After reading this short story, I was filled with a sense of confusion and disappointment. Perhaps I am missing some essential underlying themes, but this story seemed completely empty and pointless to me. Just a boring story filled with shallow, stereotypical characters. The hard-working, personality-lacking, single female lawyer; the pissed-off, moderately-abusive/moderately-respectful-based-on-his-mood, swears-he's-gonna-be-a-better-man-tomorrow husband; the pitiful, young, somewhat-helpless, trying-to-improve-her-life, unhappy girl.... Girl's stuck in a necessary, though, for the most part, unhappy marriage. Husband isn't very nice to her. They separate. They briefly un-separate. They separate permanently. Girl sort of misses him, but has a better life now. The end. I can only assume from the fact that it was assigned in my college level literature class that this story receives at least some level of recognition and critical praise. This is baffling, though not surprising; I have seen this before many times over my career as a student of language arts. I wish I had my 45 minutes back.
Such are my opinions on this work.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Monday, November 21, 2011
"The Lazarus Project" by Aleksandar Hemon
The last part of this novel is intensely violent. Hemon doesn't skimp on the graphic, gory details of this violence either, and I believe this helps to create a more emotional response within the reader. At least, it did for me. The scene in which Lazarus' family is beaten nearly to death while their house is ransacked and raided filled me with disgust and anger. It is disturbing how sick these people are. They are like animals. Olga even refers to one of them as "the swine," a fitting, if not too complimentary, name.
There are similarities and differences between the raw violence in this scene, and the raw violence in the scene in which Brick and Rora assault the driver, Seryozha, in the bathroom of the train station. This similarity is in the graphic violence that is illustrated. The following is a quote from Brick after breaking his hand breaking Seryozha's jaw.
"My hand was throbbing with beastly, thrilling pain."
The word "swine" from the first scene and the word "beastly" from the second scene give rise to thoughts concerning the animalistic nature of violence. During their moments of violence, these people are, in a way, subhuman.
The difference between these two scenes is that, while reading the first scene, I was filled with anger and disgust. But while reading the second scene, I was filled with different emotions. The violence of Brick and Rora was righteous violence. Seryozha deserved what he got, both for what he had done in the past, and for what he would have done to Elena had they not acted.
I'm not trying to say that violence is sometimes the answer, but I'm not saying the opposite either. All I am saying is that, sometimes, it certainly feels right. Though often, it certainly feels very, very wrong.
There are similarities and differences between the raw violence in this scene, and the raw violence in the scene in which Brick and Rora assault the driver, Seryozha, in the bathroom of the train station. This similarity is in the graphic violence that is illustrated. The following is a quote from Brick after breaking his hand breaking Seryozha's jaw.
"My hand was throbbing with beastly, thrilling pain."
The word "swine" from the first scene and the word "beastly" from the second scene give rise to thoughts concerning the animalistic nature of violence. During their moments of violence, these people are, in a way, subhuman.
The difference between these two scenes is that, while reading the first scene, I was filled with anger and disgust. But while reading the second scene, I was filled with different emotions. The violence of Brick and Rora was righteous violence. Seryozha deserved what he got, both for what he had done in the past, and for what he would have done to Elena had they not acted.
I'm not trying to say that violence is sometimes the answer, but I'm not saying the opposite either. All I am saying is that, sometimes, it certainly feels right. Though often, it certainly feels very, very wrong.
Friday, November 4, 2011
"The Bridegroom" by Ha Jin
The biggest thing that stuck out to me when I was reading this passage was the ignorance of the people in the society in which the story took place. Their ignorance is childlike even. Some of the things they say sound extremely childish to me:
"It's a social disease, like gambling, or prostitution, or syphilis."
"Homosexuality originated in Western capitalism and bourgeois lifestyle."
"Some believed [Baowen] was a hermaphrodite, otherwise his wife would've been pregnant long ago."
I would like to know the year during which this story takes place. It can't be too recent, can it? The ignorance of what I can only assume to be an accurate cross-section of China's population at the time says a lot about the government that prevented it from understanding the true nature of homosexuality. I find it hard to believe that the highest ranking members of China's government actually believed that homosexuality is a disease, curable by electroshock treatment. But maybe I'm wrong. I don't know.
From the perspective of a 21st century American, the ignorance of these people is astounding. We are made to feel so much more advanced in our understanding of sexuality, culture, acceptance, diversity, and the world in general. And perhaps we are. But who's to say that 100 years down the road, people won't look back on our society and marvel at its ignorance and barbarism? It is naive to believe that we, as a society of Americans in 2011, have "figured it all out."
Have we progressed relative to the society described in Ha Jin's "The Bridegroom"? I would argue that we have, and I'm sure ~99% of Americans would agree. But would that same majority of Americans agree that our society will one day appear to have been just as ignorant as the one in the story? I doubt it. And why is it that we are, well, ignorant of the ignorance that runs rampant through our minds as individuals and through our policies and attitudes as a society? It takes an idealogical revolution to change the mindset a society. One person must see the wrongs that exist in our world, then edify others, in order for us to advance. But this is a slow and grey process. People resist change. And it's hard to tell whether any particular change is for the better or for the worse while it's happening.
"It's a social disease, like gambling, or prostitution, or syphilis."
"Homosexuality originated in Western capitalism and bourgeois lifestyle."
"Some believed [Baowen] was a hermaphrodite, otherwise his wife would've been pregnant long ago."
I would like to know the year during which this story takes place. It can't be too recent, can it? The ignorance of what I can only assume to be an accurate cross-section of China's population at the time says a lot about the government that prevented it from understanding the true nature of homosexuality. I find it hard to believe that the highest ranking members of China's government actually believed that homosexuality is a disease, curable by electroshock treatment. But maybe I'm wrong. I don't know.
From the perspective of a 21st century American, the ignorance of these people is astounding. We are made to feel so much more advanced in our understanding of sexuality, culture, acceptance, diversity, and the world in general. And perhaps we are. But who's to say that 100 years down the road, people won't look back on our society and marvel at its ignorance and barbarism? It is naive to believe that we, as a society of Americans in 2011, have "figured it all out."
Have we progressed relative to the society described in Ha Jin's "The Bridegroom"? I would argue that we have, and I'm sure ~99% of Americans would agree. But would that same majority of Americans agree that our society will one day appear to have been just as ignorant as the one in the story? I doubt it. And why is it that we are, well, ignorant of the ignorance that runs rampant through our minds as individuals and through our policies and attitudes as a society? It takes an idealogical revolution to change the mindset a society. One person must see the wrongs that exist in our world, then edify others, in order for us to advance. But this is a slow and grey process. People resist change. And it's hard to tell whether any particular change is for the better or for the worse while it's happening.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)