Tim Burton's The Lottery

Ok, ever since we read Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery" some odd weeks back as a part of our Potpourri (??) unit, I have been obsessed with talking about my feature-length film adaption that I'm going to make someday, with the one and only Tim Burton as director.  So, naturally, when I was told that our blogging assignment for the week was to do just that, I jumped for joy!  I have some really big ideas for this future critical and commercial success, and the movie will certainly feature an all-star cast of some of Hollywood's biggest names (and Tim's customary collaborators).  With myself as producer, and Richard Zanuck (Jaws, Driving Miss Daisy) as co-producer, there really is no way this project could possibly go south.

Plot

A box like this one, only more ominous.

Unlike previous feature-length adaptions of the work, my film version of "The Lottery" will focus primarily on the lottery itself, its origins, and its dominance over the culture and lives of the people in the 'civilized' town.  The script, written by John August (Minority Report, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, Corpse Bride), will center around Joe Summers as he prepares for the infamous June 27th drawing.  Because the story will need some obvious padding (the 1969 educational short read the dialogue verbatim and only lasted 18 minutes), I'm alright with taking some artistic liberties and extending the story with trivial yet exciting side stories.  The surprise ending, the true nature of the lottery, still won't be revealed until the end, and no indication will be made in the trailer (I'm thinking a 60-second zoom in on the solitary black box sitting on its stool while increasingly suspenseful lines from the movie are said and accompanied by creepy crescendoing music, culminating with the box taking up the whole screen and Tessie's "It isn't fair, it isn't right!" abruptly cutting off the sound and background noise; then, the two words "The Lottery" appear, with the release date inauspiciously hovering beneath them) or in the movie itself aside from the classic foreshadowing elements.  The meaning of the work will be left intact, and any attempts to expand the plot will be purely commercial, and will simply add meaningful screen time for our stars (see Characterization).

Point of View
Ah, yes, point of view.  There's not a whole lot to say here, except that I would like to keep in step with what the short story does in terms of narration.  The narrator is detached, unemotional, and delivers the most crucial lines of the work ("A stone hit her on the side of the head.") with unwavering monotone.  Naturally, Morgan Freeman (The Shawshank Redemption, Invictus, Million Dollar Baby, ad infinitum) will narrate The Lottery.  Although the narration will retain its third-person dramatic point of view, points of omniscience and subjectivity will be thrown in when describing more fully in depth the job and life of Joe Summers.  A major part of the effectiveness of "The Lottery" is the delivery of its narration; so, in creating The Lottery, the largest weight carried on the acting front must be held by Freeman.  His performance will dictate the success of the movie.  And to be honest, I wouldn't rather it be any other man.

Characterization
An intense and deep discussion of the characterization in The Lottery wouldn't be complete without casting the entire movie full of big hit A-listers, and I will certainly do that, but first, a general note.  Obviously, by turning an 18-minute short story into a feature-length movie, I will have plenty more time to develop characterization than in the original work.  I think this is a good thing, especially on the parts of the Adams family (who first question the lottery), Joe Summers, the Hutchinson family, and others.  However, while adding characterization to the villagers, it will be important to maintain believability in their actions at the end of the story.  Relying heavily on typecast actors, I intend for the audience to feel the dark indirect characterization from the moment specific actors make their first appearance on screen.  Alright, and so we begin:

Mr. Joe Summers
Played by Johnny Depp (Pirates of the Caribbean series, Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, Alice in Wonderland) -- The 'main' character (there really isn't one per se; he'll just receive the most face time), Joe Summers is the caretaker of the lottery and takes care of all the formalities still in place.  He seems like a nice enough guy, but is certainly a driving force behind the continuation of the lottery and in the (ironic) modernization of the process.

Mrs. 'Tessie' Hutchinson
Played by Helena Bonham Carter (Fight Club, Harry Potter series, Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street) -- Although the audience may think nothing of her when she first shows up late to the lottery, they soon discover the grave importance of her character when she is chosen as the not-so-lucky winner.

Mr. Bill Hutchinson
Played by Michael Keaton (Beetlejuice, Batman series, Toy Story 3) -- The husband of Tessie, Bill plays his part in the lottery by staying calm and collected, even as his family is picked to take their second time around in the drawing.

Mr. and Mrs. Adams
Played by Will Smith (Men in Black series, I, Robot, I Am Legend) and Jada Pinkett Smith (The Nutty Professor, The Matrix series, Will Smith's wife!) -- Mr. and Mrs. Adams hold important parts in The Lottery.  As the first ones to suggest that the lottery may not have to exist, they can be seen as the (slight) heroes in the story.  The casting of the two is also significant; Will Smith, typecast as a hero in virtually every film he's in, will immediately be recognized as a "good" character in a cast of villains.  Also, by placing his real-life wife Jada Pinkett Smith alongside him, both being figureheads as strong, successful black actors, the audience will be left to ponder how racial equality could be attained in a centuries old village (see Setting), but not the knowledge to end a barbaric yet customary stoning ritual.

Old Man Warner
Played by Sir Christopher Lee (The Wicker Man, Star Wars series, The Lord of the Rings trilogy) -- The first of many "villain" characters, Old Man Warner is probably the worst.  Although it is technically Joe Summers' job to keep the lottery going, Warner plays a large part by constantly reminding those around him of how far back the lottery goes.  Lee, typecast almost exclusively as an antagonist, is old enough to play Warner, yet superb enough in his acting ability to convey senility.

Mr. Harry Graves
Played by Alan Rickman (Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, Harry Potter series) -- The mysterious postmaster who swears Joe Summers in at the beginning of the ritual, Harry Graves has a lot of power.  An obvious symbol of death (his last name is 'Graves' for Pete's sake) in the short story, it helps that Rickman is known for playing nefarious roles.

The rest of the characters, though certainly important, do not benefit from having specific actors portray their parts.  In keeping with Tim Burton's style, several of his favorites will make cameos and play smaller stints, and almost every villager will be played by actors who have at least made appearances as corrupt, culpable, or downright crooked characters.  Some who I'd like to see:

Jeffrey Jones (Mr. Martin, perhaps?)

Danny DeVito (Not so sure about this one...)

Jack Nicholson

Tilda Swinton

Michelle Pfeiffer

Charlize Theron or Uma Thurman
(But not both; I don't want to confuse the audience!)

Elena Anaya

Sir Anthony Hopkins

Quentin Tarantino

Christopher Walken

And various others, of course!

Setting
Now, I don't know if it's the biased created from the 1969 short or what, but everyone seems to have in their mind this ultra-modern setting for "The Lottery".  As far as I can see, there is no statement within the story of a time period, and other than mention of a post office, a bank, and summer vacation, there really is no indication that "The Lottery" is set in the alternate present whatsoever.  If I'm completely wrong here, then we're just going to chalk this one up to creative license, because when I first read the word village in the second sentence of the work, I immediately had images in my mind of, well, The Village.  As it turns out, I wasn't too far from the truth in terms of twisted ending.  Anyways, I've decided that The Lottery will take place in a similar, yet slightly more innovated, 19th-century town, and I find this acceptable for two reasons.  First, I can still include both a post office and a bank; these were around during that time and would fit in perfectly.  Secondly, this flows more easily with Tim Burton's style, and I can easily see the resulting work being a slower-paced clash between The Village and Sweeney Todd.  With Colleen Atwood (Sleepy Hollow, Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events, Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street) on costumes and Bo Welch (Beetlejuice, Edward Scissorhands, Batman Returns) as production designer imagining and building the set, I'll really be able to convey this sense of savagery meeting civilized world.

Theme
When it comes to the theme of "The Lottery" transposed into The Lottery, I am willing to make marginal sacrifices of the meaning of the work to ensure bigger ticket sales and better box office numbers (which is ironic, considering how I just wrote a paper stating that such sacrifices may lead to less commercial success), though with the ridiculously superior cast currently chosen, I'm pretty sure everyone in the developed world will be seeing this movie.  Even so, I don't think I've changed anything drastically regarding the theme.  The shock of the ending will still be present, yet plenty of foreshadowing will occur throughout the film, as it does in Shirley Jackson's original short story.  In order to get an overall picture of what the feature will look like, simply examine the numerous movies given parenthetically as the cast and crew's past endeavors, and extract similarities.  Many of the movies appear in numerous résumés of my chosen team, and the tones of these movies are usually very much alike; naturally, The Lottery will follow suite.  Basically, now that I've spent all this time planning out my vision, I need to see this happen.  Let me rephrase: My life will not be complete until the feature-length film version of "The Lottery" is created while simultaneously fitting the specifications described above.

Alright, let's do this.

Based on a Short Story by Stephen King

Plot
For the most part, I was really impressed with how well the movie plot stuck to the plot of the short story.  The biggest (and most crucial) aspects of the story remained constant: same major characters, Andy still broke out of jail and Red was still released, and almost all of the tangent stories Red narrates in the book are included in the movie, with the ever-so-soothing voice of Morgan Freeman to retell them.  With this being said, some differences still arose.  The first we are made aware of is that Norton is the warden from the start of the movie, as opposed to coming into the prison halfway through the story as in the book.  This is understandable for simplicity's sake, and nothing is truly lost as a result.  Another difference is that in the movie the alternate identity Andy has made for himself, Peter Stephens, was created to cover the Warden's tracks, and ends up being used to steal all of the Warden's money.  In the book, however, Andy's money is earned separate from Norton's, and Andy never takes the Warden's money.  Lastly, in classic Hollywood style, three characters meet demises unlike their literary counterparts.  Tommy Williams is shot by the guards (instead of being transferred), Brooks the librarian hangs himself (instead of dying naturally), and Warden Norton shoots himself (instead of simply resigning).  For a semi-accurate synopsis and hearty chuckle, watch Family Guy's Shawshank Redemption Parody.  It was a little too inappropriate to embed...viewer discretion is advised!

Point of View
I didn't really see any drastic changes in POV from the book to the movie.  In the book, the narration is first-person singular, and the story is told through Red's perspective.  In a movie it's difficult to show first-person all the time, but the story is still narrated by Red and he features prominently in the movie.  The only character whose thoughts we are able to take into consideration are Red's, and his interactions with the other inmates define what we as the reader are able to take away from the movie.  There are few occasions where Red is neither present in the situation nor explaining what is happening on screen.  For instance, when the Warden takes Tommy Williams outside to ask him whether or not he'd testify for Andy and is subsequently shot for unsuspectingly saying yes.  There is a correlation between this scene not being described by Red and it also not being included in the original short story.  This is because the entire work is narrated by Red in first-person, and it simply wouldn't make sense for Red to truly know what happened to Tommy.  As a reader, I'm really smart for picking up on this.

Characterization
Although the movie left out certain minor characters who were in the book, this is not the most significant change in the way characterization presents itself in the movie compared to the book.  For me, the biggest change was the role of the character Brooks.  In the book, Brooks is briefly mentioned as Andy's predecessor in the library, the man who delivered books to the inmates before Andy arrived and became his apprentice.  In the movie, though, Brooks takes on a whole new persona.  He is first introduced Andy's first day in the prison, and feeds a maggot that was found in Andy's lunch to a pet crow that he keeps in his coat pocket.  Through much more detail and characterization, Brooks becomes a vital part of the Shawshank gang until he leaves in a dramatic fury involving attempted slicing of Heywood's throat (upon receiving his parole letter, Brooks thought killing Heywood was the only way to stay in Shawshank).  He hangs himself in a halfway house very soon after being released.  I enjoyed the added character depth given to Brooks, because usually characterization takes a backseat in movies, instead of vice versa.

Setting
As in the book, almost the entirety of the movie takes place in 'Shawshank Prison', located in Maine as a state prison.  The actual prison used in the film, however, is the Ohio State Reformatory in Mansfield, Ohio.  I liked the prison they used, too (as did my fellow moviegoer, Alix), because it had an older feel and definitely seemed enclosed and shut off from the world.  Not much changed during the transfer from book to movie, and it was easier to visualize the setting when I could see it for myself on screen.  It was almost disturbing at times, like when Andy crawls through a half-mile of sewage (puking on himself, mind you) to reach freedom in a small stream as rain and thunder crashes down.  The final scene, which is alluded to in the book but not stated outright, finds the two men reunited on the beach of the Pacific fixing up an old boat.  This scene fit right along with what I imagined for the book's setting, and goes back to one of the final lines in the story, expressed by Red, "I hope the Pacific is as blue as it has been in my dreams."

Theme
Because the movie followed so close to the book's plot, characters, point of view, and setting, it naturally follows that the same theme was conveyed through the Hollywood adaption of King's classic.  The one difference I could elaborate on is the character who received the central focus in the movie when it comes to theme.  As I said in my short story blog regarding the theme, Red was the main character who used Andy Dufrense as a launching pad for his own personal revelations on life and hope.  This meaning is harder to find in the movie, because even though Red still narrates the story, it is difficult to ignore the fact that all of the major action revolves around Andy.  The viewer is immediately drawn to his plight (an innocent man wrongly mistreated in a corrupt correctional facility) and makes the connection that he is the main character.  Andy's growth as a character is what is seen in the movie, and Red's narration serves as more of an outside passerby's look into Andy's life.  Because of this, I believe the filmmaker missed the mark when it came to the 'meaning of the work'.  Despite this, I still enjoyed the movie and respect its place as a classic in the hearts of countless American ex-convicts.

U.G.L.Y. You Ain't Got No Alibi

This story, "You're Ugly, Too", by Lorrie Moore was in my opinion the hardest of the week to get.  The main character, Zoe Hendricks, is likable enough, and her crazy antics as a history professor reminded me of Mrs. Helbing and her style as a teacher.  It also kind of made me want to be that crazy professor when I grow up; that would be fun.  During the entirety of the story, Zoe satirizes and jokes about her life and those in it, at the expense of her sanity.  She loses a man she potentially had a connection with when she jokingly tries to push him off of a twenty-story balcony.  That part was a little confusing to me.  When searching for meaning within this story, I kept coming back to Zoe's insecurities about the way she looks.  The narrator at one point mentions her as always being on the fringe of almost pretty.  The final line has Zoe wondering how she looks, and all the in between parts make subtle references to beauty: Heidi (whoever she is), the black witches, the women who men flirt with in front of her, etc.  Just a very confusing piece as a whole for me.  I really look forward to clarifying some of it in class, and will probably read others' blogs to scrap up some other thoughts and opinions.

Mine

As you may have noticed, I named this blog entry 'Mine'.  This is with good reason.  You see, it is the proper name for the short (short) story we read regarding style titled Popular Mechanics.  Raymond Carver, the author, first called his work 'Mine', only to change it to 'Little Things', and then once more to the aforementioned 'Popular Mechanics'.  There's not much in this world I can stand less than an indecisive writer.  Anyways, I like 'Mine' best.

When I first read this story, I was disturbed (this is turning out to be the norm in this class).  I also immediately thought of the Bible story that is largely alluded to at the end of 'Popular Mechanics' (question #7 tells me it's in I Kings 3).  Essentially, two women come in front of Solomon both claiming that a baby is theirs.  After a long argument, Solomon makes the simple suggestion that the baby be split in half and each half given to a supposed mother.  The true mother, putting the life of her child in front of her selfish wants, crys foul on this idea and instead insists on the other woman taking the baby, thus proving to Solomon that she is the baby's mother.  It's all real cutesy and stuff, unfortunately for the baby in our story, though, I'm fairly certain that he (or she?) may have actually gotten ripped in half.

"In this manner, the issue was decided." -- ¶ 36

Whoops :\

A Son: Your Own Personal AA Meeting

Note: I suggest listening to "I Saw Three Ships" (15 on the player) while reading this post.  Makes it all so much more relevant.

Another good story this week.  I liked The Drunkard because the author (as well as the story's setting) is Irish and, well, I'm Irish and when you're Irish you love everything Irish (Go Irish!).  And it was funny; that's always a plus.

#4. Is the title seriously meant? To whom does it refer?

The title is seriously meant.  It refers to both the father and the son.  The son is indeed a drunkard in the sense that he drank his father's whole pint and spends the rest of the story completely smashed.  Through the use of this humor, the greater significance (the more serious significance, as it were) is highlighted when the reader realizes that the title simultaneously refers to the true drunkard of the story, the father.  We see a glimpse in the final paragraphs of the story of the remediation of his alcoholic ways, though, at the hands of his (ironically) drunkard son.

Not Your Typical Powerball

Ok, I might as well be honest and get this right out.  I loved this story.  The Lottery was my favorite work we've read all year, and I'm not really sure why.  It was just so twisted!  I've already decided I'm directing the first full-length feature film production of it, and my first directorial choice is to cast Helena Bonham Carter as Tessie Hutchinson.  Oh yes.  It will be a wonderful adaption of Shirley Jackson's short story into an M. Night Shyamalan-esque thriller, like The Village.  While I'm at talking about the actual story, I might as well answer a question, no?

#1. What is a "lottery"? How does the title lead you to expect something very different from what the story presents?

When I read the title of this story, I, as I assume most do, took it to mean a lotto.  You know, a bunch of people buy-in to a certain dollar amount and one lucky winner gets the jackpot.  As we find out later in the story, this is hardly the case.  To me, the word lottery carried with it a sense of risk and uncertainty, as it also does in the story; however, it also always had a positive connotation with it.  I mean, who doesn't want to chance themselves into winning a big payout?  This is the inconsistency in the connection between the story and its title.  There is no positive connotation.  The winner gets stoned to death.

I think I'm gonna cut if off there.  I could seriously talk about this story for hours.

Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption

Plot
Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption is a short story (or novella, as us English profs call it) written by critically-acclaimed horror/suspense novelist Stephen King, and was first published in 1984. The plot centers around two characters, Red and Andy Dufresne, and their time at Shawshank Prison in Maine. The plot is revealed through Red, and the majority of the narration consists of stories of Red, Andy, or the two interacting. In the end, both men actually cause the other's freedom; Red smuggles in the rock hammer for Andy, and Andy's philosophies on the life of a free man lead Red to seek a new life rather than return to the prison. Although most of the story takes place in Shawshank, it is Andy's escape and journey to Mexico that carries significance in regard to the meaning of the work. With Andy's twenty-seven year long tunnel dig, we see that hope does exist even in the biggest "hellhole" on earth, Shawshank. This is reinforced by Red's final realization of the importance of this hope, and he himself hopes for the future in the closing lines.

"I hope Andy is down there. I hope I can make it across the border. I hope to see my friend and shake his hand. I hope the Pacific is as blue as it has been in my dreams. I hope." -- pg. 107

Point of View
The entire story is a first-person narration (Red calls it a 'memoir' in the actual story) as told by Red, although most of the story he is talking about Andy.  In the novella, Stephen King does a huge favor by telling the reader (through Red) that, even though he talks about Andy, the story's main focus is Red.

"Well, you weren't writing about yourself, I hear someone in the peanut-gallery saying. You were writing about Andy Dufresne. You're nothing but a minor character in your own story. But you know, that's just not so. It's all about me, every damned word of it." -- pg. 100

Red narrates the story of Andy's trial, imprisonment, and subsequent escape as a medium with which to tell his own story.  By receiving details in the story (e.g. living conditions, bargaining with 'screws', solitary, etc.) from Red's relatively astounded viewpoint as a longtime 'lifer' directs readers toward an emphasis on Red's importance, as opposed to Andy's.

Characterization
A lot of characterization takes place in the short amount of pages allotted (107) for Shawshank.  Whether it's intense descriptions of the different types of homosexuals found in the prison, in-depth segments devoted to the interactions between Red and Andy that reveal more about who they are, or even the simple defiance (and hasty detraction of such insolence) Gonyar shows Warden Norton once Andy is found missing, King makes a great effort to name every character, even cursory ones, and build upon this by following up with at least a short sentence giving more scope for the reader.

"The skinny guard's name was Rory Tremont, and he was not exactly a ball of fire in the brains department." -- pg. 88

Ultimately, it is Red's character that impacts the meaning of the work the greatest, and this characterization is done both directly and indirectly.  Red tells the reader that he is the contraband king, that "I'm the guy who can get it for you", and other times we see his persona develop based on his reaction to Andy's words and actions.  When Tremont pukes due to all the sh- er, sewage, in the tunnel, Red laughs his way into solitary.  Ok, that part was really gross.

Setting
The majority of the story takes place in the actual Shawshank Prison, with most action happening there as well, ocassionally a story flashes back to past events like Andy's and Red's trials.  Later, Red is released on parole and spends the remainder of the story in local Maine, traveling frequently to Buxton and eventually deciding to leave for Mexico to join Andy.  The importance of the setting to me was the impact on the reader.  Prison is a pretty negative place in most's minds, and the connotation carried with it is not at all good.  The descriptions of the prison by Red help explain the lost hope most inmates experience, and makes Andy's release of the 'tiger' that much more captivating.  Even in an environment as depressing as Shawshank, Andy still defends himself on multiple occasions, from the sisters, from Hadley, and from Norton.  Rarely did he lose his composure in the hostile atmosphere and this stubbornness lends itself to both Andy and Red's ultimate goal, to be free.

Theme
Because we have already established (largely with help from ol' Red) that Red is the heart of the story, it stands to reason that the theme also primarily deals with Red.  Even though it doesn't seem to be so, Andy is a minor character with regard to the theme, because his role is simply to change our main character, Red.  Without Andy, Red probably still would've been released from prison on parole; however, as mentioned by Red himself, Andy was the reason he didn't commit some petty crime to get himself right back into the quiet routineness of Shawshank.

"If I had never known Andy, I probably would have done that." -- pg. 103

I suppose I'm not being entirely fair.  Andy Dufresne certainly plays a vital and key part in the story and contributes to the significance of the theme.  Andy's integrity, strong will, and total determination serve as an inspiration not only to Red, but to the reader as well.  Truly, Shawshank was a moving work of fiction.  In all honesty, I'm excited to watch the movie.  I've never seen it, and I hear it's good.  We shall see...

Poor Miss Brill!

Man, I didn't like this story.  I felt really bad for Miss Brill at the end, and the last thing I want to read about is a lonely and sad elderly lady whose only enjoyments in life are these Sunday strolls where she gets to 'act' in the play called life, only to have that one pleasure ruined by some snotty little PDA-oholic lovers who indecently talk mean about her right within earshot.  As if she couldn't hear!  Hmph, this post is getting me really worked up.  On to a question then, I suppose.

#7. What is the purpose of the fur piece? What is the source of the crying in the final sentence of the story?

I saw the fur piece as her little confidence booster.  She felt stylish with it on, and only wore it on what I would assume to be Sundays.  It made her feel special and important, and she obviously has a strong connection with it (at one point talking to it and fantasizing about simply stroking it), and so it possibly holds some sentimental value with her.  The source of the crying is Miss Brill, and this was the part that really got me the most.  She truly is acting in this life of hers, putting on an act and thinking that her life is some perfect little series of repetitions: going to the Jardins Publiques, listening to the band play, watching young couples mysteriously from 'her' special bench, even the trip to the baker where she may find an almond in her cake.  When she gets home, she realizes that these things don't fulfill her life, and that she is actually very lonely in her cupboard world.  This story made me want to cry.

And We Continue With the Weird Name Authors

This next story is by Eudora Welty, and is titled A Worn Path.  I've noticed from reading other people's blogs that this one wasn't exactly the favorite of the week, but I think it takes a lot of heat.  Sure it was a little too long for the message it was driving home, but all that boring descriptive stuff is necessary to get the point across.  The story was about an old woman's devotion to her grandson, and the measures that she takes (has taken, and will continue to take) in order to keep him healthy.  She is self-described as uneducated, yet she is able to make a journey that a strapping young hunter claims to be too much even for himself.  Her love for her grandson is intense, and although we don't realize that's why she makes this journey until the end, in retrospect we see that all the obstacles she faced must have been overcome with the thought of the boy always in her mind, the crazy old woman talking to herself was just a coping mechanism.  She steals from a hunter, which is kind of cool, and we don't really feel bad for him because he points a gun to her head to try and get a reaction.  The one thing I'm confused about is why everyone called her Grandma.  She's not your Granny.

I Have Irish Blood in Me!

Just go ahead and watch this video a few times before your read my next post.  You won't be able to concentrate/focus otherwise.  Multiple viewings are also completely necessary; personally I can't watch it once without viewing it about ten more times.



Phew. Now that we got that out of our systems, we can move forward with the post. Relevancy, you ask (as always)? Well, you try sitting through a small or large group discussion about a short story titled Eveline when all you can think about is a six second video of a girl named Eveline getting unsuspectedly smacked across the face. Now, to formally answer a question.

#8. Joyce said that this and other stories he wrote about Dublin dealt with the "spiritual paralysis" of its citizens. What evidence in this story supports that idea as a major theme?

Obviously, there is a clear physical paralysis of Eveline, as she gets cold feet at the last moment before boarding the boat to Buenos Aires with Frank and freezes on the dock. She literally cannot move. But there is evidence of this spiritual paralysis, for instance, when she does make a decision (or lack thereof) and stay in Dublin, her face registers no emotion, no pain or loss of a love as one might expect in the circumstances. Also, at the end of paragraph 9, she describes Dublin as "hard work - a hard life - but now that she was about to leave it she did not find it a wholly undesirable life." This indecisiveness and nostalgia lends itself to a culture that is paralyzed, and in Eveline's case, afraid to make tangible choices that lead to change.

Well, It's Not Exactly 'Shrek'...



Imagine a kid tangled up in this bad boy. Queasy yet?

 
   Once upon a time, in an AP Lit class, I read a short story called Once Upon a Time, by Nadine Gordimer.  I decided to start off with this story because I read it last so it's the freshest in my memory, and also because it had a really twisted ending (no pun intended).  I liked the 'fairy tale' for the most part, but after doing a little research on the author, the relevancy of the context just added so much more credibility to the story.  Throughout the work, it is relatively easy to pick up on the disdain the speaker has for separated socio-economic class societies, and the story declares this message even when taken as an individual piece.  But there's more...

I understand that we have this strong sense of 'speaker does not equal writer' or whatever in this class, but I do believe that in this case that doesn't apply.  The opening section of Once Upon a Time describes the author, Nadine Gordimer, and her current living conditions in South Africa (at the time this piece was written in the late 80s, apartheid was still going strong and internal resistance was culminating).  Gordimer reflects on being afraid of break-ins because these were commonplace at the time, and the short story she writes about a rich, fairy tale, happily ever after family that lives in constant fear of riots from the lower class coincides with the situations occuring in South Africa perfectly.  With this in mind, and with the story ending with the family's only son graphically and gruesomely dying of their own accord, the theme can be defined as such: racial and social segregation leads to pain and suffering for not only the oppressed, but the oppressor as well.  Gordimer made a political statement by suggesting that apartheid destroys an entire country, and the rich or upper class are not spared.  Cool stuff.

Characterization

Since I felt that none of the short stories this week deserved to have more than one blog entry spent on them, I decided to dedicate my fourth blog to characterization, since that is this week's focal point.  Characterization is the process by which the writer reveals the personality of a character.  Within this, there are two types of characterization: indirect and direct.

1. INDIRECT CHARACTERIZATION the author reveals to the reader what the character is like by describing how the character looks and dresses, by letting the reader hear what the character says, by revealing the character’s private thoughts and feelings, by revealing the characters effect on other people (showing how other characters feel or behave toward the character), or by showing the character in action.
2. DIRECT CHARACTERIZATION the author tells us directly what the character is like: sneaky, generous, mean to pets and so on.

The majority (if not all) the characterization in this week's pieces was indirect, as is common in modern literature.  Through characterization, the author paints a picture for the reader as to what type of character each person is in the story.  Some categories that most characters fall into include the following: static, dynamic, flat, and round.

1. STATIC CHARACTER is one who does not change much in the course of a story.
2. DYNAMIC CHARACTER is one who changes in some important way as a result of the story’s action.
3. FLAT CHARACTER has only one or two personality traits. They are one dimensional, like a piece of cardboard. They can be summed up in one phrase.
4. ROUND CHARACTER has more dimensions to their personalities---they are complex, just as real people are.

Most of the time, a central character or protagonist is round and dynamic, although this is not always the case.  For the men in Hunters in the Snow, Kenny nor Tub undergo any significant change, and even Frank's change of heart toward Tub seems temporary, or as though that nature of his personality had at least existed all along.  Mama, the narrator of Everyday Use, experiences a dynamic change of character when taking the blanket from Dee and giving it to Maggie, symbolic of her rejection of Dee's principles and staying steadfast in her belief that her way of raising Maggie is best.  In Bartleby the Scrivener, it appears that Turkey, Nippers, and Ginger Nut are flat characters, defined by what time of the day they work best.  A conglomeration of these different types of characters is what gives a story its flavor and contributes to the work of the meaning as a whole, regardless of what that meaning may be.

The Revenge of Herman Melville

Alright, so I truly believe that the absurd names in Bartleby the Scrivener (Turkey, Nippers, Ginger Nut, and Bartleby himself) are the direct result of Herman Melville having terrible parents who thought it would be funny to name their child Herman Melville.  Critics say he was depressed because of poor Moby Dick sales; I say he was depressed because of his name.  But to the point.  This story was long, and really creepy, but similar in style to the afore-mentioned Moby Dick, also written by Melville.  The story contains slow, seemingly bland and mundane unraveling of plot, characterization, and action before picking up rapidly toward the end of the story in the climax.  The story itself I thought was funny at times; for instance, when Bartleby gradually becomes less and less mobile and completely refuses to work or relocate, the Lawyer moves his offices to another building instead of simply removing Bartleby.  The main character was the Lawyer, but I found his character hard to read and didn't really understand what he learned from the Bartleby situation or what he was trying to prove, if anything.  In any case, the "I would prefer not to" line was really creepy throughout, especially after playing Bioshock (yes, I'm amazing at connecting pop culture dots).  Now, if you're aware of the game, would you kindly watch the following?

Watch at your own discretion! Possibly offensive...

You really have to have played the game for any of this to make sense, I suppose...

Truffle Shuffle

16th century oil painting of the same name

I found it ironic that the author of Hunters in the Snow is named Tobias Wolff.  Obviously a wolf is a dangerous animal hunted in the snow, and I wasn't positive, but I had a hunch that the nickname Tub may have derived from Tobias.  Unfortunately, after a little research, I discovered Tobias looked more like an elderly Steve Jobs than a whiny, passive-aggresive fatty, so that theory was soon thrown out the window.

To combat this shameful loss of interest in the relevancy of the story, I went searching across the Internet for ways in which I could connect the work to things that are fun.  Naturally, I was still hung up on the Tub character and as such picked up this clip from The Goonies.  Enjoy!

In all seriousness, all three of the main characters (Kenny, Frank, and Tub) are jerks in their own right, yet somehow the author still makes you feel sympathetic towards each one at some time or another in the story.  Oh, and Kenny killed a dog.

What Kind of Name is Hakim-a-barber?

Or Wangero Leewanika Kemanjo, for that matter?  Bah.

Asalamalakim!, Wa-su-zo-Tean-o!, and Salutations!  This next entry deals exclusively with a little short story Ms. Alice Walker likes to call Everyday Use (for your grandmama).  As of now, I like this story best, because it offers a unique twist on the typical Civil Rights-era literature.  Oftentimes we read of an uneducated black family who graciously and anxiously waits for the day when their children won't have to grow up in the same world that they themselves grew up in; however, in this story it is the child trying to convince the mother and sister to update their views on life and how to live.  I understand that this week's theme is characterization, and I found it difficult to read some of the characters in this story (Dee/Wangero specifically), but I am fairly confident in saying that Mama is a complex dynamic character.  This is shown for her constant love and concern for both her dauthers Dee and Maggie, although in the final scene (paragraph 76) she stands up to the condescending Dee in an effort to save some hope for Maggie to cling onto in the world (literally the quilts to be used in "everyday use", not hung for cultural significance).

I think the part of the story I enjoyed the most was that it was told from Mama's point of view.  Her colorful colloquial diction and humorous analysis of the scene she takes in as it unfolds added some much needed insight into the criticisms that surround those who misapply the Movement.

Fun Fact! Alice Walker has been arrested.

Dead Old Ladies with Flowers

One word: Creep-y.  This Emily girl is totally wacky.  Unfortunately, someone ruined the twist at the end of this ghost story, but after reading it I feel like it still had the same effect.  Written by William Faulkner, A Rose for Emily is still creepy as it ever would be.  The author serves some significance to the plot, because apparently Faulkner enjoyed writing stories about old southerners who had fell out of touch with modern living and a new generation; this is essentially what happened to Ms. Emily Grierson.  Her house was the only one left of its kind, old, gothic, and a constant reminder of the era in which Emily grew up.  She is constantly isolated while living alone in her house, besides the negro servant, and after ending her painting lessons, completely cut off from her town and community.  I personally didn't really like the story.  It was too much like a scary movie, and I don't like scary movies.

I Don't Know What the Title Means, by Author with Weird Name

Interpreter of Maladies, by Jhumpa Lahiri, wasn't my favorite short story of the week, but I can see some merit in discussing a topic from it that has grinded me since reading.  I am here to defend Mr. Kapasi.  I wasn't going to originally, but after meeting in my small group, where multiple people analytically assaulted the Mr. Kapasi character (see Katie, Ashley, etc.) I felt a literary duty to back up the man in what I see as reasonable disillusions.  The poor guy has a struggling marriage.  His job doesn't live up to the high expectations he had as being a diplomatic connection between cultures.  He is isolated in his own life and feeling lonely all the time.

And then he meets Mrs. Das.

When I read this story, I didn't see his fantasy about Mrs. Das as his true intentions.  It was simply his method of escape.  When she finally does open up to him intimately, he is disgusted.  His ideas of life with Mrs. Das were unrealistic, for sure, but I believe he never truly thought they were in the works either.  He's just a sad old man, and well, that makes me feel sorry for him.  So leave him alone.

How I Met My Husband, the Mailman with the Weird Face, not the Handsome, Dashing War Vet

How I Met My Husband was just so good I had to blog about it twice.

Anyways, there's a surprise ending to the story that I'm sure no one saw coming.  The topic is discussed in #8 and as such I will start my investigation there...

8. Discusss the effectiveness of the surprise ending. How does Carmichael differ from Chris Watters? Can it be argued that the surprise ending is also inevitable and appropriate?

Ok, I lied.  I totally saw this surprise ending coming.  How could you not?  As soon as the Carmichael character was introduced, you knew she was going to marry him.  By that time, you got the sense that the 'Chris Watters' thing wasn't going to work out, and the author was running out of pages to explain the obviously revealing title.  Carmichael is no doubt less handsome than Chris, less exciting in the sense that he probably never fought in the war (he's a mailman), and kind of a nerd, the complete foil to Chris' appealing persona.  It's good that she picked him though, because in the end he definitely would be a better father.  Back in the time this was written, a man picking up and shoving off every time he gets discontent with the area would not work out so for the wife and kids.  In this way the surprise ending was inevitable, and even more appropriate.  The last sentence on page 146 gave me a good chuckle, but also carried with it some significant meaning.  It reads,

"He always tells the children the story of how I went after him by sitting by the mailbox every day, and naturally I laugh and let him, because I like for people to think what pleases them and makes them happy."

I think that line really speaks to the character and integrity of Edie.  We obviously know the real reason she went to the mailbox was Chris, but she lets her husband believe it was him.  What a great wife.

How I Met My Husband

In the first short story of the week, How I Met My Husband, by Alice Munro, explores Edie the hired girl's life in the home of the wealthy Peebleses.  Question #5 in the book says...

5. Evaluate Chirs Watters as a potential husband for Edie.  Does her evaluation of him differ from the reader's?

Although the story is told from Edie's older, more mature persona, the reader still gets the sense that Edie remains to see Chris in a younger and naive light, a potential relationship that unfortunately never happened.  Edie fails to see Chris as we, the reader, see him.  Well at least the way I seen him.  Chris is a veteran from the war (WWII) where he used to fly, and now he takes people up in his plane; however, once he gets tired of a particular spot, he flies on to continue his "hobby" elsewhere.  As an informed reader, I can see this as a manifestation of Chris' sense of restlessness following the traumatic fighting in the war.  He continuously avoids his girlfriend (and his past life along with her) as if he is searching for meaning in life.  To me, this is a clear sign of a man incapable of supporting a normal family or any family at all really.  Edie, though, sees only the handsome war hero who can fly a plane and smooth talks his way into her pants.  Because of this, she waits by the mailbox everyday for a letter from him.  The letter of course won't come, and it takes her much longer to realize this than the reader.

Gotta Get Me Some John Donne

Originally, I wasn't planning on blogging about Death, be not proud, but instead intended on covering the printed-off handout poem.  Then I realized, "Wow, the 'Don' has a poem in this week's selection.  Now I have to cover that!"  Also, I remembered enjoying this poem the first time I read it; so, here it goes.  Basically, the speaker is being his normal rugged, indomitable, fearless, machismo-filled self and telling death straight up that it is worthless.  He calls death a "slave to fate, chance, kings, and desperate men" [line 9] and after throwing more insults, asks death "Why swell'st thou then?"  He just wants to know why death is so arrogant when it is obviously so pathetic.  The final line boldly sums up the speaker's whole point for the poem, "And death shall be no more; death, thou shalt die" [line 14].  So epic.

I just love everything about this guy.

Contentment with Chaos

(#17) The pattern/form of Robert Herrick's Delight in Disorder matches with its content to a tee.  The lines vary in length, and although there is clearly an 'aabbccddeeffgg' rhyme scheme in place, the rhymes are often broken or semi-perfect.  The poem in and of itself describes a man's heightened feelings for his woman when she looks unkempt, rather than movie star-esque.  Also, the extensive use of oxymorons ("sweet disorder", "fine distraction", "careless shoestring", "wild civility") further supports the disarray related to the poem.  Now, having established a well-paved and superbly academic approach to this poem, I will now interject my inclusive thought on the work.  The speaker, a man, is expressing how he finds his love more attractive after a sexual encounter than he did before said activities took place.  Based on descriptions within the poem ("disorder in the dress", "erring lace", "crimson stomacher", "cuff neglected", "ribbons to flow confusedly", "tempestuous petticoat", "careless shoestring"), the woman is, or once was, obviously dressed up formally for an occasion at one point.  However, these elegant articles are no longer perceived in so elegant a way.  They are destroyed, disheveled at best, and the speaker is attracted to her all the more for it, as spoken in the closing couplet, "Do more bewitch me than when art / Is too precise in every part."  He thinks his lover more beautiful 'after the fact' than he did at the start of the night's adventures when every detail of her appearance was untouched.  Specific textual evidences supporting an undertone of seduction are "crimson stomacher" and "tempestuous petticoat".  A stomacher is part of a corset, usually worn formally, and I find it intriguing the word choice of crimson, an intensified red and a color most would consider the epitome of lust or love.  The tempestuous petticoat behaves as it is described.  It instills conflicting emotions within our human speaker while also itself being conflicting; feelings of arousal are coupled with a messy exterior.  Our speaker loves this woman, and then loves her even more after loving her the first time.  Ah, poetry.

Extra long post here, my bad.  I got caught up in proving my obviously correct point.  I'll make up for it with this Calvin & Hobbes strip...

Norman Bates' Character was Based on a Serial Killer Named Edward Gein, Just Saying...

Alright.  Edward.  Creepy stuff here.  Along with Anna, all I could think of while reading this poem was Psycho, the 1960's classic thriller.  I did a little inch-deep skimming of some research, and I did in fact discover that Norman Bates (the serial killer from the movie) was inspired by a real madman named Edward Gein from 1957.  And because the poem was published anonymously (I have no idea when, either), it sounds to me like we're fittin' into some sort of cone of reason here (nevermind that both Leatherface from The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Jame Gumb from The Silence of the Lambs were also created from his ego).  Anyways, the poem itself was just eerie in my opinion.  A son, Edward, after being questioned by his mother, confesses that he killed his father.  "Mother dear", however, shows little to no remorse over the murder, instead rather we get the feeling that she set the whole thing up in the first place.  This is proven, as well as Edward's feelings of guilt, in the second half of the final stanza, "The curse of hell from me shall ye bear, / Mother, Mother, / The curse of hell from me shall ye bear, / Such counsels you gave to me, O" [lines 53-56, emphasis added].  By not telling the whole story as to what happened, though, the author effectively keeps us bamboozled, left only with the assumption that the poem is indeed an homage to Hitchcock.

Classic. View at your own discretion...muahahaha :]

Hideous-looking, Obese, Smelly, Ill-tempered, Lazy, Cowardly, Chronic and Complete Liar Seeks Total Opposite

After reading this week's list of poems, I've realized that I enjoy villanelles most.  And seeing as Wendy Cope's Lonely Hearts is a villanelle, it wasn't too hard to swallow.  Basically, the poem seems to contain different "personals", from a newspaper for instance, in which singles search for a soulmate.  I found evidence of repetition having a function (#15) in the poem, mainly in the two key lines repeated throughout the poem.

"Can someone make my simple wish come true? / Male biker seeks female for touring fun. / Do you live in North London? Is it you?" [lines 1-3, emphasis added]

Because the bolded lines are brought back at the end of each stanza alternating, they must serve some function.  Although each stanza described a single searching for specific attributes (e.g. "gay vegetarian", "bisexual woman, arty", "slim non-smoker, under twenty-one", etc.), the first and last lines of the poem remained as the constant.  This conveyed the idea that, while their interests varied, all the ads commonly sought the same thing, love; literally, they wanted one to make their "wish come true...in North London".  I think Michael has something to say about this...

Getting Out, Henry VIII Style

After reading Getting Out by Cleopatra Mathis, one emotion/tone/feeling I am sensing heavily in the work is remorse.  The poem highlights a couple who split, yet still potentially have feelings for each other.  The speaker (the woman, in this case) never gives a fully detailed reason as to why the two grew apart, leading one to believe even more so that this divorce is not the way it was meant to be.  However, she does acknowledge that "Days were different" [line 8], and maybe life just got in the way of love.  Towards the end of the relationship, both felt like a mental patient, "like inmates/ who beat the walls" [lines 1-2].  Obviously the two strived to make the marriage work, but to no avail; "I think of the lawyer's bewilderment/ when we cried, the last day" [lines 20-21].  I can see where girls would totally get into the poem because it's sappy and sad and stuff, but I don't know.  I'm just not buying it, I suppose.

"Taking hands/ we walked apart, until our arms stretched/ between us.  We held on tight, and let go." [lines 21-23]

I'm with Calvin on this one.

Patrick Swayze (Too Soon?)

Of this week's poetry collection, I'm pretty sure that the Don's poem The Apparition wins out as my favorite.  So, ironically, we find out fairly early on that the speaker is not actually dead (yet) and is not an apparition per se.  However, apparently he can't wait until he is one.  In my humble interpretation of the poem, I saw a woman who cheated on her man (the speaker) who now seeks vengeance.  However, he does so in a very sophomoric way.  First, there's the threats: "Then shall my ghost come to thy bed" [line 4].  Then, there's the insults targeted at the new man: "in worse arms shall see" [line 5].  After that, the classic 'you're gonna miss me cause he ain't love you': "in false sleep will [he] from thee shrink" [line 10].  Finally, he spits pure hate: "What I will say, I will not tell thee now,/ Lest that preserve thee;" [lines 14-15].  I can't say I don't back the guy on some of these things, but boy does he sure know how to cut to the bone.  More power to him.

Boo!

Julius Caesar

#7...
The central theme of Lord Tennyson's Crossing the Bar is the speaker's wish for a peaceful death and his acceptance of said death.  He compares his passing to a ship leaving the harbor and embarking on a journey out towards sea.  He wants "no sadness of farewell" because he has accepted the inevitability of death.  The title itself refers to a sandbar, and he uses this literal crossing of ships in contrast with a figurative crossing of the soul into heaven.  Heaven is evident as the destination because of his "hope to see [his] Pilot face to face", face being capitalized because of its reference to God.

This poem wasn't so bad, and it was nice to finally read a poem that portrayed death as not such a bad thing.  It was also mildly soothing, in a weird sort of way.

Ugo

Please keep the following image of beauty fresh in your mind before reading any further:

Now read William Shakespeare's My mistress' eyes, a poem about beauty.  I'm guessing you're now thinking more along the lines of this...

Ah, poetry.

While reading the poem (and trying to remove the above mental image from my brain), I picked up on a satirical tone (#8) given by Bill.  He is satirizing the poets and writers who compare women to unreasonable beauties.  The opening line, "My mistress' eyes are nothing like the sun", serves to set the tone for the entire work.  Bill goes on to list all of the things that his mistress is not, making her sound quite unattractive and subpar as a romantic interest.  A major shift takes place in lines 11-12 where Bill states that, although his woman is not as great as all of nature's treasures, he still loves her just as much as one who showers a love with false compliments.  These final lines most clearly show Bill's jab taken at others who describe beauty unreasonably.  I guess this poem was alright, but I don't know if I agree with Bill's approach to seducing the ladies...

APO 96225 -- Sweetest Title of a Poem. Ever.

Ok, so, it may be offensive to admit it, but this one was a sort of guilty pleasure for me.  I really liked it; 'twas my definite favorite of the last set.  The reason I believe I connected so well with APO 96225 by Larry Rottmann (and yet also the reason I feel bad about liking it at the same time) is because of the summer reading we did over The Things They Carried.  Even if this war poem weren't based around the Vietnam Era, O'Brien's novel still would've pertained.  The author perfectly depicts America's fake, two-faced approach towards war through the use of a mother and her fighting son's exchanging of letters.  Even when the son tries to protect his mother by holding out on the truth, she continually presses him for information as to what the war is really like and implores him to go past "'Dear Mom, sure rains a lot here.'"  The irony appears when the son truly reveals what the life of an American soldier stationed in Vietnam is like, "'Today I killed a man. Yesterday, I helped drop napalm on women and children'", and the father rights back saying, "'Please don't write such depressing letters. You're upsetting your mother.'"  This whole situation fit so well with what O'Brien's character repeatedly tried to prove about America showing empathy, but only to the extent of where it's not an inconvenience.  I don't blame her.

 

Doing a Job I See Myself Doing Only in the College Years

Sorting Laundry, by Elisavietta "Weird Name" Ritchie explores the ever-exciting world known as the Laundry Room.  The speaker talks to herself for a good while about clothes and such, reflecting on the memories held within each article and its significance to her.  The woman starts off strong in the first stanza with "Folding clothes,/ I think of folding you/ into my life."  This nice little snippet of foreshadowing returns to us later in the poem, as the speaker goes back to directly thinking of her man and not just his clothes she sorts.  The irony involved in this poem stems from the fact that, although the speaker talks the majority of the poem about how much the clothes' connotations mean to her, they are simply not the same as her man in the flesh.  This is evidenced in the last stanza when she states that "a mountain of unsorted wash/ could not fill/ the empty side of the bed."  I almost found myself feeling sorry for this dutiful assumed housewife, because she does her chores at home alone and they just simply don't do it for her.  Oh, and I think he's cheating...

Barbara Millicent Roberts

I think a good indicator of my future grade on this test is that I enjoyed these poems much more than last weeks, which isn't saying a whole lot, but still I'm at least getting a kick out of them.  Like the next one Barbie Doll by Marge Piercy.  Some people would like to believe Piercy is attempting some sort of social statement with this work about how our culture views an attractive woman, but I believe it goes deeper than that.  But before one is able to examine that, one must realize the allusion (#14) made in the title of the poem to understand where Piercy is coming from.  Nowhere in the poem does the speaker mention a Barbie Doll nor what one is, yet an educated reader will immediately acknowledge the famous perfection of the doll and the controversies that have long come with one, expanding and amplifying Piercy's point.  The verbal irony used in the poem is where the main focus is at, with the final stanza ironically reflecting on a woman who killed herself for failing to fit society's standard of said woman, while looking uncannily beautiful in the casket.  She cut off her nose and legs, the parts of her body she was so often told were ugly before doing so.  The eerie cool part for me was how the funeral-goers commented on how great she looked because she had a fake (putty) nose and the legs are never shown at a showing.

Yet Another Jewel from Dickinson

So, I open my lit book to the first page on our list, and what do I see?
Emily Dickinson's poem Much Madness is divinest Sense staring back at me.
It -- had -- lots -- of -- dashes, and things -- of -- that -- sort.
Burning this book?  No longer a last resort.

Alrighty.  Dickinson in the house.  It wasn't my favorite poem, but it was fairly easy to analyze.  In examining the poem we realize that its premise is paradoxical (#13), because she states that madness (as in crazy) is "divinest Sense", and yet having "Much Sense" is "the starkest Madness."  Throughout the poem, Dickinson refers more positively to the first rather than the latter, indicating that she believes the book smart of the world are simply conforming and that if one is not referred to as insane, they are not truly sensible.  This all seemed really pointless to me, because we all know Dickinson was a crazy shut-in no life in the first place.

Pink Dogish

I wasn't sure, but I think this poem might possibly have been a social commentary or something.  Elizabeth Bishop's Pink Dog was kind of funny, I suppose.  I enjoyed "all the beggars who can afford them now wear life preservers." [lines 23-24].  I saw the where the speaker was poking fun at the poor and lower class, even in a mean-spirited way.  The use of Carnival and Ash Wednesday towards the last three stanzas no doubt has significance, and Costello says the location (Rio de Janeiro) also means something, thought I'm not sure what it all means.  I really want to talk about this one in class tomorrow hopefully because I don't think I got the whole picture, especially the significance of the pink dog itself.  I haven't really grasped that concept just as of yet.  Also, I noticed that two words, fantasía and máscara, were italicized -- o, mystery!  I can't wait until we get to write our own poems...

Oh, Please, Help Us All.

Scary?  Yeah, I thought so.  This is the face of Margaret Atwood, crazy, scary, fat, feminist, cat lady.  I am shocked that she has no one to spend Valentine's Day with.  To answer #7, I guess I would say, "February is a time to shift from dread and despair in winter to life and happiness in the spring."  But somehow I just feel like that doesn't encompass it all.  In the poem, Atwood recommends we "snip a few testicles" [line 16] or "eat our young, like sharks." [line 18]  Margaret is a bitter, loveless woman who manifests her lack of relationship skills as hatred for everyone and everything good in the world.  She's Canadian, so naturally this only confirms my thesis and supports the random use of hockey.  Atwood has an unhealthy need to discuss her cat's hygiene and body parts ("enough of your greedy whining and your small pink bumhole" [lines 29-30]) with the speaker, a need I do not appreciate in even the slightest.  All in all, I wasn't a huge fan of the poem, and I most definitely did not connect to it.  I must be missing something big here.