deeper into the Japanime scene to understand it better. We have a Japanese Media Culture Club at OUC, and I've always found it very intriguing, however, I'm out of the loop. Here is some basic terminology that might help you, too, understand the wacky world of Japanese pop culture.
Anime: Hand-drawn or computer-animated artwork used in Japanese television shows, films, video games, commercials, and Internet-based releases.
Cosplay: A type of performance art in which individuals dress up like characters from Japanese manga, comic books, video games, films, television shows and other media.
Geinokai: The world of Japanese entertainment.
J-pop: Refers to Japanese pop music and musicians. Coined by Japanese media to distinguish Japanese musicians from foreign musicians.
Japanimation: More modernly called and a synonym for the word “anime.”
Kawaii: Basically, cuteness. Japanese popular culture is obsessed with cuteness. Women and girls are often described as “kawaii,” and the term lacks the infantile association we normally have with the word “cute.”
Manga: Japenese comic and print cartoons.
Otaku: Anyone obsessed with Japanese media, particularly manga, anime, and video games.
Tarento: Japanese entertainers.
Tokusatu: Special effects used in Japanese media.
Part C: Critical Response
On a scale of 1-10 where 1 is “not much” and 10 is “great job” how does your novel:
1.Make us consider the emotional, psychological and physical effects of futuristic ideas, conflict and change.
8 – The real story behind FLCL probably lies deeper in the series, but the menacing Medical Mechanica acts as a entity threatening futuristic ideas, conflict and change. The book starts by describing Medical Mechanica's ominous presence at the edge of Mabase, which is defined as an industrial city. The reader is given the impression that Mabase is an old-fashioned sort of place, and aliens on Vespas and robots popping out of boys' heads change all of that. Mabase becomes a locale for futuristic ideas, and the reader follows the effects of this story on Naota and his fellow characters. Although I haven't read the rest of the series, I'm sure that Medical Mechanica's shady practices will have a very large toll on the characters in it.
2.Encourage us to keep an open mind to consider unlimited possibilities.
10 – I can't imagine reading this book without an open mind. The book's opening scene is a 12-year-old boy messing around with a high school girl, then getting hit in the head with a guitar by a hot alien girl riding a Vespa at 400 miles per hour! Then, the reader is supposed to buy the fact that the boy sprouts horns and then robots bust out of his brain. In FLCL, the possibilities are endless. After reading the book, the content takes some time to sink in. There are so many overarching themes; I'm considering unlimited possibilities just analyzing this book!
3.Provoke questions regarding other forms of life, thereby bringing our own into perspective.
10 – FLCL does a good job of featuring other forms of life, from Haruko, the alien Vespa girl, to the three robots leaping from Naota's skull. I particularly liked when Canti displayed very human characteristics. Near the end of the story, just after Canti devoured Naota, Mamimi cries and pleads with the robot to release her friend.
“She pleaded with all her might. She was bawling. It was the first time since the night she'd met Naota that she had let anyone but Tasuku see her tears. Suddenly, Mamimi stopped beating Canti and looked up at the robot, surprised.
“The robot, now a crimson color, tenderly patted her head. Softly, as if it were offering her consolation, it said, 'You're a good girl, aren't you?'” (Pg. 115)
This scene humanizes both Canti, the robot, and Mamimi, a girl who had been afraid to show her emotions. This really did bring things into perspective for Mamimi. She realized at this moment that she cared for Naota more than she had let herself believe.
4.Stimulate curiosity and the capacity for invention.
7 – The Vespa, the robots and gaming were the technological elements of this story that piqued my interest most. I think Vespas are already on the market – or something of the sort. It's basically a scooter, but it can travel at least 400 mph. The robots were awesome, of course. I mean, who doesn't want a robot around? But these robots were a little creepy. If I can buy one at the store, then fine. But I don't want one busting out of my head any time soon. Another element I did not discuss in the summary is Mamimi's obsession with a certain video game. It's an entertaining aspect of the story, but not integral to the overarching theme, so I didn't mention it earlier. Most of my curiosity was stimulated by Medical Mechanica. Such vague information was given about the entity that I'll likely read the next two volumes just to find out what it's all about.
5.Present the reader with moral and ethical dilemmas that to some degree correspond to the real world.
10 – I think you could find ethical dilemmas in this tale all day long. First, Naota's mother is nowhere to be found. He is raised by his father and grandfather, who are both weak influences in Naota's life. His brother Tasuku, whom he looks up to most of all, is living in America playing baseball. Naota has no male influence in his life, which makes puberty all the more confusing. This leads to Naota messing around with Mamimi, his brother's girlfriend. Naota is the most true-to-life character in the book, and the poor boy is plagued by moral and ethical dilemmas. The worst part is he has no one to help keep him grounded. What do you do when you have robots coming out of your head, after all?
FLCL is the first of three volumes of a series. It was adapted from the original animation series written by Yoji Enokido.
Book Log: "Confessions of Georgia Nicholson" by Louise Rennison
Part A: Book Summary
Confessions of Georgia Nicolson: Angus, Thongs and Full-Frontal Snogging
by Louise Rennison
Humor Book
Avon Books, 2004, 245p, $13.99
ISBN 0-06-057590-5
There comes a time when every girl becomes a woman. Fourteen-year-old Georgia Nicolson thinks she might never make it through. Her nose is too big, her breasts are too small, and her experience with boys is lacking; she fears she's destined to become a lesbian. Georgia provides hilarious commentary of her adolescence, in both a self-deprecating and boastful manner.
Georgia lives with her mother, father, three-year-old sister, Libby, and an evil cat from hell named Agnus. She has a decent relationship with her mother, but distances herself as far as possible from her crude and grouchy father. An example of his fatherly love is when, early in the book, Georgia manages to accidentally shave off her eyebrows. Her father brings family members up to her bedroom to laugh at her. “What am I? A daughter or a fairground attraction?” she muses. (Pg. 23) Life at home is challenging for Georgia, as she's often taking care of Libby, who is often finding new places in Georgia's room to pee and poo. And then there's Agnus, the high-strung Scottish wildcat who eats everything and insists on venturing into Georgia's next-door neighbors' yard daily to stalk their poodle.
As if things at home aren't difficult enough, Georgia and her friends are occupied with this whole “becoming a woman” business. They're experimenting with make-up (Georgia is determined to make her nose look smaller), taking kissing lessons from a boy down the street, and developing obsessions for certain members of the opposite sex (Georgia thinks perhaps she's not a lesbian, after all!).
Jas, Georgia's best friend, begins a relationship with a fellow named Tom. Soon after, Georgia learns about his older brother, Robbie, who she refers to as a Sex God. He's in a band and is four years her elder. However, he has a girlfriend, a character Georgia describes as a “wet.” A “wet,” according to Georgia's glossary in the back of the book, is a “drippy, useless, nerdy idiot.” (This glossary is a very helpful tool provided to explain all of the British lingo Georgia uses throughout the novel.) Georgia sets out on a mission to break up Robbie and the wet, and with the help of Jas and company, achieves her goal.
The book is filled with laugh-out-loud moments, such as when, despite her parents' forbidding, Georgia bleaches a blonde streak into her hair to make her look older. She does this, of course, to impress Robbie, who had previously mentioned that Georgia was too young for him to date. When Agnus goes missing, and Robbie finds him and returns him to Georgia, she makes a play by casually running her fingers through her newly-dyed hair. When she does, the white streak breaks off in her hand! One embarrassing moment after another plagues poor Georgia. Teenage girls will love this book because Georgia shows them how to laugh of such traumatizing events, and because every girl goes through the same awkward transformation that Rennison writes about.
Three quotes:
“...there is no way an author can surprise a reader on every page. Instead, authors sprinkle humor throughout their books.” (Pg. 168) Rennison keeps the tone lively, with lots of jokes on every page. However, the big shockers are reserved for special moments, like when Georgia has to forfeit her tennis match victory and when her blonde streaks breaks off in her hand. Georgia is also cynical enough to not let the humor get out of control. There is a nice balance of ups and downs, although even negative situations are portrayed in a comical fashion.
“Humor is an obvious emotion, and students are genuinely interested in figuring out what causes the to smile or laugh.” (Pg. 169) Georgia writes about so many different things, it's easy for a reader to decide what makes them laugh and what doesn't. She makes jokes about lesbians, transvestites, incest, and many other issues that people can either take seriously or lightly.
“More and more lewd jokes (some approaching a mature recognition of the humor inherent in sex); humor aimed at schools, parents, and other adults in authority ... and grossness piled on even greater grossness.” (Pg. 163) Agnus, Thongs and Full-Frontal Snogging definitely fits this humor book age category. The novel is littered with sex jokes, disrespect for and superiority over adults, and disgusting tidbits (pee, poo, farting, snot, etc.).
Part B: Creative Response
Commentary: Flashback
Reading Confessions was a throw-back to high school for me. I could've been Georgia Nicolson; we're that much alike. I was a part of a clique of girls who fought their way through adolescence by chasing boys, applying way too much make-up, and finding ornery ways to anger our teachers. I was surprised to read Georgia's accounts of what we used to call “Light as a Feather, Stiff as a Board” and “People Pass Out.”
Many times, my girlfriends and I would chose and candidate and then gather around her. She would lie flat on the floor and we would encircle her, each placing two fingers underneath her body. Then we'd spout off some spirit chant, which usually included repeating the words, “Light as a feather, stiff as a board.” Sure enough, the girl would “float” off of the ground, and we'd be freaked totally out. I'm still not sure what “magic” was at work there. Perhaps our overactive adolescent brains made it all up. I wonder if Georgia ever held a séance before. We did once to talk to the ghost of Tupac. Boy, was that interesting.
We also used to play “People Pass Out,” where, as Georgia explains, you bend over, inhale and exhale really deep for a couple of minutes, then stand up and take a step forward. I did this at lunch one day in junior high school, and I managed to successfully make myself pass out. Everything went all gray and swirly, and I heard a lot of buzzing in my ears. When I opened my eyes, I noticed a crowd had gathered, hovering over top of me. I suppose my goal was achieved. Why else would a kid be dumb enough to make themselves pass out if not for the purpose of getting attention?
Another incident Georgia writes about is when her classmates all move their desks back an inch or two throughout class, just to confuse and infuriate the poor teacher. One day in homeroom my freshman year, our class pulled a similar prank. Before our teacher, a short, portly woman named Mrs. Randolf, came in to call the roll, we moved her desk to the middle of the room, inconspicuously surrounded by the smaller student desks. Someone replaced her desk up front with one of these smaller desks, knowing that there was no way in hell that she could fit in it. When she came in to the room, she huffed and puffed about her desk being gone, and we explained that Bob, the janitor, had came in and taken it away so that he could fix a broken leg on it. She proceeded to stuff herself into the tiny student desk as we proceeded to laugh our butts off. Eventually, when she was in the middle of calling roll, she looked up and noticed her desk in the middle of the room. I'll never forget the shade of red her face became at that moment.
Confessions made me miss those goofy high school days and the carefree mentality that came with them. I don't know a teenage girl who wouldn't relate to Georgia's tales of woe. They seem so over-the-top, but in reality, we've all been there.
Part C: Critical Response
Hostility
Georgia shows hostility towards school authorities. She's particularly annoyed by the school's headmistress, whom Georgia refers to as “Slim” given the fact that Slim “weights twenty-five stone . . . at least.” (Pg. 39) The girls launch attacks such as “Operation Sausage” against the administration to relieve their frustrations.
Agnus, the Scottish wildcat brings a bout of hostility to this tale. Georgia explains that “sometimes, he hears the call of the Scottish Highlands.” He's often found eating some random item or attacking either a person or an inanimate object. For example, on page 6, Agnus has a “Call of the Wild” episode and attacks Georgia's tights for no reason whatsoever. She manages to free him from her legs by beating him with a broom.
Georgia becomes particularly hostile when it comes to Lindsay, the girlfriend of Robbie, the Sex God. She repetitively calls her a “wet,” initiates a plan to stalk her, and outrightly attempts to steal her boyfriend.
Exaggeration
Georgia is always exaggerating things, especially when it comes to her flaws. In an early journal entry she writes that 1) “I have one of those under-the-skin spots that will never come to a head but will lurk in a red way for the next two years” and 2) I am very ugly and need to go into an ugly home.” (Pg. 3-4) Her exaggerations seem trivial, however teenage girls are inclined to be hard on themselves regarding their physical appearance. Rennison knows what's going on in the mind of a girl during her transition to womanhood.
Georgia exaggerates about Jackie Matthews' hickey. She says, “She's put about six centimeters of concealer on it and is wearing a scarf ... It's HUGE! What has she been snogging with – a calf?” (Pg. 76) This is just one example of Georgia's exaggerations towards people. Her descriptions of people in her life are over the top, really bringing the characters to life.
After Georgia's father moves to Whangamata for business, her mother strikes up a friendship with the interior decorator she's recently hired. Georgia exaggerates this relationship, blaming her mother for having an affair. When she confronts her mother about it, her mother replies, “Georgia, I know that you like a bit of drama, but I'm afraid that Jem and I are not having a passionate affair.” (Pg. 217) While I personally think Georgia's mother was definitely flirting with Jem, I don't think she was having any sort of an affair. Perhaps because Georgia was in the boy-chasing frame of mind, she thought her mother was, too.
Surprise or Shock
It was hilarious and shocking when Georgia won the tennis match that would advance her to the final round. In triumph, she throws her racket high up into the air. Unfortunately, it comes down on a teacher's head, and Georgia's win is forfeited. (Pg. 191-192)
I was shocked when – out of nowhere – Georgia tells her journal that Robbie has kissed her. It comes as a complete surprise, because as the novel is written in journal format, it's like the reader is learning the gossip after the fact. Georgia hadn't even been interested in going to see Robbie's band play that night, but it's a good thing she did.
The funniest shock in this book happens when Georgia's freshly-dyed blonde streak breaks off in her hand. She had dyed it to look older for Robbie, and when she tries to run her hand through her hair all sexy-like, it simply snaps off! Luckily, Robbie simply replies, “God you're weird,” and kisses her. (Pg. 230)
Word Play
Rennison has created an entire glossary, which is located at the end of the book, dedicated to British slang words that are used throughout the novel. Some of my favorites are “nuddy-pants,” a term meaning “Quite literally ... no pants (Pg. 240),” and “snogging,” which means “kissing (Pg. 244).”
Georgia takes pleasure in nicknaming people in her life. She refers to Robbie as the Sex God, or simply SG. She also calls a couple of administrators at her school Slim and Hawkeye. Her neighbors are Mr. and Mrs. Next Door, or Mr. and Mrs. ND, to name a few.
Instead of your typical English curse words, Rennison uses French as a disguise. Georgia writes muses in French throughout her journal, particularly when she needs a good curse word. Merde seems to be her favorite. Georgia and her friends also embark on La Marche avec Mystery (Pg. 6), where they walk up and down a local street, speaking only French, if for nothing more than to confuse people and produce giggles.
Louise Rennison is has authored a total of 17 Confessions novels to date, including: Dancing in My Nuddy-Pants, Luuurve is a Many Trousered Thing, and Stop in the Name of Pants!
Confessions of Georgia Nicolson: Angus, Thongs and Full-Frontal Snogging
by Louise Rennison
Humor Book
Avon Books, 2004, 245p, $13.99
ISBN 0-06-057590-5
There comes a time when every girl becomes a woman. Fourteen-year-old Georgia Nicolson thinks she might never make it through. Her nose is too big, her breasts are too small, and her experience with boys is lacking; she fears she's destined to become a lesbian. Georgia provides hilarious commentary of her adolescence, in both a self-deprecating and boastful manner.
Georgia lives with her mother, father, three-year-old sister, Libby, and an evil cat from hell named Agnus. She has a decent relationship with her mother, but distances herself as far as possible from her crude and grouchy father. An example of his fatherly love is when, early in the book, Georgia manages to accidentally shave off her eyebrows. Her father brings family members up to her bedroom to laugh at her. “What am I? A daughter or a fairground attraction?” she muses. (Pg. 23) Life at home is challenging for Georgia, as she's often taking care of Libby, who is often finding new places in Georgia's room to pee and poo. And then there's Agnus, the high-strung Scottish wildcat who eats everything and insists on venturing into Georgia's next-door neighbors' yard daily to stalk their poodle.
As if things at home aren't difficult enough, Georgia and her friends are occupied with this whole “becoming a woman” business. They're experimenting with make-up (Georgia is determined to make her nose look smaller), taking kissing lessons from a boy down the street, and developing obsessions for certain members of the opposite sex (Georgia thinks perhaps she's not a lesbian, after all!).
Jas, Georgia's best friend, begins a relationship with a fellow named Tom. Soon after, Georgia learns about his older brother, Robbie, who she refers to as a Sex God. He's in a band and is four years her elder. However, he has a girlfriend, a character Georgia describes as a “wet.” A “wet,” according to Georgia's glossary in the back of the book, is a “drippy, useless, nerdy idiot.” (This glossary is a very helpful tool provided to explain all of the British lingo Georgia uses throughout the novel.) Georgia sets out on a mission to break up Robbie and the wet, and with the help of Jas and company, achieves her goal.
The book is filled with laugh-out-loud moments, such as when, despite her parents' forbidding, Georgia bleaches a blonde streak into her hair to make her look older. She does this, of course, to impress Robbie, who had previously mentioned that Georgia was too young for him to date. When Agnus goes missing, and Robbie finds him and returns him to Georgia, she makes a play by casually running her fingers through her newly-dyed hair. When she does, the white streak breaks off in her hand! One embarrassing moment after another plagues poor Georgia. Teenage girls will love this book because Georgia shows them how to laugh of such traumatizing events, and because every girl goes through the same awkward transformation that Rennison writes about.
Three quotes:
“...there is no way an author can surprise a reader on every page. Instead, authors sprinkle humor throughout their books.” (Pg. 168) Rennison keeps the tone lively, with lots of jokes on every page. However, the big shockers are reserved for special moments, like when Georgia has to forfeit her tennis match victory and when her blonde streaks breaks off in her hand. Georgia is also cynical enough to not let the humor get out of control. There is a nice balance of ups and downs, although even negative situations are portrayed in a comical fashion.
“Humor is an obvious emotion, and students are genuinely interested in figuring out what causes the to smile or laugh.” (Pg. 169) Georgia writes about so many different things, it's easy for a reader to decide what makes them laugh and what doesn't. She makes jokes about lesbians, transvestites, incest, and many other issues that people can either take seriously or lightly.
“More and more lewd jokes (some approaching a mature recognition of the humor inherent in sex); humor aimed at schools, parents, and other adults in authority ... and grossness piled on even greater grossness.” (Pg. 163) Agnus, Thongs and Full-Frontal Snogging definitely fits this humor book age category. The novel is littered with sex jokes, disrespect for and superiority over adults, and disgusting tidbits (pee, poo, farting, snot, etc.).
Part B: Creative Response
Commentary: Flashback
Reading Confessions was a throw-back to high school for me. I could've been Georgia Nicolson; we're that much alike. I was a part of a clique of girls who fought their way through adolescence by chasing boys, applying way too much make-up, and finding ornery ways to anger our teachers. I was surprised to read Georgia's accounts of what we used to call “Light as a Feather, Stiff as a Board” and “People Pass Out.”
Many times, my girlfriends and I would chose and candidate and then gather around her. She would lie flat on the floor and we would encircle her, each placing two fingers underneath her body. Then we'd spout off some spirit chant, which usually included repeating the words, “Light as a feather, stiff as a board.” Sure enough, the girl would “float” off of the ground, and we'd be freaked totally out. I'm still not sure what “magic” was at work there. Perhaps our overactive adolescent brains made it all up. I wonder if Georgia ever held a séance before. We did once to talk to the ghost of Tupac. Boy, was that interesting.
We also used to play “People Pass Out,” where, as Georgia explains, you bend over, inhale and exhale really deep for a couple of minutes, then stand up and take a step forward. I did this at lunch one day in junior high school, and I managed to successfully make myself pass out. Everything went all gray and swirly, and I heard a lot of buzzing in my ears. When I opened my eyes, I noticed a crowd had gathered, hovering over top of me. I suppose my goal was achieved. Why else would a kid be dumb enough to make themselves pass out if not for the purpose of getting attention?
Another incident Georgia writes about is when her classmates all move their desks back an inch or two throughout class, just to confuse and infuriate the poor teacher. One day in homeroom my freshman year, our class pulled a similar prank. Before our teacher, a short, portly woman named Mrs. Randolf, came in to call the roll, we moved her desk to the middle of the room, inconspicuously surrounded by the smaller student desks. Someone replaced her desk up front with one of these smaller desks, knowing that there was no way in hell that she could fit in it. When she came in to the room, she huffed and puffed about her desk being gone, and we explained that Bob, the janitor, had came in and taken it away so that he could fix a broken leg on it. She proceeded to stuff herself into the tiny student desk as we proceeded to laugh our butts off. Eventually, when she was in the middle of calling roll, she looked up and noticed her desk in the middle of the room. I'll never forget the shade of red her face became at that moment.
Confessions made me miss those goofy high school days and the carefree mentality that came with them. I don't know a teenage girl who wouldn't relate to Georgia's tales of woe. They seem so over-the-top, but in reality, we've all been there.
Part C: Critical Response
Hostility
Georgia shows hostility towards school authorities. She's particularly annoyed by the school's headmistress, whom Georgia refers to as “Slim” given the fact that Slim “weights twenty-five stone . . . at least.” (Pg. 39) The girls launch attacks such as “Operation Sausage” against the administration to relieve their frustrations.
Agnus, the Scottish wildcat brings a bout of hostility to this tale. Georgia explains that “sometimes, he hears the call of the Scottish Highlands.” He's often found eating some random item or attacking either a person or an inanimate object. For example, on page 6, Agnus has a “Call of the Wild” episode and attacks Georgia's tights for no reason whatsoever. She manages to free him from her legs by beating him with a broom.
Georgia becomes particularly hostile when it comes to Lindsay, the girlfriend of Robbie, the Sex God. She repetitively calls her a “wet,” initiates a plan to stalk her, and outrightly attempts to steal her boyfriend.
Exaggeration
Georgia is always exaggerating things, especially when it comes to her flaws. In an early journal entry she writes that 1) “I have one of those under-the-skin spots that will never come to a head but will lurk in a red way for the next two years” and 2) I am very ugly and need to go into an ugly home.” (Pg. 3-4) Her exaggerations seem trivial, however teenage girls are inclined to be hard on themselves regarding their physical appearance. Rennison knows what's going on in the mind of a girl during her transition to womanhood.
Georgia exaggerates about Jackie Matthews' hickey. She says, “She's put about six centimeters of concealer on it and is wearing a scarf ... It's HUGE! What has she been snogging with – a calf?” (Pg. 76) This is just one example of Georgia's exaggerations towards people. Her descriptions of people in her life are over the top, really bringing the characters to life.
After Georgia's father moves to Whangamata for business, her mother strikes up a friendship with the interior decorator she's recently hired. Georgia exaggerates this relationship, blaming her mother for having an affair. When she confronts her mother about it, her mother replies, “Georgia, I know that you like a bit of drama, but I'm afraid that Jem and I are not having a passionate affair.” (Pg. 217) While I personally think Georgia's mother was definitely flirting with Jem, I don't think she was having any sort of an affair. Perhaps because Georgia was in the boy-chasing frame of mind, she thought her mother was, too.
Surprise or Shock
It was hilarious and shocking when Georgia won the tennis match that would advance her to the final round. In triumph, she throws her racket high up into the air. Unfortunately, it comes down on a teacher's head, and Georgia's win is forfeited. (Pg. 191-192)
I was shocked when – out of nowhere – Georgia tells her journal that Robbie has kissed her. It comes as a complete surprise, because as the novel is written in journal format, it's like the reader is learning the gossip after the fact. Georgia hadn't even been interested in going to see Robbie's band play that night, but it's a good thing she did.
The funniest shock in this book happens when Georgia's freshly-dyed blonde streak breaks off in her hand. She had dyed it to look older for Robbie, and when she tries to run her hand through her hair all sexy-like, it simply snaps off! Luckily, Robbie simply replies, “God you're weird,” and kisses her. (Pg. 230)
Word Play
Rennison has created an entire glossary, which is located at the end of the book, dedicated to British slang words that are used throughout the novel. Some of my favorites are “nuddy-pants,” a term meaning “Quite literally ... no pants (Pg. 240),” and “snogging,” which means “kissing (Pg. 244).”
Georgia takes pleasure in nicknaming people in her life. She refers to Robbie as the Sex God, or simply SG. She also calls a couple of administrators at her school Slim and Hawkeye. Her neighbors are Mr. and Mrs. Next Door, or Mr. and Mrs. ND, to name a few.
Instead of your typical English curse words, Rennison uses French as a disguise. Georgia writes muses in French throughout her journal, particularly when she needs a good curse word. Merde seems to be her favorite. Georgia and her friends also embark on La Marche avec Mystery (Pg. 6), where they walk up and down a local street, speaking only French, if for nothing more than to confuse people and produce giggles.
Louise Rennison is has authored a total of 17 Confessions novels to date, including: Dancing in My Nuddy-Pants, Luuurve is a Many Trousered Thing, and Stop in the Name of Pants!
Book Log: "The Perks of Being a Wallflower" by Stephen Chbosky
Part A: Book Summary
The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky
Problem Novel
Pocket Books, 1999, 213p, $12
ISBN 0-671-02734-4
The Perks of Being a Wallflower is the personal memoir of a teenage boy named Charlie. The coming-of-age novel is comprised of letters from Charlie to an unnamed friend throughout his freshman year of high school. The book has been among those on the American Library Association's list of challenged or banned books due to content dealing with teenage sexuality and drug use.
Charlie has been likened to a modern day Holden Caulfield from The Catcher in the Rye. He is shy and he's a people-watcher (a wallflower), and he thinks way too much. He's an introvert and has the sweetest soul; Charlie always hopes for the well-being of others in his life. Littered with pop culture references and issues that teenagers face on a daily basis, both the book and main character are easy for young people to relate to. And while it touches upon some of the more awkward and difficult subjects that teens have to handle, Perks offers a light-hearted approach that is not typical of most modern-day problem novels.
Charlie is very close to his family, and he often talks about his relationship with his brother, sister and parents. He's a very emotional boy, and he's been battling a sort of depression ever since his mother's sister, his Aunt Helen, whom he was very close to, passed away. Charlie often refers to “problems at home,” usually when talking about his peers. He has quite a nice home life, with a very functional and supportive family. Charlie almost seems an outsider at times, not square enough for the other members in it.
In Charlie's early letters, he talks about his advanced English teacher who has instructed him to call him Bill. Bill assigns Charlie books to read outside of class, and then has him write essays on the readings. Charlie indulges in each tale, from To Kill a Mockingbird to The Great Gatsby to Naked Lunch to The Fountainhead, and as he completes each essay, his writing improves. It makes for an interesting book, because Charlie's voice, already smart to begin with, becomes more intellectual as the story proceeds. Charlie takes on these assignments modestly; it isn't until Bill tells him so that he begins to realize how intelligent he really is.
Early in the book, Charlie befriends a step-brother and sister, Patrick and Sam, both seniors at Charlie's high school. Charlie's maturity is evident at this point. He's already in a frame of mind a few steps higher than his own classmates; he must hang out with the older crowd to fit in at all. Charlie is introduced to a new and liberal lifestyle through his adventures with Patrick and Sam. He soon falls in love with Sam, although she has a boyfriend and says that Charlie is too young for her. He learns about homosexuality because Patrick is gay. He eats “special” brownies at a party and, thus, learns about marijuana, and he writes a completely confusing letter at one point, ending it with, “Regardless, I decided to never take LSD again.” (Pg. 100) Cigarettes and alcohol make their appearance, as well. Charlie also talks about darker problems such as sexual abuse and abortion (he goes with his sister to a clinic so that she can have one).
Charlie certainly goes through plenty of “problems” in this novel, but takes them in stride, altering his view of the world with each event. It's Charlie's voice that keeps the reader engaged; he is so smart, sensitive, and observant, and each letter is filled with his passion for the world and what makes it tick. Throughout his freshman year, while Charlie is engaging in this teenage turmoil, he makes his way through the metamorphosis of a child to a young adult. After he befriends Patrick and Sam, he starts to wonder how he'll ever survive without them, as they are to graduate at the end of the year. By the end of the book, he has become a stronger person thanks to the friendships he gained, and he is looking forward to “participating” in his sophomore year of high school. “Participating” as opposed to “observing.” Charlie is a wallflower no more.
Three quotes:
“The problem novel, however, is based on the philosophy that young people will have a better chance to be happy if they have realistic expectations and if they know both the bad and the good about the society in which they live.” (Pg. 114)
Perks fits this criteria because Charlie is a very realistic character. He watches the world around him very closely, and observes the good and bad in everyone and everything. A young, naïve reader will learn to analyze situations they find themselves in, and they will find that there are multiple ways to get out of a tough spot. The book deals with many problems that young adults are inclined to run into, and Perks prepares its reader for such situations.
“Many of today's authors write the way people really talk...” (Pg. 114)
Chbosky wrote this book in a very creative fashion. At first glance, Charlie is an under-developed writer, using simple sentences and an uninteresting vocabulary. He writes how you would expect any 15-year-old to speak. And since Charlie's letters are just his thoughts rolling out onto paper, it sounds very informal. However, as Bill continues assigning Charlie books to read and essays to write, Charlie becomes a very literate individual, and although his vocabulary for writing and intelligence increases, Chbosky still manages to keep the content informal and understandable.
“The difference in the books ... is that the problems are not as grave as are the ones described earlier, and there is some force or some individual in the story who helps the young person through the experience.” (Pg. 132)
When I began reading about problem novels in the text, I realized I should've picked the first book I read, Looking for Alaska, as my problem novel. Perks does fit into this category (although I would rather place it under the Pop Culture category), and even though Charlie faces some grave issues, they are not as unbearable as the major tragedies that most problem novels focus on. Even though Charlie himself is an introvert, he's not depressed about it. Somehow, his voice keeps a light-hearted tone throughout the entire story. And, of course, Charlie has good friends to help him through the issues he is facing.
Part B: Creative Response
Please see attached PDF for my creative response. Since songs and mix tapes were so important to Charlie, I decided to create a lyrical scrapbook of Charlie's freshman year in high school. The piece contains lyrics from songs Charlie mentions in Perks, as well as nostalgic images from his freshman year. I've also highlighted certain lines in the songs that I think would've been particularly important to Charlie.
Part C: Critical Response
1. March Aronson says that what makes realistic novels succeed is their level of intimacy. “Does a book have the potential to touch readers deeply so that, in the struggle with it, they begin to see and to shape themselves? (pg. 113) Explain how your book does/does not succeed in terms of this definition.
I don't see how the reader could not be touched by Charlie's intimate letters. Charlie shares his every though with his “friend,” speaking about issues that are common to all young people. When Charlie was sad, I was sad. When Charlie was witty, I was laughing. And Chbosky combines the elements beautifully. With a wide range of topics, the author constructed this book in a fashion so that the widest audience could relate to the content. Charlie's growth is inspiring as well. As he becomes an active participant in life, the reader, too, is inspired to push their own personal boundaries to the edge.
2. …in the best of the problem novels authors take the space to develop various strands of their stories and to show differing viewpoints and alternate solutions. [115] Would your book meet the standard as a “best” problem novel according to this description? Why or why not?
Cbosky offers varying viewpoints on many topics throughout the book. For example, Charlie writes about Patrick's relationship with Brad, a high school jock who doesn't want anyone to know about his homosexuality. Patrick doesn't care what others think of him; he's open about being gay. However, he can't socialize with Brad during normal hours. They only hook up at parties when Brad can pretend to get “wasted” and mess around with Patrick. This shows the reader both sides of the coin when it comes to teenage sexuality. One can choose to be honest with others, or they can choose to keep their preferences to themselves, however, the latter decision may cause just as much emotional turmoil as the first. Perks is all about conservatism verses liberalism, as well, therefore, it was necessary for Cbosky to offer alternative viewpoints for the topics included.
3. See Table 4.1, please, on page 119. How do the main characters in your book “come alive” as believable with a balance of good and negative qualities?
The characters in Perks are mostly inherently good. Charlie is a very sweet, sensitive boy, always putting others in front of himself. Patrick and Sam are good, too. I'd love to have either of them as a friend of my own. Charlie's family members were all very cookie-cutter, too. But each of these individuals possessed their own flaws. Charlie is too introverted and awkward. He fails to do or say anything that he really wants to. Patrick and Sam are both good friends, but typically put their own interests before others'. And Charlie discusses how both his mother and father came to be the people they are today – good, bad, and indifferent. Charlie discusses his own faults throughout the book. He talks about how he's too emotional (and maybe even too honest) for his own good.
4. What insights into either society or individuals or both, what worthwhile theme or “something to think about” are you left with after you’ve read your novel?
I think the theme of Perks is that you should take advantage of what life gives you, that you should actually live it. Sometimes as a passive observer, we miss out on important relationships that can actually give our lives meaning.
5. On page 122, our text states that “skilled authors can show what is going on in character’s minds…” Does your author accomplish this task? Give several specific examples.
Perks comes directly from Charlie's mind. His letters are so personal, the reader takes a tour of his most intimate thoughts, which are numerous. It's actually quite hard to summarize this book because most of it actually occurs in Charlie's head. In each letter, Charlie narrates recent events in his life, but he also interjects his opinion and desires regarding each one. Unlike most young adult novels, this book does not rely solely on dialogue to carry it. Instead, Charlie's commentary fills up the pages. It would be easier to cite external examples, such as dialogue, than to cite examples of what's going on in Charlie's mind.
6. Michael Cart says that what is needed today is helping “mainstream kids begin to comprehend—intellectually and emotionally—the dramatic differences that now define the daily lives of so many other teens. Kids need to learn empathy. They need to learn how the other can become us.” Does the book that you chose engender this kind of empathy? Explain.
Charlie is a very empathetic character. Right from the beginning, he talks about the loss of a good friend, Michael. Michael killed himself, and Charlie slips into a depressed state as he tries to figure out why he did it. “Problems at home” seem to be the cause, and Charlie talks at great length about how home lives differ from person to person. Since Charlie is a people-watcher, he is constantly talking about how different people act and why. He makes skillful observations of each of his family members, his friends, and his peers. And no matter what happens, Charlie wishes the best for each individual.
7. The acceptance of the compromised dream is an element…particularly meaningful to teenagers who are just beginning to achieve some of their goals and to discover the illusory nature of the end of the end of the rainbow…they are not sorry they have ventured, for they have indeed found something worthwhile, but it is seldom the pot of gold they had imagined. Is your novel realistic in this sense? What dream is compromised; what has been found worthwhile?
Charlie misses his opportunity to have a romantic relationship with Sam because he was too busy being an observer. She chastises him for failing to take an active role in life, for not taking her by the hand when he could have. As Patrick and Sam prepare to head off to college, Charlie falls into an emotional slump and is admitted to a psychiatric hospital for two months. When he is released, he has a new, brighter handle on life. He is ready to “participate” in his sophomore year of high school, without the friends who helped shape him in the previous year. Charlie had to let go in order to pursue greater ventures.
The Perks of Being a Wallflower is Chbosky's first and only novel to date.
The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky
Problem Novel
Pocket Books, 1999, 213p, $12
ISBN 0-671-02734-4
The Perks of Being a Wallflower is the personal memoir of a teenage boy named Charlie. The coming-of-age novel is comprised of letters from Charlie to an unnamed friend throughout his freshman year of high school. The book has been among those on the American Library Association's list of challenged or banned books due to content dealing with teenage sexuality and drug use.
Charlie has been likened to a modern day Holden Caulfield from The Catcher in the Rye. He is shy and he's a people-watcher (a wallflower), and he thinks way too much. He's an introvert and has the sweetest soul; Charlie always hopes for the well-being of others in his life. Littered with pop culture references and issues that teenagers face on a daily basis, both the book and main character are easy for young people to relate to. And while it touches upon some of the more awkward and difficult subjects that teens have to handle, Perks offers a light-hearted approach that is not typical of most modern-day problem novels.
Charlie is very close to his family, and he often talks about his relationship with his brother, sister and parents. He's a very emotional boy, and he's been battling a sort of depression ever since his mother's sister, his Aunt Helen, whom he was very close to, passed away. Charlie often refers to “problems at home,” usually when talking about his peers. He has quite a nice home life, with a very functional and supportive family. Charlie almost seems an outsider at times, not square enough for the other members in it.
In Charlie's early letters, he talks about his advanced English teacher who has instructed him to call him Bill. Bill assigns Charlie books to read outside of class, and then has him write essays on the readings. Charlie indulges in each tale, from To Kill a Mockingbird to The Great Gatsby to Naked Lunch to The Fountainhead, and as he completes each essay, his writing improves. It makes for an interesting book, because Charlie's voice, already smart to begin with, becomes more intellectual as the story proceeds. Charlie takes on these assignments modestly; it isn't until Bill tells him so that he begins to realize how intelligent he really is.
Early in the book, Charlie befriends a step-brother and sister, Patrick and Sam, both seniors at Charlie's high school. Charlie's maturity is evident at this point. He's already in a frame of mind a few steps higher than his own classmates; he must hang out with the older crowd to fit in at all. Charlie is introduced to a new and liberal lifestyle through his adventures with Patrick and Sam. He soon falls in love with Sam, although she has a boyfriend and says that Charlie is too young for her. He learns about homosexuality because Patrick is gay. He eats “special” brownies at a party and, thus, learns about marijuana, and he writes a completely confusing letter at one point, ending it with, “Regardless, I decided to never take LSD again.” (Pg. 100) Cigarettes and alcohol make their appearance, as well. Charlie also talks about darker problems such as sexual abuse and abortion (he goes with his sister to a clinic so that she can have one).
Charlie certainly goes through plenty of “problems” in this novel, but takes them in stride, altering his view of the world with each event. It's Charlie's voice that keeps the reader engaged; he is so smart, sensitive, and observant, and each letter is filled with his passion for the world and what makes it tick. Throughout his freshman year, while Charlie is engaging in this teenage turmoil, he makes his way through the metamorphosis of a child to a young adult. After he befriends Patrick and Sam, he starts to wonder how he'll ever survive without them, as they are to graduate at the end of the year. By the end of the book, he has become a stronger person thanks to the friendships he gained, and he is looking forward to “participating” in his sophomore year of high school. “Participating” as opposed to “observing.” Charlie is a wallflower no more.
Three quotes:
“The problem novel, however, is based on the philosophy that young people will have a better chance to be happy if they have realistic expectations and if they know both the bad and the good about the society in which they live.” (Pg. 114)
Perks fits this criteria because Charlie is a very realistic character. He watches the world around him very closely, and observes the good and bad in everyone and everything. A young, naïve reader will learn to analyze situations they find themselves in, and they will find that there are multiple ways to get out of a tough spot. The book deals with many problems that young adults are inclined to run into, and Perks prepares its reader for such situations.
“Many of today's authors write the way people really talk...” (Pg. 114)
Chbosky wrote this book in a very creative fashion. At first glance, Charlie is an under-developed writer, using simple sentences and an uninteresting vocabulary. He writes how you would expect any 15-year-old to speak. And since Charlie's letters are just his thoughts rolling out onto paper, it sounds very informal. However, as Bill continues assigning Charlie books to read and essays to write, Charlie becomes a very literate individual, and although his vocabulary for writing and intelligence increases, Chbosky still manages to keep the content informal and understandable.
“The difference in the books ... is that the problems are not as grave as are the ones described earlier, and there is some force or some individual in the story who helps the young person through the experience.” (Pg. 132)
When I began reading about problem novels in the text, I realized I should've picked the first book I read, Looking for Alaska, as my problem novel. Perks does fit into this category (although I would rather place it under the Pop Culture category), and even though Charlie faces some grave issues, they are not as unbearable as the major tragedies that most problem novels focus on. Even though Charlie himself is an introvert, he's not depressed about it. Somehow, his voice keeps a light-hearted tone throughout the entire story. And, of course, Charlie has good friends to help him through the issues he is facing.
Part B: Creative Response
Please see attached PDF for my creative response. Since songs and mix tapes were so important to Charlie, I decided to create a lyrical scrapbook of Charlie's freshman year in high school. The piece contains lyrics from songs Charlie mentions in Perks, as well as nostalgic images from his freshman year. I've also highlighted certain lines in the songs that I think would've been particularly important to Charlie.
Part C: Critical Response
1. March Aronson says that what makes realistic novels succeed is their level of intimacy. “Does a book have the potential to touch readers deeply so that, in the struggle with it, they begin to see and to shape themselves? (pg. 113) Explain how your book does/does not succeed in terms of this definition.
I don't see how the reader could not be touched by Charlie's intimate letters. Charlie shares his every though with his “friend,” speaking about issues that are common to all young people. When Charlie was sad, I was sad. When Charlie was witty, I was laughing. And Chbosky combines the elements beautifully. With a wide range of topics, the author constructed this book in a fashion so that the widest audience could relate to the content. Charlie's growth is inspiring as well. As he becomes an active participant in life, the reader, too, is inspired to push their own personal boundaries to the edge.
2. …in the best of the problem novels authors take the space to develop various strands of their stories and to show differing viewpoints and alternate solutions. [115] Would your book meet the standard as a “best” problem novel according to this description? Why or why not?
Cbosky offers varying viewpoints on many topics throughout the book. For example, Charlie writes about Patrick's relationship with Brad, a high school jock who doesn't want anyone to know about his homosexuality. Patrick doesn't care what others think of him; he's open about being gay. However, he can't socialize with Brad during normal hours. They only hook up at parties when Brad can pretend to get “wasted” and mess around with Patrick. This shows the reader both sides of the coin when it comes to teenage sexuality. One can choose to be honest with others, or they can choose to keep their preferences to themselves, however, the latter decision may cause just as much emotional turmoil as the first. Perks is all about conservatism verses liberalism, as well, therefore, it was necessary for Cbosky to offer alternative viewpoints for the topics included.
3. See Table 4.1, please, on page 119. How do the main characters in your book “come alive” as believable with a balance of good and negative qualities?
The characters in Perks are mostly inherently good. Charlie is a very sweet, sensitive boy, always putting others in front of himself. Patrick and Sam are good, too. I'd love to have either of them as a friend of my own. Charlie's family members were all very cookie-cutter, too. But each of these individuals possessed their own flaws. Charlie is too introverted and awkward. He fails to do or say anything that he really wants to. Patrick and Sam are both good friends, but typically put their own interests before others'. And Charlie discusses how both his mother and father came to be the people they are today – good, bad, and indifferent. Charlie discusses his own faults throughout the book. He talks about how he's too emotional (and maybe even too honest) for his own good.
4. What insights into either society or individuals or both, what worthwhile theme or “something to think about” are you left with after you’ve read your novel?
I think the theme of Perks is that you should take advantage of what life gives you, that you should actually live it. Sometimes as a passive observer, we miss out on important relationships that can actually give our lives meaning.
5. On page 122, our text states that “skilled authors can show what is going on in character’s minds…” Does your author accomplish this task? Give several specific examples.
Perks comes directly from Charlie's mind. His letters are so personal, the reader takes a tour of his most intimate thoughts, which are numerous. It's actually quite hard to summarize this book because most of it actually occurs in Charlie's head. In each letter, Charlie narrates recent events in his life, but he also interjects his opinion and desires regarding each one. Unlike most young adult novels, this book does not rely solely on dialogue to carry it. Instead, Charlie's commentary fills up the pages. It would be easier to cite external examples, such as dialogue, than to cite examples of what's going on in Charlie's mind.
6. Michael Cart says that what is needed today is helping “mainstream kids begin to comprehend—intellectually and emotionally—the dramatic differences that now define the daily lives of so many other teens. Kids need to learn empathy. They need to learn how the other can become us.” Does the book that you chose engender this kind of empathy? Explain.
Charlie is a very empathetic character. Right from the beginning, he talks about the loss of a good friend, Michael. Michael killed himself, and Charlie slips into a depressed state as he tries to figure out why he did it. “Problems at home” seem to be the cause, and Charlie talks at great length about how home lives differ from person to person. Since Charlie is a people-watcher, he is constantly talking about how different people act and why. He makes skillful observations of each of his family members, his friends, and his peers. And no matter what happens, Charlie wishes the best for each individual.
7. The acceptance of the compromised dream is an element…particularly meaningful to teenagers who are just beginning to achieve some of their goals and to discover the illusory nature of the end of the end of the rainbow…they are not sorry they have ventured, for they have indeed found something worthwhile, but it is seldom the pot of gold they had imagined. Is your novel realistic in this sense? What dream is compromised; what has been found worthwhile?
Charlie misses his opportunity to have a romantic relationship with Sam because he was too busy being an observer. She chastises him for failing to take an active role in life, for not taking her by the hand when he could have. As Patrick and Sam prepare to head off to college, Charlie falls into an emotional slump and is admitted to a psychiatric hospital for two months. When he is released, he has a new, brighter handle on life. He is ready to “participate” in his sophomore year of high school, without the friends who helped shape him in the previous year. Charlie had to let go in order to pursue greater ventures.
The Perks of Being a Wallflower is Chbosky's first and only novel to date.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
