Now There’s Green Light in My Eyes

So last week I finished F. Scott Fitzgerald's (affectionately known to some of our English class as F. Money Bojangles) The Great Gatsby. Generally, I don't like classics until long after I've read them, but Gatsby struck me as endlessly intriguing. I know I'm not of the bourgeoisie but I was still able to identify with Gatsby in the simplistic analysis of the American Dream - or rather, as I've come to understand through a study on the wealth gap, meeting with Occupy Pittsburgh** and others is the American Fairy Tale.

What I think I identify most with is the idea of invented social inequality, and Nick Carraway's fantastically broad pronouncements. We have to take his word on everything because he is the first person narrator, but I find it interesting that for once I can look at a narrator as attempting to be objectively transfixed with everything.

I'm (obviously) no literary genius, and I don't pretend to be but I think this piece is a great conversation starter on the topics of the wealth gap, lust, and built up personas. One of the lines that particularly stuck out (there are so many, but this one is the one I can quote off the top of my head):

There are only the pursued, the pursuing, and the tired.

This applies to love, wealth, success, and I'd go on but the beauty of this statement is that it can be applied to pretty much anything. It's a basic observation about human existence, and for some reason I'm fascinated by this.

I really like this book for that reason: nuggets of things that may not actually be that profound (I'm 16, not some time-honored critic*) but make you say "hmm..." after you read them. Within and Without.

At this point though, I'm feeling quite tired. Have a nice week.

*Another theme of this novel, and prevalent throughout many of Fitzgerald's pieces is the emphasis we put upon superficial authorities: celebrities, scholars, etc. to the point where they are no longer a person but rather an idea. We only allow time-tested authorities to sound off on certain things. We are only allowed a choice of certain giants to stand upon the back of, it seems. The best example of this objectification/idealization is the Petrarchian lover. You fall victim to being in love with the idea of being in love or the idea  of the other person to the point where they are idolized, they are no longer a person but an idea of perfection.***

**No idea what I'm talking about? Here: http://2015blogger.blogspot.com/2011/12/visiting-with-occupiers-and-education.html and here: http://2015blogger.blogspot.com/2012/10/occupy-one-year-later.html

***JayScribble's book Paper Towns contains one of my favorite quotes: "What a treacherous thing it is to believe that a person is more than a person". A person is only a person [that is the extent to which I'll comment on the whole Alex Day thing, and I felt it fit with this post. Anyway, yeah, Gatsby.]

Summer Reading Adventure 2013 Part I: The Awakening

So one of the things that I'm required to do to keep in my honors level courses is read a book. Well, actually for English I need to read two books, write two rhetorical precis, two outlines, and two personal responses (one in each category due by July 15). For Social Studies I need to read a book, then read the first four chapters in my textbook and answer some questions.

So I test-drove the idea of book reviews last year with Withering Away Heights and I think I'm going to do it again. This contains plot spoilers, and may very well ruin the book for you. Sorry, but I am warning you now.

The first book I've read this summer was The Awakening by Kate Chopin. Where the heck do I start with this plot? It's about this woman who decides she is unhappy with her life as a married woman with children, and didn't marry for love, and wah.

It's set 19th century New Orleans and the whole aim of the piece is to highlight the lack of choices women had in the way of self expression, and what happens when they bow to social conventions and have to follow strict class expectations et cetera. 

The plotline follows Edna Pontellier experiencing a personal awakening that she didn't marry for love, and falls in love with a lovely younger gentleman named Robert. But, again: She is married to a guy already, and has two children. He loves her back, so he moves away to remove himself out of the equation.

I want to take a moment to appreciate the fact that her sons names are Étienne and Raoul. 

Anyway, she decides that she also wants to be an artist. Her husband is the breadwinner and she is expected by social conventions to serve as homemaker and loyal wife and downright dull stock character. So she sends her kids to her homeland of Kentucky, her husband off to make money in New York. And she moves out. And Robert comes back. 

And what Robert essentially tells her is: Lady, I love you, but I can't be with you because, you know, adultery and stuff. So what is the logical thing to do at this point. You guessed it - she commits suicide. The end. Because that 

Okay, so I get that class culture is something important here. So are gender roles, because together they essentially drive this Edna chick insane and she kills herself. But these are social constructs of the 1890s. 

I understand that gender gaps are still a thing. In fact, a much better (and expanded) argument can be viewed here: http://tiltingsilver.tumblr.com/post/51872916055. So we have a long way to go, but I am not sure I am getting out of this what I should. 

I saw gender roles, and Edna's struggle to be an artist to a world not kind to women wanting to be artists, not some tragic love story of a woman wanting what she cannot have. 

I think we've come a bit further than having to resort to suicide because your on the side lover wants to preserve the sacrament of the existing marriage. And I'm also trying to figure out its relevance to me personally. I guess it's cultural awareness of gender roles, but in the context of a 1890s tragedy. 

Honestly, I didn't like the book. I liked what I interpreted as the message, which really was only made clear through reading criticism. It was quite Dickens-y with the whole 'let's describe every detail of the dresses at parties' thing, but it's a short (200ish page) read. Wouldn't recommend it, but I would recommend this criticism on it. Which, I guess requires reading the book: http://www.gvsd.org/cms/lib02/PA01001045/Centricity/ModuleInstance/3232/Critical_Essay-The_Awakening-A_Refusal_to_Compromise.pdf

</rant>

So this week I celebrated four years since the first post in 2009. I got bored and played with my image editor, and this happened (left)

But seriously, Thanks. No matter how long you've been reading, or if this is like the future and I'm in year like five or whatever, thanks for reading my nonsense week after week, despite how rambly these things get. 

Thanks for reading, because honestly, without people reading this, I would've stopped a long while back. 

Stay tuned for more (slightly comical, I hope) book reviews. Meh.

Wuthering Heights: An Overview

Hey there. This is a preface. I promised that I'd post this now-semi-infamous review of Wuthering Heights. I am in my first week of school, so I don't exactly have time to post the original content this Friday (considering I'm announcing for the Golden Cougar Marching Band this fall). So, I'll give you the following. If I find time, I'll post more. I am also going to answer some of the questions my teacher had at the end. The <<number>> denotes the placement of these comments.

For the original Journal in its entirety: click here.



So I recently finished the novel Wuthering Heights.

If I were to describe it in a few words, it would be summed up as a dark love-story in reverse. I can see how this was hailed as a classic because for its time, this love-story-in-reverse is a revolutionary idea.

I guess I should explain why it is a love story in reverse. It seems that the only time everyone was truly happy was in the beginning of Mrs. Dean's tale. As the novel progressed, all of the characters seemed to get angrier in countenance as their stories and injustices deepened.

This novel basically follows the life and times of the (extremely) evil Heathcliff, incited by Lockwood meeting him, and asking Mrs. Dean about him.

If I were to assign a generic theme to this novel it would be: Don't be a Heathcliff. However, I don't think that serves as a theme as much as it serves as just good advice. So, I guess in a broader sense, a theme could be that love can prevail only if both parties pursue it.

Another could be along the lines of that of Romeo and Juliet, where the inevitability of fate <<1>> plays a rather huge role. It seems that every character is realistic in the sense of how they are their own person, and organically make decisions of their own accord without realizing how it affects one another.

Love plays a role in this novel in complicating itself. (I need to explain this...) Heathcliff loves Catherine I, and that's plain as day. However, because of his three-year absence, Catherine I moves on and marries Edgar Linton, writing Heathcliff off as escaped and possibly dead. He comes back, and is essentially told "you snooze, you lose" and he cannot find it inside of himself to move on. His life's mission is avenge this doomed love.

It appears that Heathcliff was doomed from the start with this love, after all, why couldn't he have just written her off as a sister, and loved her in that sense? <<2>> It probably would have made him less a devil and less a tortured soul. (Remember that in this universe, it is apparently okay to marry your cousin?)

I have been looking at this novel through the eye of a high school sophomore in the United States in 2012. My guess is that some of the goings-on in this novel would make more sense to me if I were a fifteen or sixteen year old living in the late 18th century. Nevertheless, it stands out to me as a reverse love story which Mr. Lockwood played as a vessel, and not a pivotal piece (I am still a tad bummed about that part...). <<3>>

I see love as an understanding between two people that there is something more between them. Love is this concept one cannot quantify in mere words, but rather through this mental understanding. There are ways of showing this love, but in the end the love itself is this understanding of one another. It seems that neither Heathcliff nor Catherine I ever understood that part.

Q&A Time:
1) (see note above): Is it Fate? Or is it social class conventions?

A: So I wrote "fate". Just looked this up, the dictionary definition is "The development of events outside a person's control, regarded as determined by a supernatural power." However, it appears that I was wrong in it, but rather it is a percieved fate. They controlled most of their own life, that is Heathcliff and Catherine I. The only event that is fate in this sense is the fact that Catherine I died. Had she married Heathcliff, I don't think she would have lived any longer, but that is one man's opinion. As for social class issues, I don't think that anything other than Heathcliff's lack of last name qualifies for a class difference. If they were meant to be, love would probably conquer...

2)Because they are soul mates!

A: I am not qualified to answer this comment, but I'll give it a whack. I'll define soul mate officially as "A person ideally suited to another as a close friend or romantic partner." (google ftw!). Analyzing the traits of Catherine I and Heathcliff, they kind of are soul mates. If you consider two overly bitter people compatible. I don't know love. See my next post.

3) But why is Nelly telling him the story? What role might he play?

A: Simply, Lockwood asked. He plays the role only as the realization of the dream of Heathcliff. Heathcliff wanted to destroy Edgar Linton's happiness. He wanted to have Wuthering Heights AND Thrushcross Grange, only to keep one and rent the other out. The latter is the role Lockwood holds. I kind of thought that he could have written the next chapter, and maybe changed Heathcliff, or maybe saved Catherine II. I don't know.

Special Thanks to Ms. Oravitz for playing along!

For the original Journal in its entirety: click here.

The Devil In The White City: An Overview and Blog

Okay, so I just finished the final book (of 3... hear this one, Education Dept? Nope? Okay...) assigned to me for this summer. Granted, I have 4 days to spare. I consider myself somewhat of a procrastinator... which is a bad trait.

Nevertheless, one of the things I had to do for the one was keep a journal. Which I did on a parallel site, but due to issues I am not publishing the whole thing. I am going to just post the overview on my main site, next Friday. So, technically the following is the second written, first in a series of book reviews I want to do on this site. It's one of the new format ideas I have, and I'm going to see how this works. Here goes nothing.

The Devil In The White City: An Overview

So I recently finished the novel The Devil in the White City: Murder, Magic, and Madness at the Fair That Changed America by Erik Larson. 

The author's note is unlike any other author's note I've read... I'll quote it:

"However strange or macabre some of the following incidents may seem, this is not a work of fiction."

This alone intrigued me.

The basic premise of the novel, is alternating chapters. Half of it tells about Daniel H. Burnham, an architect that rose to fame by being one of the key figures in the creation of the Chicago 1893 World's fair, and the other half is devoted to the serial  killer (just blocks away from this fair) living under the alias H.H.Holmes.

I was warned ahead of time that parts may be boring. I found quite the opposite to be true. The whole book was up in the ranks of books that I've read... almost to the level of Jay Scribble.

The Architect's adventures start at being a small Chicago firm, and then arranging all of the best architects in the nation at that time to combine powers to build over 200 structures... with a timespan of less than three years.

This adventure gave new meaning of "down to the wire". But once completed, this world's fair was one of the defining moment's in our nation's history. And it seemed like an awesome time to be alive.

Alive, that is, if you aren't a beautiful young woman seduced by H.H. Holmes. He'd seduce women into working for him, and in some cases marrying him. The marriage count, at my last count, was like 5 wives... with no formal divorce ever finalized...

He'd have these women move into a building of his own design. Once she got too needy, Dr. H.H.Holmes kicked in and, well, killed her. His "Murder Castle" was home to a gas chamber, dissecting table, and of course crematorium.

He admitted to 27 killings, and only 4 were ever confirmed, with one estimate reaching 200. If you're as fascinated in this, I'd highly recommend reading Wikipedia about it...

I highly recommend the book... get it from a local library or something.

So that's all for now... Have you read the book? Comment!