Bastard out of Carolina ch 6-10

This book continues to get more disturbing more and more as I read. It is very unsettling and I find myself often while reading it getting mad at the characters. It makes me mad that Bone’s mom will just stand around while Glen beats her, she gave in too easily and she should not have at all. It also makes me mad that everyone in the family knows that something is going on between them, something awful but no one has done anything, except ask a 10 yr old child who does not understand what is going on. I guess the fact that a book can instill so many feelings in the reader is just a sign of a good writer, whether they are bad or good feelings. In addition, because I see no end in sight to this, and because I know all the sides of the story, well at least what Dorothy Allison has published, it makes me want to go in and fight for her. It frustrates me the way these characters are so careless about themselves, others and the world, and so by this point I need to put down the book.

In chapter six, I do not understand what the mother goes out to do when she comes to the point of feeding her children crackers and ketchup. This may be due to a naïve misunderstanding, but somehow she puts on all these clothes and goes out, and then magically comes home with all sorts of food. So are we supposed to just understand that she did something wrong to get this food, or is it just an unnecessary fact and isn’t worth wondering about?

I think that Glen’s appearance is the most important thing to him. The main reason he wants Anney is because it makes him look good, like a family man, but also like someone that people will automatically be good, because how else would he be able to get a wife and children if he wasn’t at least half decent? You can also see this when they talk about houses that are acceptable. Glen moves them around house-to-house, ones that aren’t nice, and they probably could get nicer ones, except he only wants the ones that if you squint hard enough you could possibly see a resemblance to his brothers houses. Those houses, the ones like his brother would make him look good, and possibly if he owned one would help him gain some respect from his family. When he realizes his houses aren’t nice he blames it on everyone else, saying that no one wants him to have anything nice, everything is always everyone else’s fault. Then with this, he would “get in one of his dangerously quiet moods and refuse to talk to anybody.” I do not think it is fair that because of Glen’s personality, Bone and Reese are forced to walk on eggshells and try and make uncontrollable things perfect for him, just so that he won’t get mad and go crazy.

Another thing I find interesting in this book, are the fantasies that Bone has. They are often either morbid, or messed up and she usually ends up being critical of herself and thinking she is an awful person. One in particular stands out, this is when Glen beat her to the point where she needed to go to the doctors because her tailbone was broken and her arm was injured. She imagined that her mom would leave him and they would not talk to him until he came crawling back begging their forgiveness, and everyone refused to forgive him except for her, and then she said she would die after that. Why would she forgive him? I just cannot understand. I think this is just a result of being so traumatized after all the things that have happened to her, maybe she has these fantasies because it is the only thing in her life that she has control over.

Dorothy Allison

In reading this book, I feel like the beginning is setting up the main character, Bone for something pretty awful to happen. In the beginning when she is born she is certified by the state as a bastard, and everyday her mother tries to get them to take this stamp off of her certificate. Only each time she goes they look at her in particular ways and make comments that imply that she is white trash and you can’t expect anything else from them except for them to have fatherless children. When she finally gets a clerk that understands why she wants this stamp off, he tells her anyways that he isn’t going to do it and he can’t. He says that the state doesn’t even enforce this rule anymore but the reason that they keep enforcing it upon her is because she’s of lower class and status. “You don’t need me to tell you the answer to that. You’ve lived in this county all your life, and you know how things are” He is almost saying that she needs to accept the status that was given to her by society because she can’t change things.

Bone reminds me of Miranda from the porter stories. This is manly because of the gender roles that are constantly being challenged in this book by her. She tries to dress like her older male cousins, and carry a knife like they do. She looks up to these men that have a reputation for being aggressive and dangerous. Gender roles are definitely a popular topic in southern literature that seems to be explored in any way possible.

I don’t trust Glen. I think this is due to the point that the book keeps describing him as the “quiet sort who never fought in friendly style. He either gave you that slow grin or went all out and tried to kill you. The latter earned him a little respect.” He never spoke his mind until he later blew up in anger and for this, was once arrested. This doesn’t seem like the kind of personality that I would want around my children and this why I get the feeling that something bad is going to happen to Bone, also manly because of this line in the book: “That boy’s got something wrong with him. He’s always looking at me out of the sides of his eyes like some old junkyard dog waiting to steal a bone.” Even though the reference was to a dog bone, I still feel in some way that this is supposed to be foreshadowing, or referencing some future event in which he will go after Bone.

James Dickey

In Reading the poems by James Dickey I found them to be some what depressing and morbid, but also confusing. Most of the lines in the poems had different meanings, or meanings that I think are supposed to be applied to the happenings of that time period of which I am unaware off, and do not understand. In each of the poems so far, they have been a dwelling into the inner workings of someone’s death, detail after detail, and a thorough look inward at what this situation was like.

In, The Underground Stream, he is laying next to this well imagining what it would be like to fall into this well, this underground stream. Then with this his spirit would be free, and calm, with him being able to fall to silence. It seems like he wants to switch his fate with the fate of someone whom he loved that has died. If he were able to do this, and make it possible he would be happy and the world would be at peace. I thought this was an interesting poem about a man trying to come to terms with the death of someone close to him, and offering his life in return of the other.

This Poem reminded me of a thanotology psychology class that I took. Because it deals with mourning and bereavement, and the steps that people take during the path to coping with a death. Denial and anger, I think this is where he is now, mad and sad about the loss, willing to do what ever it takes to make things right again for him.

It also seemed as though he felt guilty for this death or just guilty for the fact that he’s alive and happy; he says “and thought how to bury my smile.” He is struggling with life, god, and his internal sense of being.

Revelation

I liked Revelation by Flannery O’Conner much more than The displaced Person. I thought that this reading had much more religion to it and it was easier to understand the messages also. Rather than a mysterious Peacock, it was laid out a lot more, not completely but enough to understand easier. I also liked it because it was less violent and the characters did not act nearly as repulsive as the ones in the displaced person.

I think that it is interesting that O’Conner chooses to open each story with a strong impression of the main character. In Displaced Person, she was compared to a mountain, and in Revelation Mrs. Turpin was portrayed as “very large” and “looming.” I think opening up with such a strong character gives the story a presence. It makes it more influential and defends the characters strong opinions.

The issue of race and class is once again an issue. In this story it is a focus, Mrs. Turpin spends a lot of her time rummaging through her opinions and the levels of class in the world. I thought it was interesting that she placed African Americans above a white class. She said that if she were given a choice by god where she had to be anyone but her self, either a black person, or white trash, she would choose to be a black woman. I thought it was nice to see the opinions of southern literature moving forward. I think that is one of the things I find to be most compelling, is that you can actually see the progress and growing moral standpoints of the south as you read.

It was interesting to read a story that was so ingrained with religion. It was a less subtle and I think better this way than in Displaced person. It seems that O’Conner is trying to get society to realize the same point in each of her stories. If the reader takes anything out of her stories, it must be that we are all equal. She points out how there are those who get too caught up in societal issues, such as class levels and fail to see these messages. Then there are those who just do not appreciate God’s creations, and those who will never come to realize any message. However, the epiphany that Mrs. Turpin comes too is that no matter the color or the race, in the end, we are all equal and we go to the same place and receive the same “saving”. So what is the point for time spent for classifying and categorizing? Mrs. Turpin is no better than anyone else whom she compares herself too, and it takes a girl hurling a book to her eye, and strangling her to awaken her from this slump. She ends up asking the girl for a revelation, what is she trying to tell her, and it is that she is no better than the hogs she takes care of. When she fully takes this message in, she realizes the reality of this statement and because she asks for gods help, he helps her. This comes back to what we said in class on how O’Conner writes about how we cannot save our selves; we need God’s grace to save us. Thus, since she chose to head this message she was saved.

I also thought that the girls name was interesting. She was the one who delivered the message, and accordingly so her name was, Mary Grace.

Play vs. Film

I thought that they did a really good job picking actors for these roles. You can completely believe that Blanche is crazy; her facial expressions when she talks, and the reactions to the voices she hears in her head sell the crazy bit. I felt a little more sympathy for Blanche reading the play rather than watching the film, this may be because actually seeing it had more of an impact than reading it. While reading it I must admit that I did not notice a lot of blanches double loaded lines. Each time she goes to lie in the film she puts her hands up to her throat and chest, as if to help block the fact that she is seeping lies. I also thought it was interesting the way the actress that played Blanche varied her voice, when she would lie and on most occasions it was soft, airy and fast paced. However, when she was actually telling the truth, her voice would go deep and become slower. This was an interesting contrast to me, it made Blanch seem like she was crazy and brought her character to life.

Stanley’s character was also made believable; the actor did a great job portraying this overly masculinized and sexualized person. The movie made me feel more sympathy for Stanley than the play did, because you actually felt bad that this crazy sister in law was really messing up his life. While I still greatly disagreed with all of his actions, it was easier to see where he was coming from when you actually were able to watch it.

I thought that Stella’s character was portrayed differently in the movie then in the film, she seemed to be more physical with Stanley, at one point she ripped his shirt and pushed him around a bit, i didnt see that at all in the play. she also, seemed a lot more independent, and willing to stand up for what is right. While she did not do these things completely, the play led you to believe she never did these things and never would. The new ending also made Stella a stronger character, even though she sent her sister away to a mental hospital, she resists Stanley completely after that, where she actually tells him never to touch her again, and says that she is never going back there as she ran up the stairs with her baby. I think that his new scene helps to add to the theme of the play and to the character Stella. It made it so that I was that mad at her for sending her sister away, because in the end she at least made the right choice and left Stanley.

Some of the scenes that they added made it all seem more realistic. Such as the police officer that comes when Blanche freaks out, and the fact that she just screamed like crazy rather than yelling fire.

I thought it was interesting how open they made Stella’s and Stanley’s house, at one point you see Blanche rushing around closing all these shutters and curtains and it makes it seem like their home is a lot bigger than it actually is, while still maintaining that fact that it’s a really poor house. I also thought that the scenery chosen for Blanche and Mitch’s date did well to show the gloominess of Blanche’s character. The fog over the lake, and the dock setting worked well with Blanche’s dark story that she tells Mitch.

I just feel in general watching this play is much easier to pick up on everything than reading the play. It brought it to life more and helped the themes in the story to be easier to pick out. In addition, the ending made me a lot happier; I was not as disappointed as I was with the play. This may be due to the fact that I am a product of the time where endings need to be happy or at least somewhat politically correct to ease my feelings about movies.

A streetcar named desire

I am not sure I completely understand the significance of the name of this play. A streetcar named desire, it brought Blanche to her sister’s apartment, but it does not really come into play at all after that except for a mention here and there. Maybe it is just that each character has their secret desires and the streetcar just symbolizes that they are more common then they realize, even though they come from different class levels, and backgrounds they still have the same hopes and dreams as the rest: The American Dream. On the other hand, it may not mean anything at all, and it just sounds nice…

To tell the truth, I was somewhat disappointed in this play. I was expecting it to be a little deeper than it was, this may have been due to the title. I thought there was going to be this epiphany, or some monumental experience. Rather, you find that Stanley is as abusive as he seems, Stella is a weak person who is greatly influenced by the fear of being alone and a single mother, and Blanche is crazy but may just be more sane than the rest. The end also disappointed me, just because it did not end in a way that I would have preferred. No one was better off at the end; Blanche was sent to a mental hospital in front of everyone she was side swiped, embarrassed and humiliated as she realized her own sister sent her away. Stella realized she made a mistake, traded her sister for security built off of abuse, and Stanley got away with everything, he was the successful villain. I do not need a happy ending to like a story, but this one just had to many disappointments.

Stanley reminded me a lot of Tea Cake, at first you think he’s this really nice guy and perfect for Stella, but then as the plot goes on he beats her, rapes his sister, and really isn’t as great of a guy that you would like him to be. But at first glance, he has all these friends, and makes a decent first impression that makes you second guess his character. Stella also reminded me of the grandmother from their eyes were watching god. Two weak characters who depended upon others for their support. The grandma towards the end of her life relied completely on fait and god, she gave up being someone to look up to for Janie, sent her away so that someone else could take care of her. Stella, realizes that there are weaknesses to Stanley’s character; the way he acts when he is drunk, the way he treats her sister, and the abuse part, and yet she will stay with him no matter what, even if it means turning her back on her sister in order to lock in on some form of security. She does not want to think about what would happen to her if she were a single mother, where she would go, or what she would look like. Even though she has a sister that will love her no matter what, who maybe demanding and crazy sometimes but will always be there for her because they are sisters.

Stella also reminds me of Janie in their eyes were watching god. In the sense that they both rely on men to achieve, live, and gain in their lives. Even though they could each get along fine without, and Stella could rely on her crazy sister, she chooses each time to kneel down to Stanley.

Their eyes were watching god, part 3.

In the last third of their eyes were watching god, Janie began off really happy. Happy that she could finally live life, and experience things that Jody had always told her were only for men to do. Tea Cake showed her new things, helped her to redefine her image of herself and cast away all the negative thoughts that Jody had instilled on her. When she ran off with Tea Cake she said, “It made her so glad she was scared of herself.” It was everything she dreamed of, with new exciting things to do and crazy Tea Cake always making her laugh.

I think that after all the doubts that the town had expressed about their relationship, and the actual site of it happening to Mrs. Tyler made her secretly wonder if she was going down the same road. She brought the 200 dollars just in case, to find that Tea Cake had taken it and spent it. Even though he paid her back, it was still not right of him to take her money. I think it showed that he though he had control over her enough to be able to say what is hers is now his. Even though they had only been married about a day. Also, when he would randomly pop in, and show up to see her at weird times that he used to not, when he should be working was also controlling. He expected her to be there each time, what would he have done if she wasn’t there? When she questioned him about where he was and if he was with another girl all he said was, “If Ah ever gets tuh messin’ round another woman it won’t be on account of her age. It’ll be because she got me in de same way you got me- so Ah can’t help mahself.” It is almost as if he is stating early on, if he cheats it’s obviously not his fault because the girl was too much like her so he can’t be blamed. That is a pretty awful response to give when you are trying to defend your loyalty if you ask me.

I think Tea Cake is like two different people. He acts one way to her, all sweet and loving, he promises her the world and him by her side for all of it. Then, he goes and gambles, gets into knife fights and beats people up, goes missing for days, and does some shady things. It is strange how he is one way with Janie and then another around everyone else.

I thought it was interesting that Hurston described both Jody and Mrs. Tyler as having hanging bodies when they met their failure in life. They are both described as their bodies giving up and bags hanging and resting on other body parts. It was as if they became broken once their pride was gone, and there was no regaining it or use in living anymore. They both decided to give in and attempt to die in peace; life had defeated them as they both had their self-importance shaken.

Thier eyes were watching god, pgs 1-50

My favorite part of this book thus far, is the beginning, the opening to the story and the opening to the life of Janie Crawford. I think that the first page carries an underlying message that is the theme of her life. She is consumed by this struggle between the barriers that separate women from men. Like so many other pieces of literature that we have come across in class, once again there is this internal and external tension that is building in those who are oppressed by the idea of strict gender roles. She strives to be this person whom her heart desires, only this person is on one of those “ships that will sail forever on the horizon, never out of sight, never landing until the watcher turns his eyes away in resignation, his dreams mocked to death by time.”

There is a connection between Janie Crawford and Frederick Douglass that can be seen possibly through the products of slavery. “Ah ain’t never seen mah papa. And Ah didn’t know ‘im if Ah did. Mah mama neither. She was gone from round dere long before Ah wuz big enough tuh know. Mah grandma raised me. Mah grandma and de white folds she worked wid.” Frederick Douglass was also raised by his grandmother, and never knew his mother or his father. I think they are also similar because they each had to struggle with a sense of identity. Neither one knew completely who they were, or where they came from. I think that this influenced their actions and relationships with others.

Another theme that is very familiar is that of interracial friendships. Janie grew up with white children, to the point where she though she was white and couldn’t even identify herself in a photo. Similar to Nannie and the Grandmother in Porter’s stories, there is a strong friendship between them. Janie identifies with these children until she realizes in the photo that she is different. It remains a completely innocent friendship, until the other children at school taint it and discolor it by signifying a difference that to them is important. This ‘tainting’ also occurs in Nannie’s and Grandmother’s friendship by the classification of not only race but social hierarchy.

I was also reminded of “The Grave” while reading this book. “She was seeking confirmation of the voice and vision, and everywhere she found and acknowledged answers. A personal answer for all other creations except herself. She felt an answer seeking her, but where? When? How?” It is a coming of age, learning the information that no one will come out and tell strait out. Just like Miranda, she had to seek and discover this knowledge on her own and put it together in her head, and from then on hold this as a secret. Miranda learned where babies come from by a rabbit her brother had killed in the forest. Janie learns what marriage is by watching the interactions between a bee and a blossomed tree. This striving for knowledge and understanding, is a driving force in their lives, and behind their actions.

Living Jim Crow

The Ethics of living Jim Crow by Richard Wright is nothing but disturbing and awful. Slavery has been abolished and Black men and women can live free and own their own home, material items and chose what job they will work. Yet, they are forced to respond to all white men with Sir and if they are unable to, forget or are not heard clearly enough it is seen as the most heinous crime towards man, and punishable by death. Often in this story, if the white man does not kill him, he says how lucky he is. He has befallen upon some godly luck, for he was not killed for forgetting to put sir before their name. These actions are so petty; it is sad and pathetic to read. It is one-step beyond what was before to instill control, or what little they have left. For this is a result of each person realizing that it is a very unstable and threatened hierarchy.

I don’t know what is worse, reading about the hideous acts towards the slaves in Fredrick Douglas’s piece or the petty actions over those in Richard Wright’s piece. Is it worse to be defined as a mere piece of property and treated as something less than a pet? Someone who is denied their personal identity, whipped and beaten without a second thought, and after finishing working for the plantation owners they are sent back to their hard floor and withering blanket to prepare for the next days work. Shoo fly shoo…

Or is it worse to be told, sorry we made a mistake slavery is over you are free, maybe even equal. Such fleeting words swept away with the actions of those who once relied on you for survival. Is it worse to have your dreams waved in front of you on an iridescent flag, while the rest of America declines your existence, punishes you for making strides, and picks at all those threads in your flag, one by one?

Every man new with each inch of their body how wrong it was to be treated in such a way, but they could do nothing. For the fear of death, was greater than any action one man could make against a thousand actions to bury each question and each seed of bravery.

The Grave

The Grave by Porter covers many themes of the southern literature we have discussed. The importance of family and family unity is once revisited. When the Grandmother’s land was donated for charity, they made sure that their family graveyard would be moved to the main family plot as to keep everyone together. I also think that the Grandmother was the one person holding the family together. There was not much mention of any of the other family members, and at the end of the story, it seems as though Miranda and Paul also ended up going their own ways. She says how she was in a “strange city of a strange country” and that what had made her think of the day when her brother Paul killed the rabbit, it also made her think of her brother and how he used to look when he was a boy. This seems like she has not thought of him, or seen him in a long time. The Grandmother was a connection to the old south, and its beliefs, one of these being the importance of family and with the death of the grandmother, the importance for them to stick together seemed to go as well.

Porter also once again touches on gender Roles. Miranda was a tomboy growing up; this may be because the family was not very well off. She wore clothes like her brother; “She was wearing her summer roughing outfit: dark blue overalls, a light blue shirt, a hired-man’s straw hat, and thick brown sandals.” She also likes to go hunting, do what her brother does and jump in graves. This brought up a lot of controversy and scandal in their town, since it was believed that girls should not be wearing such clothes or acting in such ways. The town gossiped how wrong it was for a girl to be acting this way and blamed it on the father since they new the grandmother had “discriminated against him.” Chopin also wrote about women rebelling against the gender roles. Calixta was very sexualized, not so much into settling down and having a family as she was to having fun and flirting with men out of her social class.

I also think that this was a coming of age story for Miranda, like in Barn Burning and Oder of Verbena. She follows her brother for most of the story, but then she starts to want to go do her own things and be girly. She also is struggling with the knowledge she gains when her brother kills the pregnant rabbit and what this means to her. “She understood a little of the secret, formless intuitions in her own mind and body, which had been clearing up, taking form, so gradually and so steadily she had not realized that she was learning what she had to know.” With this, the story also steps into the family theme again. Her brother killed a family of rabbits and this is terribly upsetting to them, another set of family bonds are broken.

Barn Burning

Violence again surfaces as main issue in Barn Burning, where it takes the form as a common moral problem. Much like in odor of Verbena the boy is faced with a moral dilemma, which he comes to solve at the end. He realizes that what his father is doing is wrong, but is afraid to say anything to him. As he matures, he realizes that he can do something to stop him, something that does not involve violence.

I thought it was interesting that violence plays such a big role in this story. His father used violence to enforce his dictatorship ways, enforce that his actions will not be questioned. He uses the violence as a tool to raise him up, in attempt to make him impervious to questioning. The violence is a tool to Abner, one in which he can manipulate others, the rules and what is right. He looses himself in it and did not seem to have any self-control, or self-perception. Abner used it on whoever crossed him, or questioned him; this involved his wife, son and other farmers who Abner decided did him wrong. I feel like he was the one who needed to grow up, rather than his son. He acted abruptly and without thinking first, while his son knew it was wrong and stood up to him in the end.

I think that they tried to compare the son to Abner in the story many times. I think that this was interesting and that the son realized this as well. He did not want to be compared to his father, and he had said how the only thing holding him down is his age. “it was if the blow and the following calm, outrageous voice still rang, repercussed , divulging nothing to him save the terrible handicap of being young, the light weight of his few years, just heavy enough to prevent his soaring free of the world as it seem to be ordered but not heavy enough to keep him footed solid in it, to resist it and try to change the course of events.(pg 165)” His age was the only thing keeping him from standing up to his father and from facing this moral dilemma. This dilemma was building inside of him with each erroneous action that his father took.

I also thought it was interesting that this story also focused on one of the themes of the south, the family. The father stresses how important it is for him to stick by his family no matter what because he will not have anyone else if he abandons his family. He uses this idea of family to further manipulate his son, to try to convince him that he is right and just. “You’re getting to be a man. You got to learn. You got to learn to stick to your own blood or you ain’t going to have any blood to stick to you. Do you think either of them, any man there this morning would? Don’t you know all they wanted was a chance to get at me because they knew I had them beat?” It is almost like, if he achieves at convincing his son he is right, than he knows he is too and so will the rest of the world.

Dry September

The first thing that I thought of while reading Dry September was the famous book, To Kill a Mockingbird. This was due to situation where a white woman accused a black man of some heinous crime and as a result, society wants to take justice without any facts or proof that it was committed. In Dry September and in To Kill a Mockingbird there is blatant evidence that these accusations may not have occurred. However, the idea of other black men taking after him is so atrocious that an innocent man will take the fall as a lesson to all others. “Happen? What the hell difference does it make? Are you going to let the black sons get away with it until one really does it?” I do not really think that these actions reside only on the fear of crimes by their slaves. I think it has a lot to do with the fact that when the slaves act more human and equivalent to them, the more they want to force their control over them and remind them their place.

This story also reminded me of Frederick Douglass’s piece. Frederick Douglass mentions the sleeping quarters of the slaves, and the work regimens that they were expected and forced to do. “There were no beds given the slaves, unless one coarse blanket be considered such, and none but the men and women had these. This however, is not considered a very great privation. They find less difficulty from the want of beds, than from the want of time to sleep…old and young, male and female, married and single, drop down side by side, on one common bed, the cold, damp floor, each covering themselves with their miserable blankets. (pg 176)” He mentions this, and it seems as a result for the demand of control over the slaves, as sort of a way to remind the slaves that they less than that of their owners, and their owners work to remind them they aren’t human. In Dry September, the slaves seem to have a little more leeway than those in the time of Frederick Douglass. As a result, the men seem to be jumping to conclusions because they see a very unstable way of life that they have going. By taking every white person’s word over any slaves, sends the point very successfully that they still are slaves.

I thought the portrayal of women was also interesting in this work. Women are portrayed as very passive and dependent characters, more than any other piece we have read in class. McLendon hit his wife for being up to late, and Minnie Cooper was attacked by a slave. This story works well to define a distinct class level; men, women, black men and slaves last. I feel like this piece has gone a step further in dehumanizing those who are seen as a “threat” to the white male. Now it is more than just class and race, but sex is also now a strong determining factor. I also think it is interesting that the white woman was attacked by a slave, and it took the white male to set things right, and keep society in order.

Kate Chopin

I think that Kate Chopin’s, The Storm is an interesting portrayal of the influence that society has on our everyday lives. This is a timeless topic, as it still relates to today’s society and its sway on us. In this story, both Claxita and Aclee marry whom they are supposed to according to class and society. Whom they end up choosing to marry is not their first choice; rather they base their choice on whom society deems a good match for them, and whom they can tolerate. This really underlines the unspoken disdain towards going outside your designated class level, even for love.

I really enjoyed the symbolism of the storm, and the simple effect of the storm. Both of the main characters had this building uneasiness circulating inside of them from the time they became married up until now. In order for them to go on living happily and move past this squall, they needed to get it out of their systems. Just like calm after the storm, once it passes everything is peaceful. The actual storm provided that shelter that they needed for the indulgence in their forbidden actions, and then with the passing of the storm so goes their conflicting thoughts with society’s norms. “So the storm passed and everyone was happy.” Calixta was able to be a good mother and their family was able to have an enjoyable time rather than being afraid of her like they were. Aclee and his wife Clarisse also became content with how things were. As a result, the building storm inside of them, and natures influence passed to leave a new and pleasant road ahead for all characters to travel.

I also think that Chopin’s focus on sexuality is interesting since most of the other literature had focused on slavery and race. Sexuality is depicted as being a threat to society and encloses the power to violate class. I think that this is another symbol of the storm, passion and nature taking its course. I think that this story points out how feeble it is to have such a focus on race and class when in the end, it is uncontrollable and things are going to work out how they were meant to, not necessarily according to our societies beliefs. When I read this work, it reminds me of Romeo and Juliet in a way. The characters in this story do not have nearly as fatal an end as Romeo and Juliet, but they do come across the limits that society puts on their hearts. This is another aspect that makes Kate Chopin’s piece so timeless. This Romeo and Juliet theme is a popular premise in movies today. The influence that society has over us is fascinating and I believe to be very influential.

Frederick Douglass

I thought this piece was moving and very influential for its time and possible remains to be. It is scary what he went through, and impressive that he was able to form any stable personality out of his experiences. It was a very inspiring story, he had one goal to be free and while there were downfalls, and troubling times he managed to regain hope each time and reach his dream. He came out of his experiences wanting to change things rather than runaway, and he was not concerned with what others thought of him. He stated at the end of the chapter that his life and his actions are completely up to the judgment and different views of each person.

I thought that the part about the songs was a really interesting part. How he said, “the songs of the slave represent the sorrows of his heart; and he is relieved by them, only as aching heart is relieved by its tears.” Not only did the slave owners misunderstand these songs but also the amount of emotion they carried in their words is powerful. Rather than silently crying about their misfortune they sang, or just let out noise as to release what ever was building up inside of them: sorrow, anger, fear or at one point he describes it as the evils of slavery.

I also thought it interesting that there was a sort of hierarchy of slavery. That the state of their owners influenced the slaves, to the extent that they would fight for who had the better owner, as if the greatness of their owner was bestowed upon them. I feel like this was another attempt of the slaves to feel human, they are constantly reinforced that they aren’t human, and in some ways I think they try to overcompensate for this to do anything they can to just feel in some way belonging to humanity. Maybe this is why it was so important for Frederick Douglass to learn to read and write; he wanted to become, and help those become more human and less like property. Then, with this consequence of learning to think, he became more aware of horrid state of things. “Anything, no matter what, to get rid of thinking! I was this everlasting thinking of my condition that tormented me.” He knew that the only way to make it as a content slave, who can bear with his life and how things are is to be a thoughtless one.

The Fall of the House of Usher

I really enjoyed the “Fall of the House of Usher” by Edgar Allan Poe. While it is a very sick and twisted story, it is really well written and it instills very vivid images into ones mind. I think that my favorite part about this story is the connection between the house and the brother and sister living there. There are many similarities between the descriptions of the house and Roderick Usher, at one point he describes both the house and Roderick in relation to opium users. Also, as Roderick and his sister get sicker and eventually die, so does the house. The crack in the wall that at the beginning is no bother, but by the end of the story during the deaths of the Usher’s, the house cracks in two. I assume that the progress of the house is also in direct relationship to the Usher line, and with each fall of an Usher, the house began to diminish.

In addition, we discussed in class how Roderick’s illness could not be pinpointed to a specific disease. I think that the House of the Usher’s is a character in its self, which is the cause to the downfall of the Usher’s. I also think that once you enter it is like another reality, one that sucks who ever enters the house into its undertakings. This can be seen when the narrator enters the house and stays for a while, making it possible to track his mental state into its demise. Thus, I think that the house is like an infectious disease that is bringing all those who reside there down with it.

I also think there is a connection between the brother and the sister. As the sister gets worse physically, so does the brother mentally. It said how they are twins, if she really does exist; I find it interesting that at the moment they came together they both instantly died. This death of the final Usher’s brings the death of the House of Usher’s as well. Which also has something to do with the end of their bloodline. “while I gazed, this fissure rapidly widened—there came a fierce breath of the whirlwind—the entire orb of the satellite burst at once upon my sight—my brain reeled as I saw the mighty walls rushing asunder—there was a long tumultuous shouting sound like the voice of a thousand waters—and the deep and dank tarn at my feet closed sullenly and silently over the fragments of the House of Usher”

George Fitzhugh

Southern Thought by George Fitzhugh was interesting, because he felt that slavery was beneficial whether it is black slavery or white it is needed. What I liked about this piece is that when making his opinion, he backed it up with facts and good information. While I may not agree with it, it was very well argued. I did not feel like it was insulting, or racist, rather I feel that he believed fully in what he was saying and wasn’t just trying to conform to the social norm. Unlike Thomas Jefferson who preached against slavery, while owning slaves and having relationships with one of his slaves.

In reading Southern Thought, it seems as though he has a lot of pride in the South. He says, “France and England, who fairly represent the whole of so-called free society, are actively engaged in the slave-trade under more odious and cruel form than were ever known before. They must justify their practices; and, to do so, must adopt and follow Southern thought.” He feels that southern thought and southern example should rule the world because their form of slavery is fair and needed. They are nice to their slaves, have acted civilized and according to the bible, so they are a thriving economy, one in which all other country’s should follow.

He argues that to defend and justify only black slavery is unjust and against the cause of the south. It is ignoring the fact that in all states each race may and is being held in slavery. So his argument isn’t racist and suggesting what others have suggested about slavery, he only argues that our economy depends on slavery and uses it as vital lifeline.

In a sense, we still have slavery today. We export many of our goods to be made in factories in third world countries by people who are paid barely anything. It is out of sight, and of no mention by many as to keep people from realizing that slavery still exists to this day.

Swallow Barn

I thought that Swallow Barn was a romantic portrayal of the old south. The first chapter is very descriptive and uses a lot of visual imagery. He describes swallow barn as illustrating, " three epochs in the history of the family. The main structure is upwards of a century old; one story high, with thick brick walls and a double-faced roof, resembling a ship, bottom upwards; this is perforated with small dormant windows, that have some such expression as belongs to a face without eye-brows." Not only is family shown to be very important in this story, but also the homes that have followed the families for generations seem to be of equal importance. It is very important in the south for such properties to stay in the family, and this house while old and aging, is beautiful because it is old.

John Pendleton Kennedy relies very much on southern stereotypes in this telling of swallow barn. Some stereotypes that are prevalent are, history is held in high regard, family is very important, pride, and the plantation as a symbol. The Plantation is often thought of as a trademark of the south, which makes it interesting that swallow barn isn’t the stereotypical plantation. It is falling apart and it has "shrunk a little at the joints, and left some crannies, through which the winds whisper all night long." when I think of plantations I think of huge white houses that tower over acres and acres of land.

Frank Meriwether is also an interesting character; he embodies all the stereotypes about how a southern gentleman should be. He is indecisive, complacent, handsome and well educated. When he goes to Washington, he becomes disturbed by the politics there, opinionated and brags of his knowledge. He then enters into this unsteady point of view, one day he feels one way and the next day it is another opinion. I do find it interesting that he contradicts the stereotype of religion in dealing with the southern gentleman. Meriwether doesn’t go to church but considers himself a high churchman, and is offered to a chance to speak at church but refuses.

Thomas Jefferson

This piece by Thomas Jefferson was a little easier to read then those on John Smith. It was also enticing; in the sense that it is this piece and others like it could be the start to racism and stereotypes. Hearing such an influential person speak on different cultures and things unfamiliar to them could have a real impact on shaping their opinions about what is different from them. I am definitely not saying that Thomas Jefferson caused racism and such stereotypes; I am only saying that he certainly provoked it, and added more influential opinions to the pot than the pre-existing ones. At the time no matter how contradicting, his word carried weight to it, certainly to those uneducated.

It is also somewhat scary that He can be so contradictory. At one moment he is pledging how wrong slavery is and how it is not our right to make decisions on other peoples lives, only god has this power. While at the same time he has slaves, and maybe he could be the nicest person to his slaves, but he still has them. I did not know that he had Aspergers Syndrome, it is very interesting and this may be an excuse for many things that he did. Such as the slavery issues, and his general opinions. However, I do not think it excuses him for what he said, especially about the poets. He says how Phyllis Wheatley does not deserve the title of poet, but this is all because of his bias against black people, women and her antislavery remarks. He also insulted Sancho, saying that he writes too much about feelings, and his writing was not worth his time. He however, is more forgiving to Sancho since he is a man.

I see a similarity between Thomas Jefferson and John Smith in that they both overtly contradict themselves. John Smith left England because he felt bullied, but then traveled to the new world and bullied others to come and colonize, using religion as a manipulation strategy. While Thomas Jefferson, points out how slavery is against god's will and immoral, during which he owns slaves himself. He also makes statements saying that while its bad, its necessary or else the economy will fail.

Thomas Jefferson made very crude statements about many things in order it seems, to follow his peers rather than to lead his peers.

Readings on John Smith

The two readings for class on Friday were interesting in the since that they were very different from each other. In his description of New England he sells the idea that colonizing is a duty under god. He pressures the people by manipulating information about the beliefs of their religion. This is unfair and seems to be a desperate move by John Smith to bully people into following him. The high opinions that he holds for himself can also be seen in the readings of a general history of Virginia. The point of this writing was to make him seem more legendary to the people he left and for those to colonize. As discussed in class he wrote this in third person to gain the sympathy of others in hopes to be considered a hero.

Both of these readings portray this importance for striving for land. By owning land somehow puts you in god’s good graces. However this obsession for land and possessiveness is contradictory to doing ‘good’. Those who colonized destroyed and changed the cultures of those who where there before by imposing their morals and beliefs, because of this need for land and the overtaking of property.