It is amazing that while reading a short story, you can have absolutely no thoughts about it and then walk in to English class and discuss it until the bell rings. When I first read “Harrison Bergeron,” no profound questions or ideas came into my head. However, one other person’s comment can set you off on a train of thought that opens your eyes to a whole other meaning of the story. I had one of these revelations on Tuesday after discussing "Harrison Bergeron." Suddenly, an interesting short story turned into a deep, meaningful piece of literature.
At first, it appeared to be a satirical, sci-fi kind of story with a strange unexplained ending. But after the in-class discussion, I realized that the story isn’t random and futuristic. Kurt Vonnegut Jr.’s symbols are pre-meditated and universal. “Harrison Bergeron” can be a commentary on many different social and political plights. Vonnegut’s story is a timeless piece of writing because it has been applicable to society in all time periods since he wrote it in the 1960s.
The fact that it was written in the 1960s has a lot to do with the subject matter. The 1960s saw an end to a period in history, the Red Scare, which was filled with paranoia that Communism was going to spread and take over governments all over the world. This wide spread fear is most likely what led Vonnegut to satirize the Communist/ Socialist idea that every one in a population should be equal. In the story, the beautiful cover their faces, the strong weigh themselves down, and the intelligent cannot think without being interrupted by piercing noises. In effect, the government has handicapped every individual so as to make no one superior to anyone else. Knowing this first part of the plot line might convince a reader that this story is solely a criticism of Communism.
Later when the reader is introduced to Harrison Bergeron, the son of two faithfully handicapped parents, we realize that perhaps this story is a criticism of more than just one government and maybe all of them. Harrison Bergeron is seen as the rebel who cannot be contained by the equalizing regime. He grows stronger with every handicap they give him. His defiance of the government and continued resistance symbolizes the idea that a government can never suppress the freedom of the people if they want it badly enough. Harrison Bergeron represents the rise of democracy and freedom, but also the rise of hierarchy. When Harrison cries out, “I am the Emperor!” and “Everybody must do what I say at once!” (54), he is seizing power over a weaker population. This hierarchal unfairness is exactly what communism criticizes about democracy.
Vonnegut presents pitfalls in both of these kinds of societies to point out that no government can be perfect and all-inclusive. All systems come with a list of pros and cons. Regarding democracy and communism, there are choices to be made: hierarchy or equality, knowledge or blissful ignorance, society based on power or society based on threats?
Throughout life we make choices based on the good and bad of every situation. Because of this aspect of life, this story is really relatable and can be used to describe any number of situations. Although the tale of Harrison Bergeron has obvious correlations to government, it can also be symbolic of many different aspects of a society. [568]
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Alanis might say it's like rain on your wedding day.
In every group of short stories, there is always one that strikes me imediately. There is also always one author that amazes me with his or her prowess and ability to tackle important concepts. Recently, Flannery O'Connor accomplished this in my mind. Her use of irony in "A Good Man is Hard to Find" inspired me to write this blog. Not only did she make good use of irony in her story, but the humerous technique served a dual purpose. The imminent and ironic fate of the grandmother as well as the ironic, even hypocritical, nature of religion made a great page-turner.
The irony in the plot is quite obvious. The grandmother, who tries to deter her son from going to Florida, tells Bailey about the Misfit, a criminal on the loose in the South. When she fails to convince her son to vacation in Tennessee instead, Grandma is the first in the car in the morning. As their journey progresses, Grandma refuses to let her vivid plantation memories fade away. She lies to her grandchildren and coaxes her son down a dirt path to find an old plantation that has sentimental value to her. The cat from Grandma's lap--one she wasn't supposed to bring in the first place--leaps from its resting place onto Bailey's shoulder. Unfortunately for this family, Bailey cannot control the steering wheel with a vicious cat strapped to his neck and rolls the car. So far, Grandma is responsible for placing the family on the dirt road towards the plantation and also for the car crash. To make the situation even better, O'Connor shows Grandma recalling that the plantation she is remembering is actually located in Tennessee. Without skipping a beat, Grandma flags down a hearse-like car to help the family. Finally, she does something right. But, wait, in a perfect moment of realization, Grandma squeals, "You're The Misfit! I recognized you at once!" (83) In a perfect world, criminals might enjoy being revealed, but this is Flannery's world and the Misfit doesn't much appreciate the attention. As her family gets killed off two by two, Grandma is left reflecting on her pitiful life, knowing inside that she is the cause of extreme pain and hardship.
In her last moments of life, Grandma makes a sincere regression to innoncence and acceptance of Christ. Her selflessness is out of character when she knows she must forgive the Misfit for all of his sins. She dies in a child-like pose, smiling up at the sky, leaving the reader to feel that her last minute repentence has been rewarded with a ticket to the pearly gates. Thus presents one of the greatest ironies of religion. There are devout Christians that honor the grace of past-child molesters, rapists, and murderers such as the Misfit because after their deeds were done, they asked God for forgiveness and repented their sins. Despite what you may think, this isn't a limited-time offer. Saving grace is available by the bushel. Our Lord and Savior is ever-forgiving. It seems odd...or maybe I'm just being cynical. Could it really be that easy? They do say that it is always easier to beg forgiveness than it is to beg permission.
Whether Flannery O'Connor is satarizing Christianity or recommending repentence as an end all be all solution is hard to determine. However, her lack of definitive opinion in this area opens her stories up for many heated discussions and debates. Stories like "Revelation" and "A Good Man is Hard to Find" are the most interesting perhaps because they are open to multiple interpretations, none of which could ever be proven true. [605]
The irony in the plot is quite obvious. The grandmother, who tries to deter her son from going to Florida, tells Bailey about the Misfit, a criminal on the loose in the South. When she fails to convince her son to vacation in Tennessee instead, Grandma is the first in the car in the morning. As their journey progresses, Grandma refuses to let her vivid plantation memories fade away. She lies to her grandchildren and coaxes her son down a dirt path to find an old plantation that has sentimental value to her. The cat from Grandma's lap--one she wasn't supposed to bring in the first place--leaps from its resting place onto Bailey's shoulder. Unfortunately for this family, Bailey cannot control the steering wheel with a vicious cat strapped to his neck and rolls the car. So far, Grandma is responsible for placing the family on the dirt road towards the plantation and also for the car crash. To make the situation even better, O'Connor shows Grandma recalling that the plantation she is remembering is actually located in Tennessee. Without skipping a beat, Grandma flags down a hearse-like car to help the family. Finally, she does something right. But, wait, in a perfect moment of realization, Grandma squeals, "You're The Misfit! I recognized you at once!" (83) In a perfect world, criminals might enjoy being revealed, but this is Flannery's world and the Misfit doesn't much appreciate the attention. As her family gets killed off two by two, Grandma is left reflecting on her pitiful life, knowing inside that she is the cause of extreme pain and hardship.
In her last moments of life, Grandma makes a sincere regression to innoncence and acceptance of Christ. Her selflessness is out of character when she knows she must forgive the Misfit for all of his sins. She dies in a child-like pose, smiling up at the sky, leaving the reader to feel that her last minute repentence has been rewarded with a ticket to the pearly gates. Thus presents one of the greatest ironies of religion. There are devout Christians that honor the grace of past-child molesters, rapists, and murderers such as the Misfit because after their deeds were done, they asked God for forgiveness and repented their sins. Despite what you may think, this isn't a limited-time offer. Saving grace is available by the bushel. Our Lord and Savior is ever-forgiving. It seems odd...or maybe I'm just being cynical. Could it really be that easy? They do say that it is always easier to beg forgiveness than it is to beg permission.
Whether Flannery O'Connor is satarizing Christianity or recommending repentence as an end all be all solution is hard to determine. However, her lack of definitive opinion in this area opens her stories up for many heated discussions and debates. Stories like "Revelation" and "A Good Man is Hard to Find" are the most interesting perhaps because they are open to multiple interpretations, none of which could ever be proven true. [605]
Friday, September 14, 2007
Interpreter of Lahiri
Of all of the short stories our class has read this week, “Interpreter of Maladies” was the only one that struck me with so many feelings and insights upon finishing it. I enjoyed reading this story greatly because the author Jhumpa Lahiri weaved into the story her opinions on many different topics such as diversity, immigration, and the difficulty of understanding one another.
Lahiri is a well-known adversary of immigration and the loss of culture. In “Interpreter of Maladies,” she satirizes the Das family for being a now-tourist family in their long-forgotten homeland. She puts their matching shiny visors and tee shirts on display for the reader so as to stereotype the typical tourist. On top of his ensemble, Mr. Das is also sporting a camera around his neck and burying his nose in an Indian guidebook. Lahiri even goes so far as to say that the camera is the “only complicated thing he wore.” (5) I also thought it was interesting—and gave more emphasis to Lahiri’s view of tourism—that the only other characters that the family encounters at their second site for the day happen to be two Japanese tourists snapping photos (125)—a very stereotypical image. The Das family really has no connection with their past or their culture. Therefore Mr. Das is shown taking pictures of an emaciated man instead of helping him, Mrs. Das is snapping her gum and responding only with “Neat” to everything she observes, and the children are more intrigued by the monkeys than by the temple.
Mr. Kapasi, the Das family’s tour guide, has extensive training in language interpretation and yet still cannot seem to understand the true motives or character of Mrs. Das. Because Mr. Kapasi is the narrator and the reader only hears what is in his mind, a sense of uncertainty emerges. How is the reader to know if Mr. Kapasi is understanding what Mrs. Das is saying in the same way that she means it? We cannot be sure if her calling his second profession “romantic” (61) is flirtation and affection or simply the curiosity to know if he is qualified to fix her emotional issues. On the flip side, Mrs. Das misunderstands Mr. Kapasi’s explanation of his job and seems to think that he will be able to fix her problems with adultery and disinterest. She confides in Mr. Kapasi, not because she wants to make him feel special, but instead because she wants some kind of validation. Throughout the story, it seems as if Mr. Kapasi and Mrs. Das’ relationship is based on misunderstanding after another. Lahiri seems to blame this conflict on their cultural differences. Perhaps, Kapasi and Das need their own interpreter.
One aspect of this short story that amused me was the fact that although the Das family seems to be devoid of all cultural awareness, there are some underlying facets of their life that make them resemble Mr. Kapasi and other natives more than they realize. For instance, Mr. and Mrs. Das were not arranged into a marriage like Mr. Kapasi and his wife were—as is tradition in most Indian cultures. However, the young Mr. and Mrs. Das “couldn’t stand the thought of being separated,” (141) got engaged in high school, and were married when they went to college. After being married, they almost immediately had three children and there began what would be their loveless marriage. Much like Mr. and Mrs. Das, Mr. Kapashi’s marriage fell apart before it really began. After the death of his son, his wife seemed no longer to care about anything, not even about his passion for interpreting. Mr. Kapashi even says that he has “never seen his own wife fully naked.” (99) Though the Das family is American to the core—shown by their choice of names for their kids: Ronny, Bobby, Tina—and Mr. Kapashi is enveloped by his culture as a tour guide, there are some qualities that never fail to transcend geographical and cultural boundaries.
Overall I don’t think Lahiri could have made any more-powerful statements about a number of universal truths. “Interpreter of Maladies” is not only entertaining and intriguing, it is also a piece of literature that compels its reader to think. [702]
Lahiri is a well-known adversary of immigration and the loss of culture. In “Interpreter of Maladies,” she satirizes the Das family for being a now-tourist family in their long-forgotten homeland. She puts their matching shiny visors and tee shirts on display for the reader so as to stereotype the typical tourist. On top of his ensemble, Mr. Das is also sporting a camera around his neck and burying his nose in an Indian guidebook. Lahiri even goes so far as to say that the camera is the “only complicated thing he wore.” (5) I also thought it was interesting—and gave more emphasis to Lahiri’s view of tourism—that the only other characters that the family encounters at their second site for the day happen to be two Japanese tourists snapping photos (125)—a very stereotypical image. The Das family really has no connection with their past or their culture. Therefore Mr. Das is shown taking pictures of an emaciated man instead of helping him, Mrs. Das is snapping her gum and responding only with “Neat” to everything she observes, and the children are more intrigued by the monkeys than by the temple.
Mr. Kapasi, the Das family’s tour guide, has extensive training in language interpretation and yet still cannot seem to understand the true motives or character of Mrs. Das. Because Mr. Kapasi is the narrator and the reader only hears what is in his mind, a sense of uncertainty emerges. How is the reader to know if Mr. Kapasi is understanding what Mrs. Das is saying in the same way that she means it? We cannot be sure if her calling his second profession “romantic” (61) is flirtation and affection or simply the curiosity to know if he is qualified to fix her emotional issues. On the flip side, Mrs. Das misunderstands Mr. Kapasi’s explanation of his job and seems to think that he will be able to fix her problems with adultery and disinterest. She confides in Mr. Kapasi, not because she wants to make him feel special, but instead because she wants some kind of validation. Throughout the story, it seems as if Mr. Kapasi and Mrs. Das’ relationship is based on misunderstanding after another. Lahiri seems to blame this conflict on their cultural differences. Perhaps, Kapasi and Das need their own interpreter.
One aspect of this short story that amused me was the fact that although the Das family seems to be devoid of all cultural awareness, there are some underlying facets of their life that make them resemble Mr. Kapasi and other natives more than they realize. For instance, Mr. and Mrs. Das were not arranged into a marriage like Mr. Kapasi and his wife were—as is tradition in most Indian cultures. However, the young Mr. and Mrs. Das “couldn’t stand the thought of being separated,” (141) got engaged in high school, and were married when they went to college. After being married, they almost immediately had three children and there began what would be their loveless marriage. Much like Mr. and Mrs. Das, Mr. Kapashi’s marriage fell apart before it really began. After the death of his son, his wife seemed no longer to care about anything, not even about his passion for interpreting. Mr. Kapashi even says that he has “never seen his own wife fully naked.” (99) Though the Das family is American to the core—shown by their choice of names for their kids: Ronny, Bobby, Tina—and Mr. Kapashi is enveloped by his culture as a tour guide, there are some qualities that never fail to transcend geographical and cultural boundaries.
Overall I don’t think Lahiri could have made any more-powerful statements about a number of universal truths. “Interpreter of Maladies” is not only entertaining and intriguing, it is also a piece of literature that compels its reader to think. [702]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)