100 Years of Solitude

Question: Describe your reaction to this book and the first reading assignment (up to page 58).

After reading the first assignment or even after reading the first few pages, I can safely say that this book is much easier to read then The Sound and the Fury. It is a mostly linear narrative that is heavy on the plot. This is the general description of the book that I enjoy reading. I feel as if the plot moves the book forward and although I sometimes confuse the characters (Arcadio vs Aureliano vs Amaranta), I feel that the characters are very relate-able and memorable.

In terms of Syntax, I noticed that Maruqez rarely uses quotation marks. However, Marquez will usually paraphrase what the characters are saying. As a result, anytime Marquez chooses to use quotation marks, it gives the phrase or line a lot of extra emphasis. It can also be related to the fact that Marquez had so much to say, and he is the narrator, that he does not want/have time for other characters to speak.

On The Sound and The Fury: Time in the Work of Faulkner

Okay so towards the end of this packet I kind of got a little lost because Sartre started getting all philosophical and I just couldn't really follow along, but for the most part I thought that his evaluation of Faulkner's writing was pretty accurate and interesting. Evidently, the assessment and manipulation of time were the focal points. Sartre says "In order to arrive at real time, we must abandon this invented measure which is not a measure of anything," which, similar to the comedian the other day, is an valid thought because how can we assess the present, past, and future in an accurate way by using some circular device that ticks every second, however long that is. It's an arbitrary method used for control and understanding of a situation and tells us virtually nothing about when it is and why "when" it is is significant to us. I also liked his evaluation of how there is no future, how "beyond this present time there is nothing." It was a weird thought to wrap around that there is not future, and, for Faulkner's characters, they must approach the future backwards from previous events that spell out the future without ever reaching it. Sartre says that "Faulkner always showed events when they were already over," because he had his characters live in the past. What made them into who they are in his ever-rare "present time" was a compilation of the events they had in the past, so that was where he focused. Time separates different instances, it cannot be measured with numerical values, although that may allow for more control, we must sacrifice this power if we ever hope to understand the broader meanings of past, present, and future.

An Expression of Thoughts from Reading Jean-Paul Sartre's "On 'The Sound and the Fury:' Time in the Work of Faulkner" and Various Colleagues' Comments

First thing to note: I have now experienced the sadness of having too many words for a blog comment. Second thing to note: This blog title just fits the space allowed for a blog title. Third thing to note: I truly apologize for bumping the entirety of the previous blog and preceding blogs to the "Older Posts" section.

However, the saddest thing that happened while reading the article wasn’t me picturing a needle or something poking at a hollow blob labeled “conscious” in my mind, but reading about Faulkner’s idea that there is no future, only the past and what seems to be a continuous rate of change, or derivative, of the past, in some interval dt, which I guess doesn’t exist so the derivative doesn’t exist either, nor is this analogy appropriate but still I find it funny – that represents the ever-fleeting present. I know several have already mentioned this, but it was a very gloomy concept. How upsetting it is to realize that there is no future for the Compsons, the morally decaying family in the morally decaying county that he wrote so many books about. Benjy’s being sent to Jackson, which I don’t think will be very much fun. Caddy’s gone so it doesn’t matter anyway. Quentin’s dead, that’s not much of a future. Of course, he didn’t see any future in his life before that, which is why he committed suicide. Jason’s hanging around the house, being mean to l’il Quentin and not really doing anything, just coming home to a “mad house” that he doesn’t seem bothered to actually change. In response to Rebecca’s post, I’m not so sure that Faulkner is such a strict advocate for the old South, or what the extent of time that is covered by the term “old.” He was born in 1897, so much of what he hypothetically wants to preserve is not out of pure experience but out of knowledge of history, I would think. I thought that Faulkner simply did not like the future that he saw the South going towards, that there was no future in what they were doing. The book is a means to express his feelings about this, not to revert back to the old South, but to avoid the South it was becoming, one with no optimism. So, I was pleased when Sartre expressed his own opinions of an existent future. It really brightened me up just before I went to sleep and when I woke up, now typing this. There must be a future, because as Sartre notes, “Man is not the sum of what he has, but the totality of what he does not yet have, of what he might have.” Sounds like a great motivational speaker.

Matt, it seems like all this talk of time frustrates you, and it has evoked some cynical response in me as well. Therefore, I think the conclusion of Sartre’s article is actually great, not only using a quote from some guy named Heidegger (a really cool name, by the way), but also being quite cynical himself when he refers to the “particular absurdity which is so un-novelestic (I believe he meant “novelistic,” but that’s ok, he’s French) and so untrue.” Still, I don’t think Faulkner was a one-note guy. I think he really wanted the South to head in a better direction. But he didn’t know how, or may not have seen a better direction for the South in his years, or even an optimistic direction for his own life, and so turned to writing for expression of feeling.

I agree with Marie-Louise that time was relevant to Faulkner. Perhaps not in his drunken states, but surely in his everyday life (unless being drunk was the norm). It’s not the same about not seeing a future. He still sees no future for the South, but he acknowledges that the concept of future, of being events that have not yet come, exists. That is why he writes, to express his desire for change, his critique of the direction the South was heading.

As did Haley, I enjoyed Sartre’s end comments. They are certainly discussable. There must be a future for there is always anticipation in humans, because as humans we live for the future. We are not creatures who think of the present, hunting down cute little bunny rabbits and gnawing their raw hides off to chomp on their cute little bunny rabbit flesh. We have goals, we look forward to events, we anticipate our future. We have a complex mind that can be explained, and even then far from completely, only through a biopsychosocial approach. It takes so much to even begin to explain the mind; we are truly complicated beings.

So, I’m just curious about some posts, which include Haley’s and Marie-Louise’s. Who the heck is Sarte?

Faulkner's Time in The Sound and the Fury

It is very clear when reading the article that while at times it really seems that Faukner just threw together this story, that was not the case and he really did know which direction he was taking it. At times the audience isn’t aware of what is going on but every action provides foreshadowing for things to come later in the novel. Things that would seem inconsequential at first, have a new meaning after Faulkner is finished with them. One example is when Quentin breaks the watch, this sets up for the structure and narrative description of the novel. In The Sound and the Fury, the past, present, and future all meld together to create one entity and the when doesn’t really matter anymore. But the breaking of the watch also is told in the past form, which could also symbolize that the watch is in the past, that the reader must leave behind the sense of time in the book in order to fully understand both the story and its symbols.

Time in the Work of Faulkner

From the article, I think the most interesting thing that I picked up was how Faulkner's characters never looked ahead to the future:

"As to Faulkner's heroes, they never look ahead. They face backwards as the car carries them along."(p.5)

The Compson family only lives in the past as they remember their memories and have flashbacks, but they never even considered the future. It's like they reached a dead end and they know there's no way out. Because they don't even think about the future, it shows that they already lost hope. I think this further emphasizes the southern demoralization in the novel because it seems like the family is trapped by time since they can't see the future, therefore they can't move forward. This might be a stretch, but I feel Faulkner uses these memories and flashbacks to show how the family is kind of moving backwards, which can also symbolize their degradation.

Sound and the Fury

Hey guys, so I don't know how many people will be looking at the blog, but I was thinking that since we're reading a complicated book (though we should do this for all books) we could have a blog on parts people find confusing so that we can better understand it as a whole. I for one haven't started reading yet, but who knows who did, so if anyone has any questions or thoughts, I think you should post so that we can discuss and better understand things

Song of Solomon + Sorry..my toilet erupted and caused a mini-crisis

I agree with both Leah and Saranya in that I feel like Pilate is Milkman's mentor, although I have conflicting feelings about women as a whole. I think Morrison's portrayal of women throughout the book is pretty much irregular. There didn't seem to be one prevailing type of woman, obviously that wouldn't be realistic, but she portrayed them in quite opposing lights. On the one hand you have Pilate as a completely dominant, wise, and powerful figure, and then, for example, there's Hagar: a completely emotionally dependent and unstable person who seems quite incapable of finding happiness or peace unless through "her man" Milkman. I think Morrison is attempting to contrast to the reader the two extreme ways women are perceived. For the most part, they can be seen as these totally independent and knowledgeable beings, where on the other hand they are made out to be these weak, unstable and emotionally needy burdens to men.

In regards to the Song of Solomon in the Bible, I find it quite clear that Morrison attempted to incorporate many of these lines (?) / parts of the story into Hagar's never ending emotional hike: peaks and valleys are significant components, but there is also the underrated times of peace where she is just walking and enjoying the present (that might make more sense in my head). For example, "By night on my bed I sought him whom my soul loveth: I sought him, but I found him not" (Ch. 3, Part 1) shows her love for Milkman and her desire to be with him always: an emotion that is only met with physical absence and unreciprocated love. Another example can be found in that "I am my beloved's, and my beloved is mine: he feedeth among the lilies" (Ch. 6, Part 3). Evidently she would be more than willing to completely give herself to Milkman, and considers him her man, for there is simply no other man on earth that could satisfy her needs and / or desires. This statement, however, in no clear way incorporates the feelings of the other's emotions. Throughout the entirety of Song of Solomon, it seems quite clear that all of these lines / parts are exclusively from the woman's (Hagar's) point of view. Morrison is very successful in incorporating many of these thoughts / emotions into Hagar's role.

Song of Songs

So, I recognize that this is coming like five hours earlier than all of the other posts will pop up, but here goes. I'm going to be doing some microanalysis of the second to last stanza of the first section entitled "friends".

"Don't stare at me because I am dark--the sun has darkened my skin. My brothers were angry with me; they forced me to care for their vineyards, so I couldn't care for myself--my own vineyard."

I think that this part can be interpreted to represent Pilate's character in the book. She clearly has a past that has darkened her and made it so that her "own vineyard" could not possibly be in order. Looking at her childhood, when she and Macon split, she was forced to go out into the world on her own, shouldering a nearly insurmountable amount of responsibility, damaging her like the person in the stanza above. The effects of this on her life and character are evident in most descriptions of her, for god’s sake she doesn’t have a belly button! In our very first encounter with her, the blackness imagery is evident “In a long-sleeved, long-skirted black dress. Her hair was wrapped in black too” (36).

But looking to the next stanza, it is clear that perceived surface-level flaws do not shake her confidence in the slightest. While she may lack a belly-button, and be extremely ugly and impoverished, she still sits out on her porch and welcomes the world to come to her.

*If you were wondering, the answer is yes. Yes, I did only focus on one stanza to avoid looking at the passage as a whole, which I am wholly clueless about.

Ok so Blog Space is mad at me so I'm posting randomly here...sorry!

wow! everyone put a lot of thought into their posts! But i have to disagree with Danielle and Jordan and more agree with Saranya in regards to Pilate.I think Pilate is definitely the mentor with giving Milkman the tools he needs to go on his quest. Even his quest for gold is indirectly fueled by Pilate - so without her, he would not have gone on the quest which eventually led to his search for his heritage. It’s interesting that Morrison chooses a woman to play this mentor role, having her really take the place of the customary ‘father’ figure that would mentor the young man into maturity. I also think it’s key to see how Macon II views Pilate that first time we see him interact with her: him viewing from the outside her family singing, him envious of that music. We see this relationship between man and woman with the man envious of the woman, who has a higher position spiritually and intellectually. Having Pilate, this strong, confident, manless woman as Milkman’s mentor really shows the reader the equality between men and women if not the superiority of women (yes, this may be biased as the book is written by a woman and I am a woman writing this commentary). But I think it’s important that only once Milkman can see this equality can he fully mature. Also, it could be argued that Pilate a Jesus Figure – the hero as a scapegoat. Once Pilate dies, Milkman can ‘leap’ symbolizing mankind’s redemption. Pilate suffers so that others can survive and thrive; she takes as little as possible for herself so she can give Hagar everything; she is this outcast from society, suffering, even though she’s unique in order to better humanity. Also, Pilate can be a superheroic archetype – one with divine powers (definitely supernatural as she has no naval) and who does not belong (again, regarded by society as an outcast) but is needed by society. The superheroic, mentor, and scapegoat archetypes can all be seen with Jesus – he has ‘divine’ powers, is the example of a scapegoat (dies from man’s sins) and a mentor to most Jews in the New Testament (definitely gives the apostles the tools to survive). I don’t think it’s a stretch to compare Pilate to Jesus in all 3 respects (as reasoned above). Once Milkman realizes that Pilate is all of these things, Milkman can really be free.

If we look at the archetypical relationships in a religious stand point, I think it's very interesting. We already see Pilate as Jesus. Hagar's name is actually from the story of Abraham's concubine who starts the line of the Ishmaelites (as opposed to Israelites). Then, we could argue that Milkman is Abraham - which almost makes sense as Abraham is the patriarch for Christianity, Judaism, and Islam so he symbolizes this new revelation that will change the world (which Milkman I think does represent). It wouldn't be a stretch then to call Sweetness Sarah - Abraham's wife who starts the line of the Israelites. Interestingly, Sarah means 'lady' or 'princess' in hebrew. Sweetness is the first women we see Milkman really treat as an equal. This is evident by the scene of the two together: "He soped...she put...he washed...she sprinkled" alternating the pronouns each sentence shows how Milkman has grown since the beginning of the novel (285). we could also argue that Solomon was Noah (as Abraham is suppose to be Noah's descendent). Noah saved humanity supposedly which Solomon could be argued to represent: once MIlkman realizes Solomon is his great grandfather and understands what SOlomon understood (the flying concept) Milkman too can leap and be free. Maybe this is all a gigantic stretch?

Also, really sorry for posting this so late. I was away all weekend without internet and my plane was delayed getting home last night so I didn't land till 4 this morning and I just totally crashed once I was home....sorry!!

Archetypes

I'm not totally positive if I'm blogging about this topic correctly, but I'm going to give it a whirl.

An archetype is basically an original model, if you will, of someone or something that other things are based off of. With this definition in mind, this term can be found throughout

Songs of Solomon. The "Seven Days" group, for example, that Guitar is involved in is one example. Although they do not promote being mimicked or copied, they are a model of a group that sought just vengeance for the white peoples' barbaric and hypocritical killings of black people. This group has the philosophy that many black people in America did at that time, that no unjustified killing should be left unanswered. In a similar sense, Macon Dead, represents the ideal business men that others attempt to follow in success and wealth. Although he is the polar opposite from being a model father or husband, he sacrifices these two roles in an effort to exude that businessman-excellence. He is never hesitant or lazy in getting things done, though it may hurt other people. He is fueled by a constant and incessant motivation to get his money from his tenants and maintain his success. He is cold and distant in his disposition for the sake of never getting too attached to anything so it will not interfere with his duties. He exudes all qualities of the ideal businessman, but not necessarily of an ideal man. The qualities that make him so successful in business distance him from his family, for whom he works so hard to get this money for. He views money and wealth as tangible evidence of success and cause for respect and admiration. However, in many ways, although he is wealthy, his money does not help his for he is a commonly disliked man among town and among his family. These and many more archetypes can be exemplified throughout Songs of Solomon.

Some more archetypes and a few too many side notes

I might be a little scattered in order to focus on the ones that were most noticeable (and the ones we are most likely to remember on the exam) while straying away from the path beaten particularly heavily by all of you guys.

The Initiation: While I agree with Becca that one of Milkan’s initiations was when he puts 2 and 2 together with regards to his ancestors and the song, but I think the more obvious one was when he discovers his mothers contorted (and if I dare say, totally messed up) relationship with her father, and how that affected his parent’s dynamic. Not only does our young hero become aware of this, he is proactive as well. He follows his mom on the trains and discovers something that no one else, least of all his father, knew about. As Haley noted, this opens him up to pretty concrete evidence that his family really is as screwed up as his Macon perceives. This familial understanding marks his awareness and maturity starting to advance.

Battle between Good and Evil: Similarly, I agree with Danni that Guitar’s struggle against Milkman represents this, although the first thing I thought of here was Hagar’s little rampage around a third of the way through the novel. Perhaps Morrison—by writing from the perspective of a man—is trying to send us a message about the male perception of women. Think about it, Hagar’s violent ice pick hacking, Milkman stalking endeavors occur once each month. Either way, this clearly represents a protagonist who was tired of his relationship with “evil” Hagar versus a sex-crazed woman who hears the potent ticking of her biological clock. I won’t get too side-tracked, but it is interesting that this kind of sex drive is only present in Hagar and Milkman’s mother throughout this novel [Oedipus anyone?]. Milkman’s thank you note, as it should be properly called, added to his feeling of self-righteous “goodness” while Hagar’s reaction adds to her “evilness” as perceived by Milkman.

To conclude, Hagar’s reaction to the thank you note ["sent Hagar spinning into a bright blue place where the air was thin and it was silent all the time, and where people spoke in whispers or did not make sounds at all."] puts the color blue far out of the range of the archetypal definition. I would normally disregard this as irrelevant, because not everything has to follow an archetype. I won’t however, because Milkman’s defining characteristic, flight, as Haley elucidated, is represented by blue as defined by the archetype. Morrison clearly knew what she was doing with the archetypal colors, so she must have been compounding Hagar’s evilness once again with the color of her PTSD induced happy place.

Also, for anyone who is actually reading this, you might find it interesting, albeit totally unrelated, to go back and re-examine Empire state’s situation with his French wife who loves black men. Morrison might be trying to portray the absurdity of sweeping generalizations about black people. Perhaps she gives this viewpoint to a French person so that the Americans reading would recognize the senselessness and subconsciously register that characteristic within themselves, although I doubt too many flaming racists read Toni Morrison (unless Corbin counts).

Same problem as Katie....Too many characters.

So according to google blogs, there is a 4,086 character limit. And since I posted later than everyone else, I had a lot of posts to comment on so my blog post was super long. As a result, I went over that limit. And here is the super long post:

Haley, you pretty much hit the nail on the head and used the word boon (plus 5 brownie points).

The only point I would disagree with would be the unhealable wound. I dont think it was those three events that represented Milkman's loss of innocence. Instead, I think Jordan is correct in saying that Milkman's loss of innocence was Hagar's death. It was an event that cannot be reversed (considering Hagar was dead) and although it did not immediately affect Milkman, it eventually caused him to change his actions. (and realize that making girls go crazy is not the way to live).

Katie, of course your post was too many characters. You wrote so much and somehow even changed the font. I agree with your point that the role of women was to show the value/ state of inner strength. However, this inner strength was not shown through a measure of love. Instead, the inner strength was shown through the woman's ability to stand up to men. (You did briefly mention this point...). Clearly, the strongest woman in the book, Pilate, was free of any ties to males. This immediately sends a message that woman are the most powerful when they are independent. Then, her character foil, Ruth (as you pointed out), was the weakest because she was tied to two males, her father and Macon Dead (Milkman's dad). The other female characters in the novel fit into this spectrum based on their relation to male characters. Sweet is another powerful woman because she is treated as an equal by Milkman; Milkman gives her a bath and then she gives him a bath. The same action is done to both characters. But enough about the female characters, onto the archetypes (I am going to try to talk about Archetypes that were not talked about by anyone else)

Some character archetypes do not apply to Songs of Solomon, such as the Friendly Beast (Milkman was no Pochaontas), the Devil figure (No character was continuously bad or tempted Milkman down the wrong path), or the Creature of Nightmare (No night on Bald Mountain scenes in the this book). That said, there were many archetypes.

The Platonic Ideal- This concept of inspiration woman can be seen in Circe. She is a lady who is extremely old and surrounding by thousands of mythical dogs that are eating each other. However, she leads Milkman to the right path of visiting Shalimar. This visiting of Shalimar eventually leads to Milkman discovering his whole past and eventually reaching his ULTIMATE BOON a.k.a completing his journey.

The Outcast- In a way, Milkman can be seen as the outcast of his town and on a larger scale, his race. He was a wealthy black man and as such, he was excluded, specially by Guitar, from his community. This ownership of wealth was his imagined crime against the black community and as a result, "The Seven Days", mainly Guitar, was going to kill him. Milkman, as an outcast, wanders from town to town looking for his past and for a society that will accept him.

Water vs Desert- This contrast is seen through the passages describing the Dead's Beach house/beach trip. The words describing the beach were more lively and each of the children, Milkman and his two sisters, felt more alive at the beach. However, as they drove back in through the town, the sentence structure in the passage became longer and started to drag on. This represents the water and life at the beach contrasted by the death of the town. Another example of water representing a rebirth was Milkman's journey to Circe's house. In this journey, he has to cross a river in the middle of the forest. While crossing, he slips and his head falls under water representing a rebirth or baptism. Then, at Circe's house, he becomes re-inspired in his journey for his family's history by being pointed in the right direction.

On a completely unrelated side note, I just wanted to give credit to Mrs. Siegel's pen trick. The trick is to hold a pen when reading anything because this makes the reader seem more intellectual. Well, I was a skeptic but today I was reading something while holding a pen and some random stranger came over to me and started complimenting me on how smart and intelligent I looked.....basically, the trick works. ALWAYS HOLD A PEN WHILE READING.

This is supposed to be a comment on Haley's post, but it says I've exceeded the maximum number of characters??

There are many things to consider when analyzing the role of women in Songs of Solomon. Brianna and I talked about this together to get a more concise explanation, and we found that overall, the women in the novel are suppressed by men, yet ultimately show tremendous inner strength when threatened. Those that are the strongest never fall in love, like Pilate, while the weaker fall in love, like Reba. More specifically, we described every female character's role in the story. Pilate, the strong, supernatural figure that Milkman looks to for guidance, challenges Milkman's father- the most dominant male character. While Pilate's feelings and thoughts are mainly overlooked by Morrison, she is still the ominiscent "God-like" figure who possesses a loving nature and is incapable of cruelty. These qualities make her the strong woman who she is. As a foil for Pilate, Ruth Foster Dead is a subdued, quiet, upper class woman who never really becomes independent. As Milkman's mother, Ruth is another example of a suppressed woman by society who is less assertive than Pilate and whose weird obsession and affection for her own father make her a weaker woman. However, because Ruth (and Pilate) is successful in giving birth to Milkman, she can be considered strong. Hagar, Pilate's granddaughter, is an example of an even weaker woman. As Milkman's lover, she devotes herself to him yet he frequently rejects her. She is used and abandoned, and in her plight, she kills herself because she is not loved. Hagar represents the inevitable abandonment of women who love men too much, however, through Hagar's plight (death), she demonstrates strength. Next comes Reba (Hagar's mother) whose strong sexual drive attracts her to abusive men. She is another example of a weaker woman who falls in love with the wrong men. Milkman's sister Magdalene Dead is another example of a submissive woman with inner strength. Circe, the maid/midwife for the Butler family, shows strength in providing crucial information that reconnected Milkman to his family history. Finally, Sweet, the prostitute who Milkman has a brief affair with, represents that the most gratifying relationships are rooted in treating each other as equals. This concept is virtually nonexistent in the racially embittered society. In determining the archetypes in Songs of Solomon, we discussed the following: Milkman: the unbalanced/ the other hero- he has no meaning in his life until he decides to delve into his past and discover his family's history/ his physical abnormality (one leg being longer than the other) illustrates him as an "other." He undertakes bother a quest for identity (to discover himself) and a journey in search of knowledge (to discover his family's past). When he finally sees his legs as the same length towards the end, his quest is near an end. Milkman is a hero because he experiences the greatest character metamorphosis from a selfish boy to a caring man. He takes his own plight at the end, after he discovers who he is and ultimately finds meaning in his life. Pilate is another example of a hero because even after her father dies as a result of racial sentiments, she lives on her own and perseveres in the end. The Mentors in the novel are Circe and Pilate. Circe gives indispensable insight about Milkman's history which leads him to undertake his quest/journey. Pilate serves as the God-like figure and she protects Milkman from his father when he is in his mother's womb. Pilate also later influences and inspires Milkman's journey. Additionally, Pilate and Milkman have a mentor-pupil relationship (another archetype). The Father-Son Conflict in the novel is most obviously Milkman's relationship with his father. After Milkman hits his father in order to protect his mother, his father reveals Ruth's crazy and obsessive love for her own father. As a result, weird and awkward tension main Milkman's relationship with his father. The Shadow in the novel is Guitar. He tries to kill Milkman because he believes and accuses MM of hiding the gold. Guitar ultimately betrays his friend, and therefore he must be destroyed. However, he never clearly is destroyed, and he psychologically represents Milkman's own psyche. The Creature of Nightmare in the novel is/are the white people. Guitar is an example of a character who harbors lifelong hatred for the white people. He believes that they are responsible for all evils in the world. I agree with everything Haley found and thoroughly described, and I am just going to add one more symbolic archetype to the list: Fire and Ice: As fire represents knowledge, light, life, and rebirth, it can be noted that Milkman does not have any "fire" in his life until his quest to learn his family's history is fulfilled. Additionally, his "fire" can also be his plight at the end of the novel when he and Guitar are on the cliff. Likewise, as ice represents ignorance, darkness, sterility, and death, it can indisputably be noted that Milkman's childhood is a "ice" cold one, in the sense that he has no meaning or purpose. In many ways, he lives in the darkness of the shadow of his family's past life.

Archetypes in Songs of Solomon

There are a lot of archetypes that apply to Songs of Solomon, but for the sake of leaving some topics for other bloggers I am only going to talk about three examples of situational, character, and symbolic archetype.

Situational Archetype:

The Quest: This archetype applies to Milkman as he is the Hero of this novel. The quest he is presented with is to find the gold that Pilate left in the cave in Pennsylvania after his grandfather was murdered. Both his father and Guitar desperately want the treasure Milkman sets out to find for their own specific benefits. Macon Dead (his father) wants the gold because of his natural greed and need to prove his worth in a society dominated by whites. Guitar wants it in order to carry out a plan on the Seven Days group. Essentially this quest is to bring “fertility back to the wasteland” (or gold back to this Michigan town) in order to restore peace (in the mind of Guitar with the plans of the Seven Days) and order (in the mind of Macon Dead a new societal order in which blacks have equal authority to whites). In a figurative sense, the knowledge and/or gold Milkman returns with will settle an old vengeance and feud between Pilate and Macon Dead – a familial peace.

The Journey: Milkman’s trip to Pennsylvania and then Virginia represent the journey that brings some truth that will help save his family/moral character/history. The truth that he ultimately finds is the story about his family’s lineage and culture. He understands the impact his ancestors have had on different people and society – and all that they have achieved and were capable of – this gives him a new sense of purpose, responsibility, and maturity. He has a revelation or in the strange terms of a monomyth cycle achieves the ultimate BOON! He then takes all the information he learns and brings it back to the rest of his family to help save all of the deteriorating relationships.

The Unhealable Wound: I think this is an interesting archetype and one that is probably open to a lot of interpretation. I believe this probably would have had to happen at an early point in Milkman’s life in order for it to symbolize his loss of innocence. I think this could be one of three events in the novel:

1) When as a young boy he realizes that men cannot fly – he then lost interest in life and became a selfish, ungrateful human being

2) When he realizes the story behind his name – the disgust he now feels towards his mother and the shame associated with the event

3) When he hears of both sides of the story between his mother and father regarding their relationship – Milkman realizes that they no longer love each other and that if anything there is only contempt and resentment felt between them (Milkman knows that his family is going to be eternally screwed up)

Song of Solomon: A Myth, Fairy Tale, or both?

(Note: My computer is self-aware and is actively trying to kill me. I cannot post in the comments...anyway)

Bruno's, Fairy Tale versus Myth, draws distinguishable similarities and differences between the fairy tale and myth by highlighting the key points of each. Based on these points, Song of Solomon borrows heavily from both types of ancient story-telling when constructing its narrative and form. However, Toni Morrison leaves it up to the reader(a rare action for her) to interpret whether Song of Solomon is a myth, fairy tale, or a hybrid of both.

The key features of a myth are seen in Milkman's character. One striking parallel that I found was between Milkman and Oedipus. The Oedipus complex, the theory that children want to push away their father in order to have their mother to themselves, is clearly seen in Milkman. Macon Jr. even notes that Milkman's relationship with his mother is unhealthy, namely the fact that Ruth breast-fed Milkman long past infancy. Another aspect of the myth that defines Milkman is his actions during the third act of the novel. Bruno states, "Myths typically involve superego demands in conflict with id-motivated action, and with the self-preserving desires of the ego. A mere mortal is too frail to meet the challenges of the gods" (37). When Milkman undergoes his journey to discover his history and heritage(a superego demand), he battles with Guitar Baines, who is driven by greed and hatred(an id-motivated action). For a normal individual, it would be impossible to complete Milkman's quest. But, Milkman discovers he is not a mere mortal when he learns that his father was the legendary Solomon that flew back to Africa. This god-like element in his blood allows him to stand and fight against Guitar.

The elements of a fairy tale are used to describe the setting and the characters in Song of Solomon. One element that the novel borrows is the type of characters in fairy tales. "The fairy tale, by contrast, makes clear that it tells about everyman, people very much like us" (40). Indeed, the characters of Song of Solomon are "normal" individuals that would belong in the time period they are depicted. Staying on the concept of characters, another aspect of a fairy tale is seen in Milkman. "If names appear, it is quite clear that these are not proper names, but general or descriptive ones" (40). Milkman is not his birth name but is descriptive of his character, who "drinks" the kindness from everyone with nothing in return.

The ending of the novel is where Morrison asks the reader whether to view the book as a myth or fairy tale. When Milkman leaps at Guitar, the result of this action is left unanswered. Does Milkman defeat Guitar or is he shot and killed? The answer to this question determines whether the book is a fairy tale or myth. "An even more significant difference between these two kinds of story is the ending, which in myths is nearly always tragic, while always happy in fairy tales" (37). The reader must draw understanding and interpretation from the rest of the novel in order to decide Song of Solomon's true story type.

Milkman's Search: Fairy-Tale or Mythical Hero?

In Bruno's "Fairy Tale Versus Myth," he effectively and thoroughly establishes the fundamental effects of similarities and differences between a fairy tale and a myth. Of all his indispensable insight into what each is and into how each are delineated, I found the most notable to be at the bottom of page 39: "Mythical heroes offer excellent images for the development of the superego, but the demands they embody are so rigorous as to discourage the child in his fledgling strivings to achieve personality integration. While the mythical hero experiences a transfiguration into eternal life in heaven, the central figure of the fairy tale lives happily ever after on earth, right among the rest of us... Thus, a happy though ordinary existence is projected by fairy tales as the outcome of the trials and tribulations involved in the normal growing-up process." Here, Bruno is most basically establishing the "common ground" that a fairy tale provides for its audience, unlike the unattainable and seemingly impossible heaven that is present in myths. In regards to Songs of Solomon, Milkman eventually undergoes a character transformation as he realizes the quest he must embark upon. From his sheltering, wealthy, problem-free family background, he goes to school and jut carries out his daily routines without any emotion. He essentially has no meaning to his life, until he becomes friends with Guitar and goes to see his aunt Pilate, Reba and Hagar. When he finally decides to learn about his family history, his quest begins. I'm calling it a quest because in some ways, Milkman can be identified as a common man's hero, and in a myth, a hero undertakes 8 steps (both physical and/or psychological) in order to complete his quest. Milkman is a hero because he shares many characteristics with mythical heroes as well as other literary heroes. His physical quest is his search for his family's background, while his psychological quest is to grow from a selfish boy into a compassionate man. Milkman is truly portrayed as a hero near the end of the novel, when he stands up to Guitar and leaps off of Ryna's cliff. This is an obvious demonstration of Milkman's recognition of the importance of identity. However, it is also a time in the novel in which Morrison reveals that flight is not in fact a myth, but that flight actually occurs. In maintaining the novel's genre of magical realism, Morrison renders human flight both possible and natural, making Milkman's flight off the cliff evidently real and empowering. On page 337,

after Pilate dies and Milkman stands up unafraid of Guitar's gun, he yells out Guitar's name. He then sees Guitar's outline in the dark. "Milkman stopped waving and narrowed his eyes...'You want my life?' Milkman was not shouting now. 'You need it? Here.' Without wiping away the tears, taking a deep breath, or even bending his knees- he leaped. As fleet and bright as a lodestar he wheeled toward Guitar and it did not matter which one of them would give up his ghost in the killing arms of his brother. For now he knew what Shalimar knew: If you surrendered to the air, you could ride it." Even after Milkman doubted the possibility of human flight entirely and was perceived as "abnormal" by the community, he believed in the reality of flight and because he jumped off the cliff, he eradicated all his feelings of alienation. This represents his final resurrection and rebirth as the hero, because even as Pilate is dead, Milkman takes his own flight. He learned the story of his heritage to become revitalized. While we do not know who will die as a result of Milkman's jump, it doesnt matter. Milkman finally has a sense of who he is and of where he comes from. He will live on even after his death, just as Solomon's song signaled.

I know my thoughts are a bit out of order, so it's probably confusing to see the connection between Milkman and the cliff scene to the quote I selected from "Fairy Tale Versus Myth," so I'll end with this. Milkman is not a mythical hero. His virtue and accomplished deeds are ones that anyone can emulate. He, "like the rest of us," "impresses [us] with his own insignificance when compared with them (41)." "Whatever strange events the fairy-tale hero experiences, they do not make him superhuman, as is true for the mythical hero (40)." Bruno denotes what we can relate to everyday, and what we cannot. Morrison does this too- in her illustration of understanding personal and familial identity in order to attain complete potential in life.

Hard Times - Literary Terms - ch. 2

LITERARY TERMS:

alliteration - "mighty man", "professed pugilist" (5)

hyperbole - ""always in training...ready to fight all England...coming up to the scratch, wherever and whatever it was, and proving himself an ugly customer. He would go in and damage any subject whatever with his right, follow up with his left, stop, exchange, counter..." (5)

tone - "The third gentleman now stepped forth. A mighty man at cutting and drying he was; a government officer..."

symbolism - flowered carpet / horses on walls - innocence / naivety / childlike splendor

metaphor - "He and some one hundred and forty other schoolmasters had been lately turned at the same time, in the same factory, on the same principles..." (7)

Hard Times-Chapter 2

First, the description of Mr. McChoakumchild is a hyperbole. Dickens compares him to a boxer who would beat the facts into people. This isn't really a way to teach children so the fact that Dickens has a boxer teaching the children I think tells us that not only is this not the right person to be teaching children, but what he is teaching the children isn't what their education should be about. On the next page, the word fact is repeated a number of times once again to stress that facts are not all that children should be learning. The exchange between Sissy and Mr. McChoakumchild over the flower rug shows the contrast between a typical child's point of view and the crazy fact-based teaching method that Mr. McChoakumchild and Thomas Gradgrind agree on. On page 7 at the bottom, there is a description about Mr. McChoakumchild and his educational journey. Dickens describes it as coming from a factory. This statement shows Dickens's opinion of the education system of the day and the happenings of the times. Everything is being industrialized even the schools until one day everything will be the same and everything will come from a factory. On page 8, Dickens says, "If he had only learnt a little less, how indefinitelybetter he might have taught much more." This statement is an oxymoron because normally the more you know the better you can teach; however, in this case Dickens is saying that had Mr. McChoakumchild been less like a machine and more like a human being maybe he would be able to teach the students in a more effective way. Finally, Dickens makes an allusion to Ali Baba which I don't entirely understand but I think he is saying that Mr. McChoakumchild is teaching the other students by harming Sissy. By making fun of Sissy, he is mocking her in order to teach the others.

Hard Times - tone

Definition: The writer's attitude towards the material and/or readers. Tone may be playful, formal, intimate, angry, etc.

The narrator's tone is present throughout the entirety of the book, obviously; however, unlike many novels, Dickens's tone is essential in the characterization of the people in the book. Varying from ironic to mocking to tender. His varying tone provides a guideline for the reader's reaction and emotions while reading the book. Their views of the characters are skewed and tainted due to the bias put on them from the author's tone.

Example: "The simple circumstance of being left alone with her husband and Mr. Bounderby was sufficient to stun this admirable lady again without collision between herself and any other fact. So she once more died away, and nobody minded her" (18).

Innuendo: As Sharp as a Butter Knife

One of the most common and thinly-veiled forms of satire is innuendo. The cold definition of an innuendo is: an oblique allusion or equivocal reflection on character or reputation. Yet, the innuendo, despite its immature and baseless reputation, can take on many different forms and can effectively shield the satirist from immediate criticism. An innuendo can be in the form of an entire story or a simple name. An example of the former can be found in an episode of South Park, where the increase of hybrid cars in California has caused the state to issue Smug Alerts. The use of names, however, can best be attributed to Charles Dickens and his amazingly blunt war for social change.

It is beyond question that Dickens was very immature and direct when satirizing others. No clearer is this than in Hard Times. For most of the characters in the novel, Dickens gives an individual a name according to how he views their real life counterparts. One example of this is the schoolmaster, Mr. M'Choakumchild, which probably gives some insight into Dickens's opinion of the education system during the industrial revolution. Another example of this is the crooked Union leader, Slackbridge, which shows how Dickens views dishonest and uppity workers. In both cases, Dickens is able to provide social commentary in a single word and keep a prevalent thought in the mind of the reader. As the reader continues on with the novel, the blunt innuendo is repeated every time the character's name is mentioned and the reader is slowly turned towards Dickens's point of view. Dickens's masterful use of the innuendo steers readers towards social change by invoking their basest emotions.

What in the Dickens?

Hi Everyone!

Hope you are having a great weekend!

As we discussed in class, satire is the literary are of diminishing or derogating a subject by making it ridiculous and evoking towards it attitudes of amusement, contempt, scorn or indignation. Satire does not attempt to harm or damage by ridicule, but rather to shock to gain attention and begin social change. The themes of satire are maintenance of standards, reaffirmation of values, and the necessity of reform. That being said, I asked you each to take a literary device, define it, and explain why/how it is used in satire. These devices are: tone, irony, exaggeration, distortion, understatement, innuendo, ambiguity, catalog, simile and metaphor, oxymoron, parable, and allegory. I'm interested to see your answers below. I'd also love to see what you have to say in response to Plato's Allegory of the Cave in comparison to the world established in Hard Times.