So this is my literal drawing and representation of the beautiful garden about to be consumed and destroyed like the rest. While painting this, the image became even more vivid than before.
Thursday, September 27, 2012
The "Garden of Eden" Becomes A Desolate Wilderness
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Painting Pictures with Pethuel's Son
There were so many descriptions and images that I could pick from that it was hard to choose! Yet one of the images that really stuck out to me was in chapter two, The Terrible Visitation. It starts off with this fire that is before them, and then a flame is burning behind them as well. "The land is like the garden of Eden before them, But a desolate wilderness behind them, And nothing at all escapes them."
This section helps me picture how the land is before and after the locusts come. There is this lush, beautiful land, compared to the garden of Eden. It's perfect in a sense, and then the locusts come. And when these creatures are through with there destruction, there is nothing that is left alive. The locusts are like a forest fire that wipes out anything and everything that is there. Any life that once existed is now gone.
Then, there is a section with another description of the sound of the locusts.
"With a noise as of chariots They leap on the tops of the mountains, Like the crackling of a flame of fire consuming the stubble, Like a mighty people arranged for battle." The locusts not only destroy everything, but they have a terrifying sound. The "noise as of chariots" is thunderous, like there are many in number, booming and very ominous. The locusts come with such a powerful presence. "Like the crackling of a flame of fire" reminds me of actually being around a fire as the wood is crackling because the fire is consuming the wood. These locusts are just devouring and consuming everything. It wouldn't be a pretty noise, hearing the locusts consume everything around you.
In the beginning, as the locusts make their entrance, there is another piece of imagery that caught my attention. "It has made my vine a waste And my fig tree splinters. It has stripped them bare and cast them away; Their branches have become white." This fig tree was once something of use and value. It had a purpose. But now it is no longer worth anything. It is dead, bare. It's amazing how something can be full of life, then something happens and it can no longer produce anything, but can only give way to death. It's sad to see something beautiful go to waste.
There is a lot of wailing and mourning mentioned throughout Joel that gives this sad and depressing mood. The land, beasts, priests, vinedressers and ministers are mourning because of this devastation. I can just hear and feel the sadness. I don't know exactly what would be said, or if there would even be crying involved. I imagine crying, but, in general, a downcast look on everyone's face.
To contrast this death and devastation, there is also life shown too. There is rain that the Lord pours down. Rain is life giving. Plants need it to survive. We need water to survive as well. And there is a promise given that "The threshing floors will be full of grain, And the vats will overflow with the new wine and oil." God is restoring the things that were taken away and destroyed. Even though He sent the locusts to destroy, He is the one also providing and replenishing the sustenance that His people need.
(555)
This section helps me picture how the land is before and after the locusts come. There is this lush, beautiful land, compared to the garden of Eden. It's perfect in a sense, and then the locusts come. And when these creatures are through with there destruction, there is nothing that is left alive. The locusts are like a forest fire that wipes out anything and everything that is there. Any life that once existed is now gone.
Then, there is a section with another description of the sound of the locusts.
"With a noise as of chariots They leap on the tops of the mountains, Like the crackling of a flame of fire consuming the stubble, Like a mighty people arranged for battle." The locusts not only destroy everything, but they have a terrifying sound. The "noise as of chariots" is thunderous, like there are many in number, booming and very ominous. The locusts come with such a powerful presence. "Like the crackling of a flame of fire" reminds me of actually being around a fire as the wood is crackling because the fire is consuming the wood. These locusts are just devouring and consuming everything. It wouldn't be a pretty noise, hearing the locusts consume everything around you.
In the beginning, as the locusts make their entrance, there is another piece of imagery that caught my attention. "It has made my vine a waste And my fig tree splinters. It has stripped them bare and cast them away; Their branches have become white." This fig tree was once something of use and value. It had a purpose. But now it is no longer worth anything. It is dead, bare. It's amazing how something can be full of life, then something happens and it can no longer produce anything, but can only give way to death. It's sad to see something beautiful go to waste.
There is a lot of wailing and mourning mentioned throughout Joel that gives this sad and depressing mood. The land, beasts, priests, vinedressers and ministers are mourning because of this devastation. I can just hear and feel the sadness. I don't know exactly what would be said, or if there would even be crying involved. I imagine crying, but, in general, a downcast look on everyone's face.
To contrast this death and devastation, there is also life shown too. There is rain that the Lord pours down. Rain is life giving. Plants need it to survive. We need water to survive as well. And there is a promise given that "The threshing floors will be full of grain, And the vats will overflow with the new wine and oil." God is restoring the things that were taken away and destroyed. Even though He sent the locusts to destroy, He is the one also providing and replenishing the sustenance that His people need.
(555)
Monday, September 24, 2012
Joel Sounds Like...
There is so much imagery jam packed into The Book of Joel. There are descriptions and sounds of images brought to life through this writing.
The first passage that caught my attention because of its sound was at the beginning.
The vine dries up
And the fig tree fails;
The pomegranate, the palm also, and the apple tree,
All the trees of the field dry up
Indeed, rejoicing dries up
From the sons of men.
Gird yourselves with sackcloth
And lament, O priests;
Wail, O ministers of the altar!
I love the alliteration here that just pops when you read it aloud: “the fig tree fails” and “the pomegranate, the palm also, and the apple tree.” This all helps to give it a rhythm and sound as you read.
There is also assonance that appears with the words tree, trees, field and indeed. These all have the “ee” sound that can give character and flow of the lines to the reader. It’s something that I came back to and read a few times to understand and read it better.
Toward the end there was some consonance with the letter t in lament, priests, ministers and altar. Along with that, ministers and altar had a rhyme to them at the very end.
They run like mighty men,
They climb the wall like soldiers;
And they each march in line,
Nor do they deviate from their paths.
They do not crowd each other,
They march everyone in his path;
When they burst through the defenses,
They do not break ranks.
They rush on the city,
They run on the wall;
They climb into the houses,
They enter through the windows like a thief.
The biggest appeal these lines had to my ear was the repetition that is developed here. The word “they” is repeated a lot with an action that comes after it: They run... They climb... They march... They (action here). It gives me the feeling that the “they” people are doing something. There is movement, there is a destination and purpose that “they” are striving for. This variation creates different feelings, like between “They rush” and “They enter.” “They rush” gives a hurried sense that there is a fast movement and the word is said quickly with a lingering on the “sh,” the ending of rush. On the other side, “They enter” is more casual. They are just entering through the windows like it’s no big deal. There isn’t the same sense of intensity, but almost more casual, or even cautious.
Also, assonance makes a scene here in words such as, like, mighty, break and ranks. It gives these lines repetition of sounds that the ear catches.
Alliteration makes an appearance as well through phrases like, “mighty men” and “do they deviate.” The “mighty men” gives strength to the men, not only because of the word mighty, but because it starts with an “m” and more emphasis will be given to these two words in a row.
Lastly, this little consonance that snuck in here is shown in the line, “And they each march in line.” The “ch” sounds gives almost a beat as you say it aloud. You can imagine people in line marching, firmly stepping in time: Left, left, left, right, left...
“Yet even now,” declares the LORD,
“Return to Me with all your heart,
And with fasting, weeping and mourning;
And rend your heart and not your garments”
Now return to the LORD your God,
For He is gracious and compassionate,
Slow to anger, abounding in lovingkindness
And relenting of evil.
Once again, repetition shows its face. This time, it appears with words that end in -ing. Such as, fasting, weeping and mourning, all in the same line. Then the -ing’s are brought up again through abounding, lovingkindness and relenting. The -ing’s give a bounce to the sound as they are read aloud. Even the “ing” has its own bounce, and gives a nice rhythm to the end of the words as they are said.
The other big pattern of sound that is here is assonance, in words like, all, heart; heart garments; LORD your God.
In that whole line, “Now return to the LORD your God,” there is consonance with return to. The t sound is repeated and then right after, the assonance comes in. These two elements put together side by side creates this urgency as you read it, and Israel does need to come back to God. These elements in this are appropriate for the urgency of Joel.
(811)
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
A Story about "A Story about the Body"
Not only did I read Robert Hass's work, "A Story about a Body" three times, I read it over and over so I lost count. As I read through this piece at different times, new ideas came to me about the meaning of the story as a whole, and even certain sentences.
The first character that I encountered was a "young composer, working that summer at an artists' colony" where he sees and meets this woman who is a Japanese painter that is almost sixty. That seemed kind of creepy to me. Hass doesn't specify the age of the man, but since he's "young," that could be from twenty years old to forty, yet the woman was almost sixty. Since the male character is young, I'm assuming that he hasn't experienced life and maybe isn't so educated because he doesn't know what a mastectomy is and the woman has to tell him in plain terms. Yet, this Japanese woman seems so honest, understanding and knows more about life than the man. She may have gone through other relationships and issues along with the double mastectomy. Those experiences may have caused her to see people in another light and may be more aware of people's reactions to situations.
One of the lines that was foreshadowing of this story was when "he thought he was in love with her." He didn't know for sure, he only thought he was in love. That was basically a dead giveaway that this wasn't going to be a happy ending. The love wouldn't last, and I was right.
I love how the Japanese artist's character is so straightforward with him, and says, I think you like me, and I like you too, but I have to tell you something about myself. She is so honest because she probably knows that this is a big factor for most people. She has probably faced some rejection in other relationships like this before, and is almost a "pro" at it now. I'm sure that it was heartbreaking the first time, and still is. But she seems to handle herself well. She faced the situation head on and told him this fact about herself because she would probably rather know sooner than later if this relationship was going to work out or not.
When "the radiance that he had carried around in his belly and chest cavity--like music--withered very quickly," you can see that this man did not have a real love for this woman. He had butterflies and superficial feelings, but when it came down to loving this woman that he thought he knew, he couldn't accept her because the double mastectomy that she had. I think that this character hadn't experienced true love. He probably hasn't been married or had super serious relationships, and that's why his feelings withered away. While on the other hand, I think the woman could have been married before, had children and other relationships with people, so she knew how they thought, and the most likely reaction to her situation.
An interesting thing that I noticed was that at both of the doors to their cabins, something is revealed about the characters. At the woman's door, we find out that she had a double mastectomy and the guy can't be with her if she is like that. Then, at the man's door the next day he finds a blue bowl sitting out there with rose petals in it. But underneath the rose petals were a bunch of dead bees. I had two different thoughts with this: One, this bowl with rose petals and dead bees represents this man. She thought he was this nice, sweet guy, but on the inside, his heart was cold and he didn't know how to love. It was like he was dead to her. He was dead on the inside. Two, it also could represent his perception of her. He looked at her and thought she was one way, but then he finds out this new information, and their relationship can no longer last. It's dead and gone.
I thought the "small blue bowl...full of rose petals" and "dead bees" was such a clever and artistic way to show the woman's thoughts of this man. There was a lot of meaning behind this small act.
Robert Hass tackled a subject that many of us deal with: accepting or rejecting others based on appearance.
(738)
The first character that I encountered was a "young composer, working that summer at an artists' colony" where he sees and meets this woman who is a Japanese painter that is almost sixty. That seemed kind of creepy to me. Hass doesn't specify the age of the man, but since he's "young," that could be from twenty years old to forty, yet the woman was almost sixty. Since the male character is young, I'm assuming that he hasn't experienced life and maybe isn't so educated because he doesn't know what a mastectomy is and the woman has to tell him in plain terms. Yet, this Japanese woman seems so honest, understanding and knows more about life than the man. She may have gone through other relationships and issues along with the double mastectomy. Those experiences may have caused her to see people in another light and may be more aware of people's reactions to situations.
One of the lines that was foreshadowing of this story was when "he thought he was in love with her." He didn't know for sure, he only thought he was in love. That was basically a dead giveaway that this wasn't going to be a happy ending. The love wouldn't last, and I was right.
I love how the Japanese artist's character is so straightforward with him, and says, I think you like me, and I like you too, but I have to tell you something about myself. She is so honest because she probably knows that this is a big factor for most people. She has probably faced some rejection in other relationships like this before, and is almost a "pro" at it now. I'm sure that it was heartbreaking the first time, and still is. But she seems to handle herself well. She faced the situation head on and told him this fact about herself because she would probably rather know sooner than later if this relationship was going to work out or not.
When "the radiance that he had carried around in his belly and chest cavity--like music--withered very quickly," you can see that this man did not have a real love for this woman. He had butterflies and superficial feelings, but when it came down to loving this woman that he thought he knew, he couldn't accept her because the double mastectomy that she had. I think that this character hadn't experienced true love. He probably hasn't been married or had super serious relationships, and that's why his feelings withered away. While on the other hand, I think the woman could have been married before, had children and other relationships with people, so she knew how they thought, and the most likely reaction to her situation.
An interesting thing that I noticed was that at both of the doors to their cabins, something is revealed about the characters. At the woman's door, we find out that she had a double mastectomy and the guy can't be with her if she is like that. Then, at the man's door the next day he finds a blue bowl sitting out there with rose petals in it. But underneath the rose petals were a bunch of dead bees. I had two different thoughts with this: One, this bowl with rose petals and dead bees represents this man. She thought he was this nice, sweet guy, but on the inside, his heart was cold and he didn't know how to love. It was like he was dead to her. He was dead on the inside. Two, it also could represent his perception of her. He looked at her and thought she was one way, but then he finds out this new information, and their relationship can no longer last. It's dead and gone.
I thought the "small blue bowl...full of rose petals" and "dead bees" was such a clever and artistic way to show the woman's thoughts of this man. There was a lot of meaning behind this small act.
Robert Hass tackled a subject that many of us deal with: accepting or rejecting others based on appearance.
(738)
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
An Afternoon Adventure
“I’m bored,” Richie said. They had been playing since after lunch. They always did whatever Maggie wanted to do, since she was older.
“We can play a different game. How about ‘House’? And I can be the mommy, and Cindy can be the baby...” said Maggie. Cindy was her favorite doll at the moment. It never left her side. Its cute face and pretty dress were the things Maggie loved most about Cindy.
“No! We already played that. How ‘bout ‘Firefighters’? And we get to spray water and put out the fires! There are some buckets in the bathroom that we can put water in...”
“That’s going to make a mess, and Mommy won’t be happy. We would get spankings for that,” Maggie stated factually.
“Fine... There’s nothing to do! We have to be quiet because of Baby. I hate naps. Mommy said I don’t have to take naps because I’m a big boy now,” Richie triumphantly declared.
“I’m hungry,” Maggie said.
“Me too. I want some cookies.”
“We aren’t allowed to have cookies until after we finish all our dinner,” she reminded her brother. “But there’s celery in the fridge.”
“Ewww... I don’t like celery. It’s gross,” he complained. “It doesn’t taste good.”
“But Mommy says that’s what we can have for snacks.”
“Hmmmp!” Richie pouted. “I want cookies.”
“Well I’m getting celery,” Maggie told him.
Richie followed Maggie as she quietly tiptoed through the hall to the kitchen, so she wouldn’t wake up Baby. Richie, on the other hand, didn’t care about Baby’s nap time. He was consumed with the thought of not having cookies when he wanted them.
As Maggie approached the fridge, Richie approached a chair and dragged it from its place behind the table. He put it next to the counter so he could climb and stand on the countertop to reach the cookies. Mommy’s cookie jar was high in the cupboards so the kids, and her husband, couldn’t reach them easily. But as Richie stood on the counter, that jar was just within his reach. Maggie poked her little curly head out of the fridge just as he was reaching the prize.
“Richie! Get down! You’re not s’posed to be up there! No cookies!”
“But I want them!” Richie turned his focus back on the cookie jar and successfully reached his goal. He opened the cookie jar, and pulled out two, fresh, soft cookies that Mommy had made earlier that day. He sniffed the pleasing, chocolatey aroma and sighed contently. “Do you want one?”
Maggie pondered this offer for a moment. The celery didn’t taste that good. It actually tasted like nothing at all, and the strings always got stuck in her teeth. Mom’s cookies were the best and were a wonderful treat when she made them. She wanted that delicious taste in her mouth, but knew that it was forbidden as a snack. She shut the fridge as she declared her compromise. “I’ll just have a bite of yours. Let’s hurry quick so that Mom doesn’t catch us!”
Richie put the cookie jar back in its place, stepped down onto the chair, cookies in hand, then hopped to the ground. They pushed the chair around the table where it belonged and snuck out of the kitchen like nothing happened. As they got back to the room, Richie extended a cookie to Maggie. “I got you one too because I know these are so good and you like them a lot.”
Maggie tentatively took hold of the cookie. She did want the cookie, but she wanted to obey Mom. But she also wanted the delicious snack. Looking around, Maggie cautiously took her first bite. And then another, and another till the whole cookie was gone. “Thank you,” she said to her brother, through a mouthful of cookie.
After devouring their forbidden snack, they decided to play again, but this time, Richie was determined to pick the game. “Hey, let’s go outside and play. There’s nothing to do in the house.”
“Mommy said we couldn’t go outside unless she or Daddy is with us. But Mommy is resting with Baby, so we can’t go outside,” Maggie protested.
“But there’s nothing to do! And we’ll just be outside for a little bit.” After a few seconds of hesitation, Maggie reluctantly said yes.
“But only for a little bit because I don’t wanna get in trouble.”
The kids went out the back door to the big backyard. There was plenty of room to play, and they didn’t have to use their “quiet voices.” There was still the decision of what to play.
“We could play ‘House’ out here,” Maggie suggested.
“No, let’s play something fun! How ‘bout tag or soccer?”
“No, I don’t like those games.”
“Umm... What about Power Rangers?! We can beat up the bad guys and save the day! And you can be the Pink Ranger!” Richie exclaimed.
“Ok! And Cindy will be the little Pink Power Ranger,” she said as she still held her precious doll tightly. Richie had ruined a few other dolls by pulling off their heads, or ripping them. So she tried to keep Cindy from these horrible situations.
“Pew-pew-pew! I’m gonna get you, bad guy!” Richie announced as he swung purposefully at the air as if someone were there fighting him.
“Hyah! Pshew, pshew... Take that bad guy!” Maggie said as she too fought the invisible enemy in front of her.
They continued to fight like this until they had finally defeated the bad guy. Then Maggie and Richie sat on the grass facing the woods behind their house. They had gone in the woods a few times with Dad, who was building them a fort. It was about twenty feet in from the edge of the woods, and at this point, was simply a two-level frame with a few boards on top that the kids could sit on if they climbed to the second level. They weren’t allowed to go in the woods by themselves. Their parents didn’t want them getting lost.
Richie was done sitting around. He gazed at the woods and said, “Let’s go exploring! We haven’t played that!”
“Mommy says that we can’t go in the woods because it’s dangerous,” Maggie dutifully reminded him.
“But we’ll just go to the fort, and then we’ll come back. Please?” Richie begged.
“The sky is getting darker and icky. We should go in.”
“But I want to go to the fort!”
“No, we can’t. We’re not s’posed to.”
“Fine. I’m going by myself. You can’t make me go in the house,” Richie retorted as he ran off toward the woods.
Maggie debated whether to tell Mom, or to go after Richie herself. Maggie normally told on Richie, because Richie didn’t obey. But Maggie decided to be the brave one this time and rescue her brother from trouble because she was older and it was her responsibility.
“Wait!” Maggie called, running after him, with arms swinging wildly, still clutching her beloved doll. Her blonde curls bounced rapidly as she ran in Richie’s direction.
From afar, the woods seemed pleasant enough, but as Maggie approached the entrance, the forest seemed more ominous, especially as the sky darkened.
“Richie! Come on! I’m gonna tell on you!” Maggie didn’t really like the woods, but she found courage and stepped into this little leafy, green and brown world. She carefully moved over, around and under branches that were in her way. She followed a small, barely used path, that led the way to their work-in-progress fort. She approached the fort and said, “Come on, Richie, let’s go inside now. We don’t want to get in trouble.”
There was no response.
“Richie? Hello? Where are you?” Maggie’s voice slightly rose with panic as she couldn’t find her brother.
A small snicker from a little distance gave him away, though. “You have to come and find me,” Richie said. “We’re playing hide-and-go-seek.”
“All right, ready or not, here I come,” she said meekly. She just wanted to find him and go back in the house. But as she searched, she realized she was having fun hunting for Richie. She looked up in the trees and around the bushes. She used the fort as a lookout and get a better view, and set down Cindy in a comfortable place to be a lookout as well.
Finally, Maggie spotted Richie’s red shirt in a set of bushes farther away. She climbed down and quietly went to the area where the mischievous boy was.
“Gotcha!” she exclaimed, as she tapped Richie on the back.
“You found me!” Richie replied. “I thought it would take you forever.”
“Well I’m really good at this game.”
“Me too.”
“Ok,” Maggie said, “this time I’ll hide, and you have to find me. Now close your eyes and count to twenty.”
“All right. One... Two... Three... Four...”
Richie’s voice grew distant as Maggie slipped farther into the woods. She was looking for a good place to hide in the dense bushes or behind a big tree. She finally found a spot near a wild berry plant. She was told never to eat these berries because they were poisonous, so she didn’t even touch them as she crouched quietly in between them.
“Ready or not, here I come!” Richie announced.
Richie began searching for Maggie. He looked everywhere for her. But her green ensemble for the day was quite appropriate as it helped hide her in the bush. After a while, Maggie was getting restless, and the wind picked up, causing her to shiver. Richie still hadn’t found her, and Maggie thought that she had won the game. She carefully stood up and said, “Ok! You didn’t find me! I win!”
But Richie was nowhere in sight. He had given up a minute or so before, bored because he couldn’t find her. Noticing that it was getting dark, Richie picked up Cindy from the fort, and brought her back to the house.
By this time, Mother had woken up from the pleasant nap to the baby crying. Her instincts carried her to the nursery and she appropriately attended to her baby’s needs. With the baby in one arm, she called to the kids from the kitchen because she was beginning to make supper, and she needed her little helpers. The kids had not replied, so she called once again, surprised that her faithful and obedient Maggie had not responded yet.
All of a sudden, Richie came inside, brown hair slightly damp from the rain beginning to fall down, yet still clutching the small doll in his small hands.
“Where’s Maggie?” Mother asked calmly, but firmly.
“She’s out in the woods,” Richie replied nonchalantly and slightly out of breath.
Mother brought the baby back to the crib to play. The rain’s sweet pitter-patter on the roof became a thunderous pounding of water. She donned her coat and shoes. She was about to leave to find Maggie when the doorbell rang. Mother walked to the front door and opened it. To her delight and displeasure, Maggie stood there, drenched in her clothes.
“Margaret Susan...” Mother began.
Maggie stood there looking at her mother, soaked to the bone. Yet despite her predicament, her brown eyes sparkled with excitement, her innocent grin not concerned with consequence, but consumed with thoughts about another adventure.
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
My Thoughts on "Twinkle"
Originally, as I thought about this, I was going relate to the character Sanjeev, because I feel that I have some similarities with him which would be easy to write. Instead, I chose to learn more about the other main character, Twinkle, and push myself to learn more about her and see her perspective.
First off, Twinkle is not her real name. It's Tanima, but she was nicknamed, Twinkle, because of a nursery rhyme. Twinkle is an Indian woman with "thick, unruly hair, streaked here and there with henna" (139). Although she is twenty-seven, Sanjeev thought that she "had not grown out of her girlhood" (142-143). She didn't have worried eyes, and hadn't fully settled into the "face" that she was going to have. Sanjeev thinks that Twinkle is pretty, and some of Sanjeev's friends mention that she is beautiful as well. There is no indication that she is corpulent, so I am assuming that she is skinny, and fairly tall, close to her husband's height, since he doesn't like when she wears heels (140). Other than there, there is no description about her eyes, nose or any other facial feature besides the general "pretty"(148). She could just have an average face, yet people are drawn to her by her charisma (152).
I think that Twinkle doesn't have a job, but is just working on her master's degree at her desk all day. That's why she keeps typing "all day" (141, 145). Because how could she just leave a workplace in the middle of the day because she is bored? She would get fired. Because Sanjeev's so rich, it doesn't matter if she doesn't work (148). She is finishing her master's degree. That's her "job" right now. Since she is doing that, I would say that she is fairly intelligent and hard-working to be pursuing that much education.
Twinkle dresses fairly casually, like in sweaters and T-shirts, but also wears traditional outfits for an occasion, such as the party Sanjeev and Twinkle hosted (142, 146, 152). She also accessorizes with heels, and on that occasion, a pearl choker with a sapphire (152). Her parents live in California, though I think they were from Calcutta, where Sanjeev's parents live (142). That's how those families would know each other. Twinkle also went, and still goes, to Stanford in California, so I'm assuming that she grew up with quite a bit of American culture in her life, while still acknowledging her roots.
Twinkle has a bubbly and curious personality. She finds a lot of Christian paraphernalia in odd places around their new house, and she calls it a treasure hunt, hoping to find something each time she walks around. I'd even venture to say that she is silly. Yet, Twinkle is also sensitive to other cultures, and carefree. I like how Sanjeev said it, "content yet curious" (141). To me, compared to Sanjeev, she comes across like she grew up in America. She smokes, she drinks, she wants to dance in public, rolls her eyes and hollers (yes, I'm stereotyping Americans) (139-141). Twinkle is also self confident, and she can get what she wants (139-140, 152).
Twinkle is friendly and gets along with everyone. There is only one part when she tells Sanjeev, "I hate you," but there is no indication in her thoughts that she thinks about him this way all the time. Her actions reveal that she cares for him by giving hugs and other touches (144, 147, 149, 152, 157).
Twinkle enjoys being in the world, and taking in all that is out there to enjoy. The biggest challenge that she faces is finishing her master's degree and making peace with her husband over all of the Christian paraphernalia in their house (145,157). That is the biggest conflict shown in the story. Another one could be that Sanjeev wants her to work harder around the house and take care of it, but she isn't concerned about those things probably because Sanjeev is left with all of the work and then she just expects that he will do it (141, 150). I don't think that she does things like that intentionally, but can be forgetful.
I think that Twinkle wants a good marriage with Sanjeev. She had a previous relationship with an American who failed as an actor and left her (143). So I think she wants a stable relationship: someone that she can depend on to take care of her. She is also twenty-seven, and rushed really quickly into the marriage (143). These two people knew each other for two months, then they got married and have been together for only another two months (142). Maybe Twinkle wanted to be settled down with someone because she was getting older and didn't want to be single much longer. It may be an insecurity, or a desire in her heart to be married. Regardless, I think that Twinkle wants this marriage to work out, and just like a fairy tale, live happily ever after. Cause that's part of the American Dream, right? She wants to live a normal, American life.
(832)
First off, Twinkle is not her real name. It's Tanima, but she was nicknamed, Twinkle, because of a nursery rhyme. Twinkle is an Indian woman with "thick, unruly hair, streaked here and there with henna" (139). Although she is twenty-seven, Sanjeev thought that she "had not grown out of her girlhood" (142-143). She didn't have worried eyes, and hadn't fully settled into the "face" that she was going to have. Sanjeev thinks that Twinkle is pretty, and some of Sanjeev's friends mention that she is beautiful as well. There is no indication that she is corpulent, so I am assuming that she is skinny, and fairly tall, close to her husband's height, since he doesn't like when she wears heels (140). Other than there, there is no description about her eyes, nose or any other facial feature besides the general "pretty"(148). She could just have an average face, yet people are drawn to her by her charisma (152).
I think that Twinkle doesn't have a job, but is just working on her master's degree at her desk all day. That's why she keeps typing "all day" (141, 145). Because how could she just leave a workplace in the middle of the day because she is bored? She would get fired. Because Sanjeev's so rich, it doesn't matter if she doesn't work (148). She is finishing her master's degree. That's her "job" right now. Since she is doing that, I would say that she is fairly intelligent and hard-working to be pursuing that much education.
Twinkle dresses fairly casually, like in sweaters and T-shirts, but also wears traditional outfits for an occasion, such as the party Sanjeev and Twinkle hosted (142, 146, 152). She also accessorizes with heels, and on that occasion, a pearl choker with a sapphire (152). Her parents live in California, though I think they were from Calcutta, where Sanjeev's parents live (142). That's how those families would know each other. Twinkle also went, and still goes, to Stanford in California, so I'm assuming that she grew up with quite a bit of American culture in her life, while still acknowledging her roots.
Twinkle has a bubbly and curious personality. She finds a lot of Christian paraphernalia in odd places around their new house, and she calls it a treasure hunt, hoping to find something each time she walks around. I'd even venture to say that she is silly. Yet, Twinkle is also sensitive to other cultures, and carefree. I like how Sanjeev said it, "content yet curious" (141). To me, compared to Sanjeev, she comes across like she grew up in America. She smokes, she drinks, she wants to dance in public, rolls her eyes and hollers (yes, I'm stereotyping Americans) (139-141). Twinkle is also self confident, and she can get what she wants (139-140, 152).
Twinkle is friendly and gets along with everyone. There is only one part when she tells Sanjeev, "I hate you," but there is no indication in her thoughts that she thinks about him this way all the time. Her actions reveal that she cares for him by giving hugs and other touches (144, 147, 149, 152, 157).
Twinkle enjoys being in the world, and taking in all that is out there to enjoy. The biggest challenge that she faces is finishing her master's degree and making peace with her husband over all of the Christian paraphernalia in their house (145,157). That is the biggest conflict shown in the story. Another one could be that Sanjeev wants her to work harder around the house and take care of it, but she isn't concerned about those things probably because Sanjeev is left with all of the work and then she just expects that he will do it (141, 150). I don't think that she does things like that intentionally, but can be forgetful.
I think that Twinkle wants a good marriage with Sanjeev. She had a previous relationship with an American who failed as an actor and left her (143). So I think she wants a stable relationship: someone that she can depend on to take care of her. She is also twenty-seven, and rushed really quickly into the marriage (143). These two people knew each other for two months, then they got married and have been together for only another two months (142). Maybe Twinkle wanted to be settled down with someone because she was getting older and didn't want to be single much longer. It may be an insecurity, or a desire in her heart to be married. Regardless, I think that Twinkle wants this marriage to work out, and just like a fairy tale, live happily ever after. Cause that's part of the American Dream, right? She wants to live a normal, American life.
(832)
Monday, September 10, 2012
Discord, Love? and "This Blessed House"
Still, after reading this entire story, "This Blessed House," I do not fully understand the title. The title could allude to the fact that the little Christian "findings" around the house made it blessed. Yet one thing that I did see throughout this story was the fact that the articles that represented the Christian faith caused the biggest conflict between Twinkle and Sanjeev.
These two characters, as I read through the story, are fairly dissimilar in many ways. Here is just one example: Toward the beginning, Mahler's Fifth Symphony is mentioned to be playing from the stereo. In the midst of a heated conversation between Sanjeev and Twinkle, Sanjeev notices how the particular movement matched the tension that was there in the room with the "crescendo" and the "telltale clashing of cymbals" (139). Yet once the disagreement was over, the "tender fourth movement" of the piece began coinciding with the fact that the dispute had now subsided. Sanjeev enjoyed this classical music and the "elements of tragedy and struggle" while Twinkle mentioned that, "if you want to impress people, I wouldn't play this music. It's putting me to sleep" (140). They did not have the same taste and appreciation in music. What Sanjeev found enjoyable, Twinkle found boring.
Sanjeev is a very Type A personality, keeping things neat and tidy, he is intelligent, strong in his Indian beliefs, and dedicated to being successful. Twinkle on the other hand seems to be more care-free and a sociable person who needs attention. Even though Sanjeev is strong-willed and does not even know if he loves his wife, he still does not leave her. I thought there may be a point where he would break and just call everything off, but I don't think that he can. There are moments when emotions are built up inside of him, mostly anger, when this character should do something drastic, but that never occurs. Then we also see the moments where Sanjeev is caring and kind. I think that even though Sanjeev may not be certain of loving Twinkle, because Sanjeev believes in success, he will try and make their marriage work and not leave her. The last sentence is an example of his willingness to stick it out. After thinking thoughts of hatred about a silver bust of Christ because it's dignified and Twinkle likes it, this is what Sanjeev does with that hatred. "Sanjeev pressed the massive silver face to his ribs, careful not to let the feather hat slip, and followed her" (157). He is going to follow his wife and let her have her way. Maybe Sanjeev has his firm beliefs, but is also a people-pleaser, trying to make everything just right, and that's why he "gives in" to his wife.
I really enjoyed this story because there are so many aspects to come from and so many points that I thought were interesting and made me question where the author was going me. There is more in the story than what the words tell.
(506)
These two characters, as I read through the story, are fairly dissimilar in many ways. Here is just one example: Toward the beginning, Mahler's Fifth Symphony is mentioned to be playing from the stereo. In the midst of a heated conversation between Sanjeev and Twinkle, Sanjeev notices how the particular movement matched the tension that was there in the room with the "crescendo" and the "telltale clashing of cymbals" (139). Yet once the disagreement was over, the "tender fourth movement" of the piece began coinciding with the fact that the dispute had now subsided. Sanjeev enjoyed this classical music and the "elements of tragedy and struggle" while Twinkle mentioned that, "if you want to impress people, I wouldn't play this music. It's putting me to sleep" (140). They did not have the same taste and appreciation in music. What Sanjeev found enjoyable, Twinkle found boring.
Sanjeev is a very Type A personality, keeping things neat and tidy, he is intelligent, strong in his Indian beliefs, and dedicated to being successful. Twinkle on the other hand seems to be more care-free and a sociable person who needs attention. Even though Sanjeev is strong-willed and does not even know if he loves his wife, he still does not leave her. I thought there may be a point where he would break and just call everything off, but I don't think that he can. There are moments when emotions are built up inside of him, mostly anger, when this character should do something drastic, but that never occurs. Then we also see the moments where Sanjeev is caring and kind. I think that even though Sanjeev may not be certain of loving Twinkle, because Sanjeev believes in success, he will try and make their marriage work and not leave her. The last sentence is an example of his willingness to stick it out. After thinking thoughts of hatred about a silver bust of Christ because it's dignified and Twinkle likes it, this is what Sanjeev does with that hatred. "Sanjeev pressed the massive silver face to his ribs, careful not to let the feather hat slip, and followed her" (157). He is going to follow his wife and let her have her way. Maybe Sanjeev has his firm beliefs, but is also a people-pleaser, trying to make everything just right, and that's why he "gives in" to his wife.
I really enjoyed this story because there are so many aspects to come from and so many points that I thought were interesting and made me question where the author was going me. There is more in the story than what the words tell.
(506)
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Literature that Transforms and Exercises the Mind
When I first read all the pieces, they seemed like three completely unrelated topics. But as I reread and mulled over these pieces, connections started to happen. So throughout the reading of these three texts, there were points that I felt were reiterated through all three pieces.
One of the themes was about living and exercising our minds as we read and ask questions. In "Why Read Literature," the idea is presented that physically "exercis[ing] and reading parallel each other and, finally, intersect"(5). Just as we work out to be fit, we must "'work out' our minds and imaginations through the exercise of reading"(1). Exercising our minds, like exercising our body requires time and commitment. I thought this analogy was so striking and fitting. We do "work out" our minds when we read and ponder things and ask questions while being active readers. It's a work out for our brains. So the more we exercise our brains and make active reading a habit, our minds become stronger and more attuned to the literature that we read.
In Francis X. McAloon's "Reading for Transformation..." he gives us three ways that we can exercise our minds by "focusing upon (1) the world of the text... (2) the world behind the text... and (3) the world before the text"(2). The "world of the text" would be literally what the words are saying, finding the imagery and reading through the difficult passages. The "world behind the text" would be like looking up the history or when it was written and the cultural influence upon the piece that you read. Finally, the "world before the text" is how the reader personally interprets for themselves what the text means to them, how they can relate or learn something new. It makes it so much easier for me, having a guideline to follow, if I wish, on ways that I can exercise my brain so that I can function to the best of my ability in active reading.
From "Darkness, Questions,..." by Paul T. Corrigan, the word "exercise" appeared again in the context of being involved in the what you do by engaging and experiencing, not by being passive. There was also a thought of "living questions" and "questions of darkness" that need to be addressed. We must be aware of what is around us, and be able to confront the things that face us. For me, being an active reader is a struggle for me. But if I can be assertive with what I think and how I feel, that will be a turning point for me in my active reading.
Another thought that carried through the reading was the theme of transformation. We are "living beings who are inspired by literary encounters to explore and transform ourselves"(2). Having these "literary encounters," especially with difficult reading, will help us better understand what we read, better understand ourselves and will make reading a habit for us (2-3). As I work on my reading skills, the only trouble that comes to my mind is what to read. I don't know where to begin to challenge my reading skills. I could just go to the library and pick out a random book that looks difficult and start there. Yet I do want something to start with that I can enjoy and recommend to others with the same interests in books as me. The "transformation" is a process, so slowly working my way up to more difficult texts might be the path for me to start on.
Francis X. McAloon's "Reading for Transformation..." discusses his personal experience of how Gerald Manly Hopkins' poetry challenged him and changed McAloon's appreciation for poetry. When we read a piece of literature, we place ourselves reading the perspective of the author. As we see a different perspective than our own and finish our text, we should not just "come 'back'" but rather "move forward into a newness of being"(2). We should have a different understanding, and as Professor Corrigan said, that moves us forward because it broadens our lens that we look through and now we can look through different scopes. A line that I thought was interesting in this text was this, "[a]dmittedly, each person's encounter with a poem [or any piece of literature] is both universal and particular"(3). We all may agree on one way of seeing a text, like the first time we read for content, but we all have different backgrounds that give a "particular" perspective to each and every one of us as we actively read. This reminded me of when we were in class on Tuesday. The gentleman in class, who I believe is a Film Studies Major, made a connection between Raymond Carver's "What We Talk about When We Talk about Love," and a movie he saw called, "Carnage." Since this guy studies movies for his major, and I assume enjoys them, he knew of that connection and could relate to Carver's story in multiple ways. His mind and how he analyzes the story was completely different from my perspective that I had. I actually thought to myself, "Wow, I am not that deep" and I felt bad because I didn't have that take on the story. But once again, we all have our "particular" way that we interpret the literature that we read, and that also means it transforms us differently as well.
Transformation takes place through engaging in our world around us. In Professor Corrigan's piece there is this darkness that is afoot in life. We have the choice to ignore it or face it. If we ignore or deny things, like darkness, then there is no way that we can be changed because our actions are passive. But there is a hope that can be found, but we first must willing to let the process begin by being aware, and then confronting and mulling it over. After that time of reflection, we can then look toward the hope that is there in front of us. Not everything in life is all beautiful and roses and perfection. There are hardships that we must face at one time or another that will challenge us. But as we meet the challenge, we then become stronger, more aware and more likely to change and move forward in our way of thinking.
All three of these pieces made excellent points through well said phrases that provoked me to really look at myself, my perspectives, and how I can be more open to exercising my mind through reading, and reflecting. I hope that I can be assertive to situations and allow myself to be aware so that a change can be made in the way I perceive things.
(1,127)
One of the themes was about living and exercising our minds as we read and ask questions. In "Why Read Literature," the idea is presented that physically "exercis[ing] and reading parallel each other and, finally, intersect"(5). Just as we work out to be fit, we must "'work out' our minds and imaginations through the exercise of reading"(1). Exercising our minds, like exercising our body requires time and commitment. I thought this analogy was so striking and fitting. We do "work out" our minds when we read and ponder things and ask questions while being active readers. It's a work out for our brains. So the more we exercise our brains and make active reading a habit, our minds become stronger and more attuned to the literature that we read.
In Francis X. McAloon's "Reading for Transformation..." he gives us three ways that we can exercise our minds by "focusing upon (1) the world of the text... (2) the world behind the text... and (3) the world before the text"(2). The "world of the text" would be literally what the words are saying, finding the imagery and reading through the difficult passages. The "world behind the text" would be like looking up the history or when it was written and the cultural influence upon the piece that you read. Finally, the "world before the text" is how the reader personally interprets for themselves what the text means to them, how they can relate or learn something new. It makes it so much easier for me, having a guideline to follow, if I wish, on ways that I can exercise my brain so that I can function to the best of my ability in active reading.
From "Darkness, Questions,..." by Paul T. Corrigan, the word "exercise" appeared again in the context of being involved in the what you do by engaging and experiencing, not by being passive. There was also a thought of "living questions" and "questions of darkness" that need to be addressed. We must be aware of what is around us, and be able to confront the things that face us. For me, being an active reader is a struggle for me. But if I can be assertive with what I think and how I feel, that will be a turning point for me in my active reading.
Another thought that carried through the reading was the theme of transformation. We are "living beings who are inspired by literary encounters to explore and transform ourselves"(2). Having these "literary encounters," especially with difficult reading, will help us better understand what we read, better understand ourselves and will make reading a habit for us (2-3). As I work on my reading skills, the only trouble that comes to my mind is what to read. I don't know where to begin to challenge my reading skills. I could just go to the library and pick out a random book that looks difficult and start there. Yet I do want something to start with that I can enjoy and recommend to others with the same interests in books as me. The "transformation" is a process, so slowly working my way up to more difficult texts might be the path for me to start on.
Francis X. McAloon's "Reading for Transformation..." discusses his personal experience of how Gerald Manly Hopkins' poetry challenged him and changed McAloon's appreciation for poetry. When we read a piece of literature, we place ourselves reading the perspective of the author. As we see a different perspective than our own and finish our text, we should not just "come 'back'" but rather "move forward into a newness of being"(2). We should have a different understanding, and as Professor Corrigan said, that moves us forward because it broadens our lens that we look through and now we can look through different scopes. A line that I thought was interesting in this text was this, "[a]dmittedly, each person's encounter with a poem [or any piece of literature] is both universal and particular"(3). We all may agree on one way of seeing a text, like the first time we read for content, but we all have different backgrounds that give a "particular" perspective to each and every one of us as we actively read. This reminded me of when we were in class on Tuesday. The gentleman in class, who I believe is a Film Studies Major, made a connection between Raymond Carver's "What We Talk about When We Talk about Love," and a movie he saw called, "Carnage." Since this guy studies movies for his major, and I assume enjoys them, he knew of that connection and could relate to Carver's story in multiple ways. His mind and how he analyzes the story was completely different from my perspective that I had. I actually thought to myself, "Wow, I am not that deep" and I felt bad because I didn't have that take on the story. But once again, we all have our "particular" way that we interpret the literature that we read, and that also means it transforms us differently as well.
Transformation takes place through engaging in our world around us. In Professor Corrigan's piece there is this darkness that is afoot in life. We have the choice to ignore it or face it. If we ignore or deny things, like darkness, then there is no way that we can be changed because our actions are passive. But there is a hope that can be found, but we first must willing to let the process begin by being aware, and then confronting and mulling it over. After that time of reflection, we can then look toward the hope that is there in front of us. Not everything in life is all beautiful and roses and perfection. There are hardships that we must face at one time or another that will challenge us. But as we meet the challenge, we then become stronger, more aware and more likely to change and move forward in our way of thinking.
All three of these pieces made excellent points through well said phrases that provoked me to really look at myself, my perspectives, and how I can be more open to exercising my mind through reading, and reflecting. I hope that I can be assertive to situations and allow myself to be aware so that a change can be made in the way I perceive things.
(1,127)
Monday, September 3, 2012
Talkin' About Raymond Carver's kind of L-O-V-E
When I read through the headnote about Raymond Carver, he sounded like many other poets and short story writers. He had his struggles to provide for his family. Carver was an alcoholic for a little while, then stopped. He got divorced, remarried and then died. He had his problems that he dealt with, yet he was still successful and Carver's work is still being read to this day. I liked at the end of the headnote as it reads, "In Carver's stories, reader get the sense that he chooses his words very carefully so that the honesty of the moment can emerge." I enjoy when things are honest and real so that I can picture the scenario in my head. "Honesty of the moment" is important so that the readers can connect to a "real" situation in a fictional short story.
What is love, really? It seems to be a big theme throughout this story. The characters think that there are different kinds of love. People see love in different kinds of ways. Mel said, "Terri's a romantic. Terri's of the kick-me-so-I'll-know-you-love-me school." Although Terri was abused by her first husband, she believed that Ed loved her "in his own way"(54).
Some of the different kinds of love are the way that Ed "loved" Terri, how Mel loves Terri and vice versa. The way that Nick and Laura love each other as newlyweds as Nick took her hand and kissed it. There is also a friendship kind of love between all four of them as Laura says, "Mel, we love you" and Mel replies, "Love you too, Laura. And you, Nick, love you too... You guys are our pals" (59). Love is shown in different kinds of ways throughout the story. And especially the way the older gentleman loved his wife when they were in the hospital room and he couldn't look at her. Apparently, that was a significant kind of love, but I don't think that the four characters could comprehend that kind of love since they were so drunk. Yet Mel insisted that this story "ought to make [them] feel ashamed when [they] talk like [they] know what [they're] talking about when [they] talk about love" (59). Apparently this couple was an example of true love, in Mel's opinion.
I guess there could be different kinds of love in human minds, but it amazes me that God has just one kind of love: He loves all people with His whole heart. He has abounding love. His love is so big. We try to compartmentalize how we love certain people or how much we love them.
I think that love in general is a hard concept to get, and I don't really know if we understand or have experienced true love. We try to put rules and guidelines about how we should love. And the Bible does tell us what love is (1 Corinthians 13) and who we should love (Matt. 5:43-48; 22:37-39).
I don't really know why the whole scenario is about these two couples sitting around a table drinking gin and in the end they end up so drunk that they can't even move. It's a "casual" scenario, I guess, and when we're comfortable with certain people we can talk about anything. Maybe he writes this story with them becoming drunk to see how our minds work and think when we're not in a clear mind. Mel becomes cruder with his language, but he just keeps on talking.
And maybe this is a true scenario of what does happen when people get together and sociably drink. I wouldn't know because I don't and can't legally drink.
I think the descriptions about the sunlight and how it starts fading away is significant. One of the first lines is that "sunlight filled the kitchen," then the afternoon sun was a "spacious light of ease and generosity" (54, 58). Then the "sunshine in the room was different now, changing, getting thinner" (61). There is talk of sunset, and lastly, "the room went dark" (64). At these different points you can see the changes in the light in comparison to how drunk everyone is. As the light fades, it signifies that their minds start fading and becoming fuzzy, and maybe they pass out at the end to correlate with the darkness. Carver uses descriptions of the sun as the four characters progress into drunkenness.
I don't know if I completely understood the whole story and all the meanings, but it did make me stop and think about love.
(769)
What is love, really? It seems to be a big theme throughout this story. The characters think that there are different kinds of love. People see love in different kinds of ways. Mel said, "Terri's a romantic. Terri's of the kick-me-so-I'll-know-you-love-me school." Although Terri was abused by her first husband, she believed that Ed loved her "in his own way"(54).
Some of the different kinds of love are the way that Ed "loved" Terri, how Mel loves Terri and vice versa. The way that Nick and Laura love each other as newlyweds as Nick took her hand and kissed it. There is also a friendship kind of love between all four of them as Laura says, "Mel, we love you" and Mel replies, "Love you too, Laura. And you, Nick, love you too... You guys are our pals" (59). Love is shown in different kinds of ways throughout the story. And especially the way the older gentleman loved his wife when they were in the hospital room and he couldn't look at her. Apparently, that was a significant kind of love, but I don't think that the four characters could comprehend that kind of love since they were so drunk. Yet Mel insisted that this story "ought to make [them] feel ashamed when [they] talk like [they] know what [they're] talking about when [they] talk about love" (59). Apparently this couple was an example of true love, in Mel's opinion.
I guess there could be different kinds of love in human minds, but it amazes me that God has just one kind of love: He loves all people with His whole heart. He has abounding love. His love is so big. We try to compartmentalize how we love certain people or how much we love them.
I think that love in general is a hard concept to get, and I don't really know if we understand or have experienced true love. We try to put rules and guidelines about how we should love. And the Bible does tell us what love is (1 Corinthians 13) and who we should love (Matt. 5:43-48; 22:37-39).
I don't really know why the whole scenario is about these two couples sitting around a table drinking gin and in the end they end up so drunk that they can't even move. It's a "casual" scenario, I guess, and when we're comfortable with certain people we can talk about anything. Maybe he writes this story with them becoming drunk to see how our minds work and think when we're not in a clear mind. Mel becomes cruder with his language, but he just keeps on talking.
And maybe this is a true scenario of what does happen when people get together and sociably drink. I wouldn't know because I don't and can't legally drink.
I think the descriptions about the sunlight and how it starts fading away is significant. One of the first lines is that "sunlight filled the kitchen," then the afternoon sun was a "spacious light of ease and generosity" (54, 58). Then the "sunshine in the room was different now, changing, getting thinner" (61). There is talk of sunset, and lastly, "the room went dark" (64). At these different points you can see the changes in the light in comparison to how drunk everyone is. As the light fades, it signifies that their minds start fading and becoming fuzzy, and maybe they pass out at the end to correlate with the darkness. Carver uses descriptions of the sun as the four characters progress into drunkenness.
I don't know if I completely understood the whole story and all the meanings, but it did make me stop and think about love.
(769)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)