DavidWilbanks

EL237

To be honest, I don't even know where to begin, talking about John Henry Days by Colson Whitehead, except to say that I'm going to order his other book. I really like the stuff about the freelancers, as it made a bit nostalgic. In two ways, first, off I can only imagine how mucn nicer it must have been in many ways to freelance before the internet. Based on my own search for freelance work (mainly from around 04-06, when I was a journalism major), the whole dynamic seemed to be significantly different. (Perhaps the other difference is that I wrote primarily for crappy little publications that would accept work from virtually anyone). Anyway, it seemed like most places called for specific coverage of events or topics, rather than having writers just attend events, and then send stories off to whoever would publish them. Alternatively, for the less timely stuff they just took open submissions and either published you or didn't. Again this can mostly be attributed to my lack of a degree, but I think in part it probably has to do with the internet. It seems like for a similar story now, it would be a whole lot easier to just find some freelancers in Charleston whose plane tickets you don't have to pay for. Obviously, this is different for regular reporters for the major news outlets, but for freelance, it would seem to make more sense.

Anyway, that said, I really think he nailed the attitude of a jaded freelancer. Just the whole idea of "excreting" twelve hundred words, pretty much sums it up. I remember a two day Forest Service conference that I reported on for the American Receation Coalition in Boise, Idaho, (I lived about 4 hours away) which was mind-numbingly boring, and despite my youthful enthusiasm for the occupation, "excreting" was pretty much how I'd describe the process through which I wrote the article. It's even more apt to describe virtually ALL of the online content I ever did. Anyway, I guess this story just reminded me of that experience.

On to the writing aspect of it:

The way in which Whitehead perfectly articulates social interactions is just insanely skillful. The extended metaphors he uses to describe minor events works out splendidly. The scene on the plane was awesome, the way in which he was able to accurately relate all the thoughts and feelings throughout a subtle, silent, yet supremely realistic social interaction was completely brilliant. The level of detail, coupled with clever imagery and sardonic humor just really makes it a joy to read.

Plus, any story that involves a man losing his eye during an air-quoting accident is just ridiculously funny.   

EL237

That was by far the most enlightening chapter I ever read. Apparently, writers often mean the OPPOSITE of what their words actually say. Beyond that in some cases they even go so far as to vastly exagerate their sentiments toward something they actually feel the opposite way about. I had never even HEARD the word hyperbole before reading this. Suddenly Samuel Clemens, O. Henry, Alexander Pope, Geoffrey Chaucer, Dave Barry and South Park all make sense to me.

(If that actually happened I would literally, have about 3.7 solid years of laughter to catch up on)

Anyway, despite my obvious, and extremely intimate familiarity with the subject of irony, this is not a useless chapter. (It just so happens that the lobe in my brain that is meant to take care of time-management and punctuality, has mutated and become a second wit-lobe)

However, in all fairness, if more people were aware of irony, and had a far better grasp of its use and meaning,  I would have about 1.2% more free time, as I wouldn't have to explain so many jokes....or those random outlandish, yet ironic phrases that tend slip out of my mouth.

SO, to sum up: If you find yourself spending an inordinate amount of time trying to determine whether to laugh at what I just said, or seriously respond.....go get yourself a copy of Writing About Literature by Edgar V. Roberts, and read chapter 11.

EL237

I really liked "Theme For English B," by Langston Hughes, in part for its simplicity, and in part for the very real level of thought occuring in it. It really captures the student-like mind set. The first part offers the basic details, hometown, where you live, where you go and went to school, age, race, hobbies, a bit like a facebook profile. Then it really switches gears and goes into greater depth, trying to describe much more abstractly, the speaker's role in the world, and where they fit.  

I guess I can really relate to the idea that, (or that's the idea that stands out most for me in the poem), because that's kind of how I recall the age of 22. The answer to the "Who am I?" tended to be a clump of facts and details, the majority of which could apply to anyone. Who really hates to "eat, sleep, drink, and be in love." Despite this, we tend to, at that age, be trying to figure out our relationship to the rest of the world, and determining where we fit in terms of society.

Obviously, a big part of the poem that I really didn't discuss is race, and the reason I left that until the end is because despite the racial emphasis of the content, the basic tone is very universal. While I'm not black, (and a whole lot of people who enjoy Langston Hughes' poetry aren't), I can still relate to the very idea of being young and coming to terms with the world, and determining how you relate to it. Then again, if I were an African-American in 1959, my race would be a massive part of how I relate to society.  

EL237

I already blogged about Poe's "Masque of the Red Death," and talked a little bit about Romanticism and Realism, but here I decided to tackle the colors of the rooms, or rather my opinion of them. I honestly think that Poe included them for two reasons: First, I think it really shows the oppulence of the room. It was far more extravagent to have colored lighting back when you couldn't just buy a 60 watt bulb in any color you want for a couple bucks.

Second, it screws with the reader, creating a great deal of ambiguity. While I don't really think he had any specific symbolism in mind behind the colors (except the obvious black in the one room), he was definately well aware that people read all sorts of different things into colors. Colors are symbolic of all sorts of different things, green for example, is often associated with envy. However, one can also be green around the gills, when feeling sick. In Dickenson's poetry, green is typically refering to nature, and growth, maybe rebirth too. In Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, the green is also nature, but not a good pretty nice nature, but rather a magical, somewhat sinister nature. So, what does green mean this time? Who knows? There is evidence to support most of the previous suggestions: the envy of those excluded from the party? the sickness of the red death? rebirth? Evil/magical/sinister nature which disease might be part of? At least the lack of clear answer should provide fodder for literary essays for the next several centuries, or at least a time when they develop the technology necessary to reanimate Poe's corpse and get a straight answer out of him.

This isn't to say that there is anything wrong with it. In fact, the lack of a clear answer makes the reader think...as good literature should.  

EL237

Just got to mention that I really could not resist writing about an election. Politics is by far my favorite sport as no other so effectively combines the mindless, underhanded brutality of undergound street fighting with the shameless theatrics of professional wrestling. That said: 

The editorial I read was by George Will, entitled Stimulating Incumbency. This link is to my hometown's newspaper's website, but you need a password to get in. However, I think he's syndicated, so you can probably find it somewhere else.

His article is discussing the stimulus packages and their relationship to the upcoming midterm elections. It wasn't quite as witty as others I've read, but it did offer much more structured, and better supported argument than others I've read.

The main idea that it points out is how often arguments tend to hinge on statistics that are completely inquantifiable. The number of jobs that can be considered to have been "created" by the stimulus packages tends to come out as a negative number, since unemployment kept increasing after them. For this reason the statistic that tends to be used, is the number "saved." However, this number, while considered an estimate, is pretty immpossible to determine. As a statistic, it is emensely valuable, as arguing against an estimate is simply fighting shadows. Will's article is effective because he doesn't argue that this statistic is necessarily wrong, but simply points out that no one really knows.

He also suggests that the third stimulus will likely come pretty close to the election, and will mostly be intended to save jobs, within congress. Will is certainly accurate that it'll take some pretty deft manuvering to keep even the slimmest of majorities, let alone attain the  filibuster-proof one they'd always been dreaming of. Polls cited in another article, suggest that only half of the voters who came out for Obama will vote in the midterm, versus 66% of McCain voters. This sort of backlash against the party holding the presidency is pretty typical (Think 2006). While the uninformed of the victorious party rest on their laurels, the uninformed of the other party actually bother to vote in midterm elections. Beyond that, Democrats tend to need help from the young, yet far too busy to vote in boring midterm elections unless they're getting extra credit group, while the Republicans have the advantage of holding on to much of the old, and have nothing better to do group (many of whom have a significant intrest in health care).

Okay, I ended up off topic, but I'm fine with that. (At least I didn't say anything to outrageous, as I tend to when I start writing/talking/thinking about politics...I try to save that for my other blog, which no one reads.) I guess all that really matters is that this next election should be a bit more entertaining than the last, as they wont waste all their coverage on presidential candidates, which became pointless about 4 months prior to the election, as the conclusion got really obvious. Anyway, for now I'll give 100:1 odds to anyone betting the Dems will get that 3/5s (You can count Lieberman, but no other Independants). I'll figure the rest out later.

EL266

The chapter on Christ figures instantly reminded me of Choke by Chuck Palanuik. The main character, and narrator, is a sex addict (The book is supposed to be a his 4th step, which is an inventory of all your mistakes, in any Alcoholics Anonymous type recovery group) Anyway, this character is interesting because in character he is intentionally un-Christ like but in various other ways, he is. (He makes money by pretending to choke in restaurants, thus getting "ressurected" by whoever saves him, and hitting them up for cash) While this is a scam, the idea that he is unwittingly redeeming these people by giving them confidence and making them feel heroic, later comes up. He also has no Earthly father, and I believe he is 33.  (There is also a bit of plot where he is suspected to be created from cloned DNA from Jesus.) Also, he has a lot of phrases and stories that he repeats (vaguely reminiscent of parables and aphorisms)

While this may be as overt as the Christ symbolism in The Old Man and the Sea, I think this chapter made me notice a lot more of it.  

EL266

First, I must congratulate myself for avoiding making some reference to that one Foster chapter on Shakespeare as the title "If its not Shakespeare, the bible, Chaucer, or Sophecles....It's Cervantes" would be a touch unwieldy, and launch me further down a slippery slope that would eventually leave me with "If its not Shakespeare, the bible, Chaucer, Sophecles, Cervantes, Dickenson, Poe, Clemens, Joyce, Hardy, Clavell, Hesse, Marlowe, Milton, Thoreau, Orwell, Voltaire, Kerouac, King, Hawthorne, Faulkner, Roseau, Hemmingway, Carver, Kesey, Seuss, Grisham, Lucas, Star Trek, The Simpsons or South Park....it's definately Christopher Moore."

Alright, Tom is definately a little Don Quixotian in the escape plans he comes up with, but I didn't really see it as "degradation" as much as delusion. Don Quixote surely had no special malice toward windmills, but rather required them to play a part in his fantasies. In the same way, Tom Sawyer's torment of Jim isn't due to his race, or status as a slave, but due to Tom's need for adventure. The only way in which this scenerio is affected by Jim's race or status is that he is sort of stuck humoring the boys, as he needs them to escape. Tom is just as willing to torment Huck and himself by climbing up lightening rods, rather than using the stairs, and attempting to dig (with case-knives initially) rather than just steal the key. Based on the fact that Tom only gives up on his "heroic" endeavors once experience (and blistered hands) show them to be impractical (and he rationalizes that he can stretch the truth about them later). Because he doesn't experience the torments he unleashes on Jim during his fantasy, he doesn't realize that they should probably likewise be discarded for fiction. 

For this reason, I feel there isn't really the big change in Huck suggested by the introduction. He has tended to just drift along, and go with the flow (to use some terrible puns) throughout the story, so it would seem uncharacteristic for him to avoid playing the perfect Sancho Panza to Tom's Don Quixote.    

EL266

This semester seems to be flying by, as it is once again time for a quick look back. Anyway, this is my second portfolio for my class, American Literature 1800-1915. The first one explained this next bit, so skip to the next paragraph if you've read it. This class looks at a variety of American literature (obviously from the selected time period), and also looks at techniques for writing about literature. For this reason, the entries that will be referenced here are a blend of responses to text-book chapters, and responses to various works of literature, though a fair portion of it is dominated by The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, by Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain).This portfolio is designed simply to showcase the work I've done since the last one.

To begin with, I'd like to present a few blogs that I feel are reasonably well written, in terms of addressing the literature, and providing insight about the material. I was particularily pleased with my blog about Thoreau's Walden, ....and if for some reason it's not from Shakespeare, it's from Chaucer, which discusses references to the Canterbury Tales, that I found in Walden. Th title is a reference to a chapter title from Foster's book How To Read Literature Like a Professor entitled "When In Doubt, It's From Shakespeare." How Shiftless! is about Aiken's theatrical adaptation of Uncle Tom's Cabin, and offers a detailed analysis of the meaning behind Ophelia's favorite word, as well as including the first ever sentence to illustrate all three possible meanings for the word"shiftless." So, at this point, if it isn't Shakespeare or the Bible, it's Sophocles once again references Foster's chapter title, though it makes more sense to do so as it is actually about a chapter from his book. (Usually my better work isn't about text-books). Anyway, it talks about the common archetype of the blind seer, (Tiresias from Oedipus Rex). I tried to find an unimportant blind literary character and could not (I ran through characters from Bartelby the Scrivener to Geordi LaForge). Sexist Irony...or Ironic Sexism, if you prefer looked at the often overlooked issue of gender in The Adventures of Huckelberry Finn, (people tend to focus on race). It was just in a brief, non-essential scene, but I found the irony amusing.  

 The reason we blog, rather than write lots of little essays, is that they offer a chance for discussion. Blogs are an online conversation, rather than a work of writing. These next few are blogs of mine that show some interaction and discussion with my peers. Which Pallas? is a bit embarassing, as it shows my failure to recognize the connection between "Pallas" and "Pallas Athena" in Edgar Alan Poe's poem "The Raven." Instead I did some heavy research into a minor god and a titon by that name. It did a comment though, as others (who GOT the connection), corrected me. I got some approval in Thoreau: False Romantic when I pointed to a passage in Walden that seemed to contradict some of his main points. In Wow, it STILL might be Shakespeare, which beats the dead horse that is Foster's chapter on the prevalence of Shakespeare references in other works, got some comment as I compared Huck to the wise fool present in much of the bard's work.

With any communication, it is necessary for it to go both ways. Thus, it would be remiss of me to not mention other people's blogs that I participated in discussions on. I, as well as several others, commented on Jeremy Barrick's blog The Fowl's Happiness is Dark, which looked at the raven as a symbol of evil in Poe's poem, "The Raven." I also discussed the role of the bust of Pallas in the same poem on Kayla Lesko's blog, Poe Post 1 as well as my own. On Katie Lantz's blog Tom Sawyer: Holden Caufield? we discussed the similarities between Huck Finn (I think she meant him rather than Tom), and Holden Caufield from J.D. Salinger's Catcher in the Rye. I don't have as many good conversations on here as I would like as I seem to have inadvertantly wiped out my draft blog containing a list of comments. (I just went with the first ones I could track down, as it is tedious work.) 

 To increase the chances for communication, it is important that my blogs are done early enough that others get a chance to comment on them.....and if for some reason it's not from Shakespeare, it's from Chaucer  was up a couple days before class, which is kind of dissapointing as it got no comments. The majority (including all of the ones above) of my blogs were posted at least a day before, so in the interest of saving space I will mention only the those that were not previously mentioned. Water = Baptism which refers to a chapter in Foster about Baptism, as well as the baptism of pig's blood that Carrie gets in Stephen King's novel Carrie. Wow, I would never commit a crime with these guys.... discusses the scene with the bandits on the wrecked steamer in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.   

We were asked to pick a favorite blog, and it need not even be related to this class. I selected Sailing From Romanticism to Realism, not because I necessarily consider it better than my other blogs, but because it deals with "Cargoes" by John Masefield, a poem that we never really discussed in my Writing About Literature class. 

To sum everything up, here is a list, in order of every blog required for the class since my last portfolio, Puritans, Vampires and Wallpaper....oh my? :

Thoreau: False Romantic on Walden by Thoreau 

....and if for some reason it's not from Shakespeare, it's from Chaucer  on Walden by Thoreau

Sex Addicts can be Christ Figures, too.  on Choke by Chuck Palanhuik and the idea of the Christ figure from Foster

Which Pallas? on "The Raven" by Edgar Alan Poe

Grim and Ghastly Pun on "Epigram for Wallstreet" by Edgar Alan Poe

High on Life, er Nature on XX: "I taste a liquor never brewed" by Emily Dickinson

This chick likes books  on the frequent theme of reading in Emily Dickinson's poetry

Water = Baptism on the meaning of Baptism discussed from Foster

How Shiftless! on Uncle Tom's Cabin by George Aiken

Wow, it STILL might be Shakespeare on the role of Huck in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Samuel Clemens

So, at this point, if it isn't Shakespeare or the Bible, it's Sophocles on the role of the blind in literature, from Foster

Sexist Irony...or Ironic Sexism, if you prefer on gender in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

Wow, I would never commit a crime with these guys.... on humor in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

Tom Sawyer's Degradation of Jim? on the "Introduction to Huckleberry Finn" by Henry Nash Smith

EL266

I highly recommend that you NEVER read anything by Clemens when you have a so readily available portal through which to discuss it. (I should really just turn off my laptop or at least leave my blog). There are just so many funny bits to talk about...(Those people who are "lucky" enough to recieve random calls from me talking about different bits of the book I just read are fortunate that I have a blog) Oh, and it's probably a good thing I didn't have this when I read Letters to the Earth, I never would have stopped....

Oh, anyway, a point:

I don't know if anyone caught this, but the thieves on the boat keep calling each other by their FULL NAMES. Smart criminals use aliases, but even AVERAGE ones typically at least have the sense to avoid using last names. I could picture robbing a bank with these guys: "Hurry up, David Wilbanks, we have to get into your Black 2002 Buick LeSabre license number HB2385 and get back to apartment 2 in that blue building accross from the church at the corner of 3rd and Pennsylvania." Just thought that bit was entertaining, and couldn't help myself.

I also really liked the clever morality that both Huck and the gang use. Huck and Jim's plan of taking the middle road, and deciding not to "borrow" a few things is clever, as they're things that they don't want or aren't in season. (I myself have followed their example and given up drinking cheap vodka (which I hate) and real absinthe (which isn't really available here)). I also like the gangs clever "moral judgement" that it's far more nobler to intentionally leave a man to die, than to actually kill him. (Many ancient cultures did the same thing with babies).

EL266

So, I found the scene with Mrs. Judith Loftus to be particularily interesting. When she figures out that Huck's a boy, and rattles off the list of details that made it obvious, I was momentarily reminded of spy novels I've read (far too frequently). The hero always picks up on some subtle detail to pick the assasin out of the crowd, and Mrs. Loftus seemed to do that to Huck. (Though there wasn't a crowd, and she was intent on helping him rather than sneaking up behind him to silently slit his throat).

Anyway, it was interesting because she gives him several sexist stereotypes to follow in order to better fake being a girl. Ironic, because at the same time she tells him his current act is so bad that only a man would fall for it. Through this section Clemens is able to effectively satirize a whole lot of stereotypes. While he may be saying that girls suck at throwing, the main point is that they're smart, and perceptive. The level of detail that Mrs. Loftus picks up on is really quite impressive (Especially for a woman (just kidding)).

Though his satire tends to have a pretty specific target, (in this case slavery), Clemens is ALWAYS ready to take a few subtle shots at any worthy targets that linger in his crosshairs. That is just want makes him so much fun to read.