Fly Away

Song of Solomon transcended my initial impression of weird, incest novel. The end left me in a conflict as to whether flying was good or bad. There were several pieces of evidence in the book that made me think flying, while initially appearing like a majestic form of leaving behind the bad parts of society, whetehr that be racism, slavery, or insurance collecting, is bad because of the other things you leave behind. People depend on others, and chances are if you fly away you are leaving behind someone who loves or depends on you. That is why Pilate heard her dad telling her that you can't just leave someone. That is why Ryna still screams when the wind hits her gulch right. And that is why Hagar died. However, Morrison's last sentence really makes me feel like flying is not all bad. It is Milkman's dream, and the way he discovers it is possible seems like an incredible experience to me. I decided that when Milkman flew, he was not leaving anyone behind. Hagar had already died because he left her, after he told his family about his history they were somewhat indifferent, and Pilate had just died in his arms. I think the message is that people should fly if they can, but they have to be careful they do not cause pain to those they leave behind.

I am looking forward to reading Jazz, which Morrison said was her best novel in her interview.

Yuck

First off, that incest scene was nasty. Besides Ruth lying with her dad "naked as a yard dog, kissing him," the part that really got to me was Macon's description of the dad as a "white rat" (73). The image grossed me out. Which is probably good because if it did not then something is wrong with me. Nightmares are coming. What is Milkman supposed to do? His dad's story just completely messed him up and now he is having flashbacks of himself breastfeeding.

Till has it worse though.

Milkman is growing up and it seems like he is on teams. He is on a team by himself against his family and he is on the team blacks that is fighting against the discrimination of whites. He is caught in the middle of the civil war within his family. His dad hates his mom and his sisters are just there. They make rose petals and glare at him when he knocks down Macon but they do not really seem to do anything. The story about Till puts Milkman against more opposition besides his family, whites. A white man can do anything to a black man without consequence because there "ain't no law for no colored man except the one sends him to the chair" (82). So far I am seeing Milkman against the world. At least he is together with the other black men fighting racism, but still it seems like the odds are against them winning.

Flight seems like an important theme. When Hagar says that "some of [her] days were hungry ones," Pilate realizes "she don't mean food" (48-49). Pilate then sings the same song she sang when Robert Smith tried to fly away. I was confused when I read this part, but here is my interpretation: I think Hagar wants to "fly" away from something. Maybe poverty or maybe oppression, I am not sure. Pilate's recollection of her mother's "blue...ribbons" that she wore before she "died" also reminded me of flight (42-43). Robert Smith was wearing blue wings when he tried to fly away. I think blue could represent flight or death or both. Flying could be a way to freedom, and so could death.

My point is this. The Newsday writer who said, "[Morrison's] writing evokes the joyful richness of life" must not have read the book about which he or she was talking (back of the book).

Colorful

The color imagery in Song of Solomon really stood out to me in the beginning of the book. Robert Smith had a "little yellow house" (3). He had his "wide blue wings" stretched around him before he tried to fly away (6). The "red velvet rose petals" scattered around into the snow that would soak "through them" (5). And "white-coated surgeons" work in mercy hospital (7). I already think white must represent something treacherous because Mercy did not allow black patients until they admitted Ruth, and the snow is trying to ruin the red roses that they girls have worked so hard to make. I also think yellow could be something bad because Robert Smith was trying to escape from his yellow house. Escape on blue wings. Blue could be escape and red could represent toil.

Names also caught my attention. I feel like they must be important just because of how much they stand out: First Corinthians and Pilate are clearly biblical allusions. I wonder why it was so important to the whites that Mains Avenue wwas not called Doctor Street. Maybe because they do not want the black doctor to be recognized.

Whatever

Chapter 19 of King Leopold's Ghost gives several examples of murder not mattering to people. Just like the exhibit of the Soviet Union, the exhibit of the Congo has "no hint" of the "millions of Congolese" that died (293). The murder of the Congolese was considered insignificant at the time it happened, so exhibits of the Congo do not display its horror. The Company's nonchalance towards its treatment of the natives in Heart of Darkness shows how little the Europeans thought of the Congolese.

Another similarity between Chapter 19 and Heart of Darkness is European reaction to rebellion. The statues that have "every nail and blade" inserted into them to represent 'retaliation" remind me completely of the heads on poles that Kurtz used to instil fear in the natives. The Europeans were scared of losing power in Africa so they would terrorize the natives to make sure they kept their power.

Women

The women in Heart of Darkness all seem significant to me. I only remember four. The two at the beginning, one of whom "preceded [Marlow] into the waiting-room" (14). She could be important because she kind of marks the beginning of Marlow's journey. However, what I really noticed about Marlow's encounter with her was how he "only...just began to think of getting out of her way" when she "walked straight at [him]-still knitting with downcast eyes" (14). Marlow barely even thought of moving out of her way until she was about to walk into him. His actions made me feel like he thought he was above her. Then, at the very end of the book, we meet the "wild-eyed and magnificent" African woman (113). As Marlow and the crew leave Kurtz's station Marlow blows the steamboat's whistle to scare off the native onlookers, and "only the barbarous and superb woman [does] not so much as flinch, and [stretches] tragically her bare arms after [them] over the sombre and glittering river" (127). This woman seems powerful, steady amidst the terror felt by all around her. Finally, Marlow meets the lady that loved Kurtz. She seems to bring all the grief hat has happened in the novel together through a "feeling of infinite pity" (144). The scene with this lady repeats Kurtz's "very last words" in a "persistent whisper that seemed to swell menacingly" (145). She encompasses all the darkness Marlow has seen through her mourning of Kurtz. The women can be insignificant, powerful, or somber. Yet the men have power of them. Marlow treats the first lady in a way that makes her insignificant. The native is willful, but Kurtz and Marlow still leave her behind making her seem helpless. And Marlow has to save the last woman from overwhelming anguish that would have been "too dark" by lying about Kurtz's last words. Marlow alone lived with the knowledge of the "horror," at least until he told this story to his shipmates.

The End

Someone once told me the only activity proven to make people smarter is reading. I feel like if I could just understand Heart of Darkness a little better I could feel myself getting smarter as I read it. I am obviously no expert on literature but I feel it is the most well written book we have read so far this year and we have read some very well written books. I definitely started noticing black and white imagery more and more as I got towards the end of the book. A few examples really stood out to me when Marlow goes to visit the lady in the Kurtz's painting. "The tall marble fireplace had a cold and monumental whiteness. A grand pianio stood massively in a corner, with dark gleams..." (139). "She came forward, all in black, with a pale head" (139). "That great and saving illusion that shone with an unearthly glow in the darkness" (142). Even when all is dark around Marlow and this woman they are in the middle of a light because they knew Kurtz.

I really did not understand "The horror! The horror!" (130). Did Kurtz, in death, understand the true horror of the world? Or maybe of his actions?

Bald as Ivory

I am trying to figure out what Marlow thinks of Mr. Kurtz. He talks about Kurtz in different ways, usually making me think he does not respect Kurtz, but sometimes his commentary is not always consistent. His goal is to find find Kurtz, the man who is "grubbing for ivory" in the middle of the "wretched" jungle (77). At this moment, Marlow thinks of Kurtz as a man trying to find ivory by any means neccessary. Marlow's use of the word of "grubbing" gives a negative connotation. I picture a fat, greasy man grubbing at his food, scraping everything he can off his plate.

However, when Marlow starts to think that "Mr. Kurtz is dead...by this time," a "sense of extreme dissapointment" overcomes him for the sole reason that now he cannot have "a talk with Mr. Kurtz" (86). I think Marlow is so dissapointed because he wants to confront the man that seems to encompass everything that he thinks of as the "heart of darkness." Maybe that is why "of all [Kurtz's] gifts the one that [stands] out preeminently , that [carries] with it a sense of real presence, [is] his ability to talk" (86). I think ivory is a symbol of evil in Heart of Darkness. Ivory represents the white man's greed and evil in the novel. Marlow describes Kurtz as "an ivory ball" because of his bald head (87). Conrad turns Kurtz into the ultimate "white" man. His bald appearance actually reflects his personality: greedy and inhumane.

Evil

In Heart of Darkness, the characters seem to have an inner nature of evil. In the moments when they have nothing to lose, their true natures surface. I first noticed this when Marlow talks about the way people respond to hunger. Marlow says, "No fear can stand up to hunger, no patience can wait it out" (76). Marlow does not see how anyone can withstand the "devilry of lingering starvation" (76). Marlow is actually surprised that the black men on the boat have not turned to cannibalism in an effort to defeat their hunger. Heart of Darkness expresses the idea that black is good and white is bad, contrary to what just about every white man believes during the time Marlow's story takes palce. While Marlow believes any man would eat other humans rather than starve, the black men were able to excercise restraint in this situation, restraint that surprises Marlow. When Marlow threw the dead helmsman overboard it "scandalised" the starving black men, but he only presented a "first-rate temptation" when dead (94-95). The black men are starving, and they would happily eat a dead human, but they are not willing to kill someone to satisfy their hunger. Marlow, who is white, expects them to revolt and eat the rest of the white men.

The evil of human nature also shows itself in the battle between the men on the steamboat and the indigenous people. When the "savages" see the steamboat, they shoot at it. They do not try to make contact with the men on the steamboat and see if they are friendly. They immediately shoot arrows and throw spears. The men on the steamboat of course shoot at the savages in response to the hostile actions. When Marlow asks the harlequin why "they attacked," the harlequin replies "shamefacedly, 'They don't want him to go'" (100). I think the reason they attacked is because of the way Kurtz treats them. He treats them terribly because the nature of man is evil.

Landscapes

This book is pretty depressing. I was having a lot of trouble reading it at first but I am starting to get used to Conrad's style. Conrad's description of the landscape so far throughout the novel strikes me. It chills me sometimes. When Marlow begins his journey he watches the coast slip by before him, "smiling, frowning, inviting, grand, mean, insipid, or savage, and always mute with an air of whispering, Come and find out" (20). The coast has so many different characteristics, yet it is "almost featureless," with an "aspect of monotonous grimness" (20). Conrad personifies the coast by using a series of varied actions and then juxtaposes them by calling the coast "monotonous." This gives the landscape a mysterious feeling that accompanies Marlow not knowing what to expect on his journey.

Marlow steps into the "gloomy circle of some Inferno" that he soon discovers to be "the grove of death" (27, 32). The "uninterrupted, uniform" noise of the rapids that fills the "mournful stillness of the grove" fits the scene. The people have come to die under this cluster of trees. The steady yet gloomy noise of rapids reflects the fact that these people are waiting for their inevitable deaths.

Marlow discovers that "there was no joy in the brilliance of sunshine" (60). Typically the thought of bright sunlight evokes happiness in a reader, but the excruciating brightness of the sun and the already miserable environment in which Marlow has to bear its rays make it painful. Conrad's contrast with the typical idea of sunlight grabbed my attention. Even sunlight causes sadness in the heart of darkness.

The Moment of Truth

I think Lyubov's critical discovery is when she finds out that Lopakhinhas bought thecherry orchard. At this moment she realizes how important it is to her and that it is finally gone. Lyubov says, "Oh, my dear, sweet, lovely orchard!...My life, my youth, my happiness, good-bye" (379). Lyubov has lived with the cherry orchard her whole life, so it holds all of her childhood memories, everything she has ever known. Anya has no problem leaving the orchard in order to start a new life because she is not as close to the orchard as Lyubov and Gayev.

The servants are also very close to the cherry orchard, because they have lived there for a long time. I think Firs shows the ultimate example of someone not being able to live without the ochard. He was always talking about the old days of the orchard, and then when it came time to begin the new days away from the orchard he was not able to. Firs literally could not live without the orchard, so he died before he was able to leave it.

I feel like the differences between characters in The Cherry Orchard were really not that great. Each had different personalities but in the end I placed each into two categories. Those that could accept the loss of the cherry orchard, and those that could not. In the first category, the characters will probably be able to have a good life while the others might never be able to move on. On the other hand, I think it might show a good personality trait in those that cannot move on because it shows a level of emotional deepness that the others do not possess.

Non-Stop Laughter

I would not say The Cherry Orchard is one of the funniest plays or books I have ever read, but comedy is present in a weird kind of way. Some of the characters are straight up crazy, like Firs and Gayev. In the middle of his sentence Gayev will "...yellow into the side pocket..." (377). I do not know why he does this but maybe it is to cope with his misery due to the loss of the cherry orchard or maybe it is because he is a raving lunatic. Either way it is kind of funny. Another part of the play that I guess could be funny is the very end. After a sad goodbye that everyone says to their former home, we find out that Firs was never actually in the hospital, he was in the locked room. Ha. It is just so ridiculous that the people would lock someone in a room that it is a little funny, but since Firs happens to be dying the humor is lacking. Firs himself is pretty comical. The whole play he has rambled on about things not even remotely related to what anyone else is talking about. Then, he changes completely and shows extreme maturity by being able to accept his death, realizing "there's no strength left in [him]", nothing's left, nothing" (380). And then he reverts to the crazy old Firs that we have come to know and love when he says, "Ach, you...addlepate" (380)!

Yummm, Milk Soup

Some of Charlotta's lines at the beginning of Act II really struck me. Charlotta thinks, "Where I come from and who I am - I do not know...Who my parents were...I don't know" (337). The reason these lines stood out to me is that since Charlotta is a governess, I would expect her heritage to be very important to her given the time. I would expect most noble people to be proud of their family history and maybe even flaunt it sometimes, but Charlotta cannot even remember who her parents are.

Chekhov's language makes the play feel "real" to me, but sometimes I think he uses phrases that someone would probably only think and not actually say out loud. Yasha points out how it is "very pleasant smoking a cigar in the open air" after Dunyasha just told him she is "passionately in love with [him]" (339). By the way, it is very pleasant eating these potato chips while I write this blog entry. There are some things that we can keep to ourselves. When the characters say out loud what I would expect to be just a thought (and not a comment), it makes me feel like the characters are kind of in a daze, like they are not really tuned into reality. Maybe Yasha has something besides tobacco in that cigar.

The servants have to eat "milk soup" because of Lyubov's poor financial situation, but she is still willing to "squander money foolishly" (340). Lyubov is aware of her lack of money and even expresses guilt for the misery of her servants, so why does she still spend money so carelessly?

The Cherry Orchard, Remembering People, and Rudeness

In class we talked about the cherry orchard being a metaphor. I am trying to figure out what the cherry orchard represents as I read, and right now I think it could represent wealth. Lyubov is out of money, and Lopakhin suggests "the cherry orchard...[be] cut up" to help pay off her debts (325). Lyubov was rich, but now she her financial situation is poor and she might become completely bankrupt if she decides to cut down the cherry orchard. A long time ago, the cherries "were soft and juicy" and they "brought in money" (326). Maybe during this time that Firs describes, forty or fifty years ago, Lyubov was much wealthier so people were happier. The excessive amount of crying and whining in the story makes me think that money correlates directly to the characters happiness.

Something that stood out to me in the story was how people were having so much trouble remembering other people. They were gone five years, but I feel like they would be able to remember the people they left from their home much better than they did. Lopakhin wonders, "Will she recognize me" (317)? Lyubov states that she "recognized Danyasha" (318). I would think that since Lopakhin and Danyasha were considering meeting the returning people at the train station, they would have a somewhat intimate relationship, close enough that forgetting what someone looked like would not be an issue. I remember what my friends from North Carolina look like even though I left seven years ago and Have not seen them since. That could be because of facebook though. I do not think they have facebook.

Anya annoyed me with her random statements and lack of attention to other characters questions. Danyasha tells Anya about Yepikhodov's proposal to her, and Anya replies, "You always talk about the same thing...I've lost all my hairpins" (319). Rude. Maybe Anya and me have different priorities but I would consider a proposal more important than hairpins, no matter how often anyone talks about it.

Why does it matter?

The part I do not understand about the fact that Huck Finn's speech may be "modeled on black speakers" is its importance. If Mark Twain imagined Huck as a "poor white boy," then I think Huck was supposed to be white. If only Huck's speech is modeled after that of a black person, then I do not really see what the issue is. Huck grew up around slaves, and so their presence probably would have influenced his speech in Mark Twain's eyes. I can easily accept that Twain modeled Huck's speech after Jimmy. I think Twain could have placed parts of Jimmy's personality in Huck. Huck always has something to say and he is captivated by "small marvels" that some would consider "not worth remembering." This allows Huck to have the same effect on the reader that Jimmy had on Twain. Huck can make a great adventure out of nothing, like rescuing a slave who is already free.

However, I do not think Twain's use of Jimmy in Huck had anything to do with the fact that Jimmy was black. I think it was because Jimmy was an interesting kid whose personality could help make a great story. Even if Huck's speech is modeled after a black person's, I disagree that we would have to "rethink who Huckleberry Finn is." He is a white kid who goes against society's ideas because he realizes for himself how kind and how good of a friend Jim is. How would having black speech change that? I was certainly surprised to read that any part of Huck was modeled after a black person, but finding it out really does not change the way I see Huck. If Huck was black my feelings would be completely different, but even Professor Fishkin "was not arguing that Twain envisioned Huck as a black child."

Differences

I do think Jim is meant to characterize many black people during the setting of Huck Finn. Although Jim is not a white man posing as a black man, he probably has some attributes that Twain gave him because he thought they were exhibited by most blacks at that time. For example, Jim's firm beliefs in superstition and witchcraft attract many slaves to see him and touch the token that hangs around his neck, which the devil gave to him. Only slaves came to hear Jim's stories. And Jim's dialect is not shared by any white man in the story. I think that any distinctions between Jim and the white characters of the novel act to separate whites from blacks even more than slavery already does. Because Jim is so different than any other white character in the story, I do think his actions create a small stereotype of how any black man would act.

However, many of Jim's actions are admirable, and would make blacks look good if Twain was in fact characterizing blacks' behavior through Jim. For example, Jim shows remorse for beating his daughter when she did not deserve it while Huck's father never showed remorse for beating Huck for trivial reasons like going to school. While I think Twain does characterize the behavior of blacks through Jim, I do not think he does so to make fun of blacks as in a minstrel show. I think Twain does so to demonstrate a cultural difference between blacks and white which society creates.

Hush

I think editing Huck Finn is ridiculous. I think part of the reason Mark Twain uses the n-word could be to show the reader how dirty and discriminatory it sounds. Mark Twain says in the author's note at the beginning of the book that he studied all the dialects he uses in Huck Finn, and so I am sure white people actually used the word at the time the book takes place. Mark Twain "was a passionate critic of American racism," so no one should edit his book when the point is to expose American racism. The editing of the n-word makes white Americans at that time seem less racist than they were. Personally, I think Twain's use of the n-word makes me more aware of how extremely racist it is.

Huck used the word many times because society taught him that it was okay. Although Huck diverges from society's racist belief through his experiences with Jim, his use of the n-word throughout the novel shows that he can probably never truly break away from the ideas society has placed in his head.