I'm really enjoying The Bell Jar. I find it really interesting to get a female perspective on some of the same kinds of concepts that came up in the last couple books that we read as a class. The experience is rather jarring but it rings true. Get it? Well you don't have to because it was an awful joke.
When I first started reading the novel I immediately started drawing parallels with Holden in Catcher in the Rye, but as I read on the differences in the characters of Holden and Esther became more and more apparent. In the early chapters of The Bell Jar, Esther uses some of the repeated phrases that Holden does throughout Catcher, like how something "depresses her" or verbing the hell out of a noun. I guess that could be just as much from how people talked back then as it is a similarity. Besides that, they both feel out of place in their respective environments.
The main difference is that Esther knows how to play the game and is good at it. She's an A student, has manufactured answers to any probing question. She surrounds herself with a diverse, close group and knows how to behave in all kinds of situations. On the outside she also seems to be able to be comfortable with herself, like when she rolled caviar into chicken and ate it without fearing any judgement. Under the surface though, the reality is different from her self-assured exterior.
Both characters realize the inevitability of the path they're going down eventually and that scares them. Esther is pretending in order to move up in the world but she doesn't know about what that means about herself.
In my opinion, if you pretend for long enough you can overcome the brain and it actually becomes a reality. I feel like certain character traits can be faked until success. If someone acted really confident and well prepared all the time, people would be more inclined to trust them and follow them. As a result of more people being attracted to the pretender, they would take on more burdens and actually settle into the "lie" they created for themselves. I'm not really sure, that's just my theory.
I guess I'm not far enough in the book to make any more definitive statements but the blurb on the book says it's about a woman's descent into insanity and I'm curious how that would come about in the end.
Wednesday, February 25, 2015
Saturday, February 21, 2015
Holden's Voice and writing style: The end of Catcher in the Rye
I've been thinking a lot about the assignment Mr. Mitchell gave us about writing a reflective response paper in Holden's voice responding to Portrait. It's a really interesting assignment but I think it would be really difficult because of the nature and style of the book. The closest thing the readers get to Holden's actual writing is the note he leaves to Phoebe and leaves in her school, and even then we get very little about how he actually writes.
Throughout the entire book it's like he's speaking to the readers directly, with a lot of asides to the audience and in general very casual. I wish Salinger included Holden's essay about Allie's glove or something for any reference on what academic writing would sound like. For me, there's a huge difference in the way I would write an assignment and the way I would tell someone a story.
Anyway, to switch topics, at the end of class we were talking about whether or not Holden really comes of age in the book and I don't think he does. He slowly notices changing is inevitable and takes place slowly over time and decides to stop resisting for the sake of the people he cares about. People like Mr. Antolini told him exactly what he should have needed to hear but he spends most of the conversation thinking about how much his head hurts and not really absorbing the message.
The events of the book are really just a low point in Holden's life and the end of the book is just coming out of a slump. With a little more exposition it wouldn't really seem like a coming of age novel as much in my opinion. I'm curious what other people think though.
Throughout the entire book it's like he's speaking to the readers directly, with a lot of asides to the audience and in general very casual. I wish Salinger included Holden's essay about Allie's glove or something for any reference on what academic writing would sound like. For me, there's a huge difference in the way I would write an assignment and the way I would tell someone a story.
Anyway, to switch topics, at the end of class we were talking about whether or not Holden really comes of age in the book and I don't think he does. He slowly notices changing is inevitable and takes place slowly over time and decides to stop resisting for the sake of the people he cares about. People like Mr. Antolini told him exactly what he should have needed to hear but he spends most of the conversation thinking about how much his head hurts and not really absorbing the message.
The events of the book are really just a low point in Holden's life and the end of the book is just coming out of a slump. With a little more exposition it wouldn't really seem like a coming of age novel as much in my opinion. I'm curious what other people think though.
Saturday, February 7, 2015
Not Holden anything back
Uni High is a school in Urbana, Illinois. You probably haven't heard about it. Maybe you've seen the fundraisers and probably have seen the giant thermometer, anyway. It shows up in a bunch of magazines, called a "public elite" school by Newsweek because of our high scores on some tests. It's apparently notable for for producing Nobel laureates and a Pulitzer prize winner, but I don't know them. Maybe three guys, if that many. They probably already came to Uni that way.
I really like the way Holden describes things, because it comes off as really sincere. Whenever he remembers something, he always adds on the new information like a close friend telling a story. At the same time, the character himself always seems very real because of the way he acts and the mistakes he makes. While what he's going through may not exactly be relatable for me, the way it's presented puts me a lot deeper into the story.
Before reading the book, just from the title I never thought it would be interesting. I mean, what does "The Catcher in the Rye" even mean? It didn't really seem super intriguing or anything. The title is probably down there in terms of interesting-ness with The Scarlet Letter, and if I've learned anything from that I shouldn't have high expectations. I literally would judge books by their covers and this book was just not colorful enough. At this point, though, having read a good amount of it I'm having a hard time stopping at the assigned points just because I need to find out what's happening next, which I rarely feel while doing these english reading assignments.
Holden's perspective is really refreshing and open and a nice change of pace from Stephen's in A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. At the same time though, they really undergo a lot of the same problems but their approaches are different because of their respective backgrounds. For example, their encounters with women/prostitutes. Holden is able to Holden his desires (getit) while Stephen succumbs and it slowly eats away at his mental state. We never get an actual reason as to why Holden didn't end up doing the deed besides that he felt sad after hanging up her dress or just felt bad for her in general.
Anyway, I'm enjoying the book. I really am. I'm curious to see what the rest of it has to offer.
I really like the way Holden describes things, because it comes off as really sincere. Whenever he remembers something, he always adds on the new information like a close friend telling a story. At the same time, the character himself always seems very real because of the way he acts and the mistakes he makes. While what he's going through may not exactly be relatable for me, the way it's presented puts me a lot deeper into the story.
Before reading the book, just from the title I never thought it would be interesting. I mean, what does "The Catcher in the Rye" even mean? It didn't really seem super intriguing or anything. The title is probably down there in terms of interesting-ness with The Scarlet Letter, and if I've learned anything from that I shouldn't have high expectations. I literally would judge books by their covers and this book was just not colorful enough. At this point, though, having read a good amount of it I'm having a hard time stopping at the assigned points just because I need to find out what's happening next, which I rarely feel while doing these english reading assignments.
Holden's perspective is really refreshing and open and a nice change of pace from Stephen's in A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. At the same time though, they really undergo a lot of the same problems but their approaches are different because of their respective backgrounds. For example, their encounters with women/prostitutes. Holden is able to Holden his desires (getit) while Stephen succumbs and it slowly eats away at his mental state. We never get an actual reason as to why Holden didn't end up doing the deed besides that he felt sad after hanging up her dress or just felt bad for her in general.
Anyway, I'm enjoying the book. I really am. I'm curious to see what the rest of it has to offer.
Monday, February 2, 2015
Growing up fast: A Truckload of Vice
In class discussions of Stephen's growth, his desires in the middle of the book to be unique and distinct from his peers came up a lot. Stephen had to feel unique in order to develop his identity.
Throughout the early parts of the novel, religion really defines all of Stephen's actions. He always tries to get in all of the prayers and tries to be a model child. The environment really forces him into that pattern of following the religious norms. Religion really ends up sorta screwing up his mind, in my opinion, since it made him feel as though normal stages of development were unusual and something to be ashamed of. None of the other kids around him would share their feelings with him as a result of this as well. Or, maybe they did, but it seemed like in the middle of the book Stephen didn't really have that many close friends because he was too obsessed with brooding and being different.
I find myself cringing at a lot of the things Stephen does in the book, like anyone would looking back on themselves when they were younger. The way he treats his family with such disdain, or ignores his friends, or fails to approach numerous women that aren't prostitutes. Even the part in chapter 5 where Stephen tries to show Cranly how anti-religion and faithless he is, especially since the readers know how big of an impact it had on him. It was probably Joyce's intention to make the readers uncomfortable with some passages, but I liked the cringe-inducing moments because it made me feel better about some of the awfully embarrassing things that I've done in my life too, sort of a "oh other people have had the same experience" moment. Reading a book about the inner mind of another child developing would be great for Stephen.
Ultimately I think he finally found himself at the end of Chapter 4, and as evidenced by all the talking he does in the early parts of Chapter 5 he finally feels comfortable enough with his identity to engage in social interactions. I'm almost jealous of Stephen that his calling to art is so clear-cut and that he at least knows what he's doing with his life right away. I think for me and many other people my age, it's probably not so easy to just know what you're going to do in a moment of clarity. There are so many other factors preventing people nowadays from just saying to themselves: "I want to be an artist" and doing only that with their lives. Or, maybe it's easy and I'm just narrow minded, I'll never know.
Throughout the early parts of the novel, religion really defines all of Stephen's actions. He always tries to get in all of the prayers and tries to be a model child. The environment really forces him into that pattern of following the religious norms. Religion really ends up sorta screwing up his mind, in my opinion, since it made him feel as though normal stages of development were unusual and something to be ashamed of. None of the other kids around him would share their feelings with him as a result of this as well. Or, maybe they did, but it seemed like in the middle of the book Stephen didn't really have that many close friends because he was too obsessed with brooding and being different.
I find myself cringing at a lot of the things Stephen does in the book, like anyone would looking back on themselves when they were younger. The way he treats his family with such disdain, or ignores his friends, or fails to approach numerous women that aren't prostitutes. Even the part in chapter 5 where Stephen tries to show Cranly how anti-religion and faithless he is, especially since the readers know how big of an impact it had on him. It was probably Joyce's intention to make the readers uncomfortable with some passages, but I liked the cringe-inducing moments because it made me feel better about some of the awfully embarrassing things that I've done in my life too, sort of a "oh other people have had the same experience" moment. Reading a book about the inner mind of another child developing would be great for Stephen.
Ultimately I think he finally found himself at the end of Chapter 4, and as evidenced by all the talking he does in the early parts of Chapter 5 he finally feels comfortable enough with his identity to engage in social interactions. I'm almost jealous of Stephen that his calling to art is so clear-cut and that he at least knows what he's doing with his life right away. I think for me and many other people my age, it's probably not so easy to just know what you're going to do in a moment of clarity. There are so many other factors preventing people nowadays from just saying to themselves: "I want to be an artist" and doing only that with their lives. Or, maybe it's easy and I'm just narrow minded, I'll never know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)