Eveline

This story is about a girl who wants to escape from her horrible life and find happiness elsewhere but can't make the decision to go.

1) What's the girl's name?
2) Why didn't she go with Frank?
3) If you were in that situation, what would you do?

The theme of this story is about fear of change. (Yes, I looked that up in the notes :) ) But really, it is. Eveline is afraid of changing her life, even though it's for the better. She's afraid of leaving what's familiar, even though it's not good for her. People generally don't like the unknown and so prefer even a bad thing that they recognize to a possibly good thing that they're not sure will work out and will take them away from what they know.

I thought the reference to the priest was interesting. We learned in class that every Joyce story (in Dubliners at least) has a reference to a dead/gone priest. I think it would be amazing if we went through the book and found all the priest references. Anyway, I suppose it's more symbolism about how the Catholic church was once good and stable but now (by that I mean James Joyce's now) it caused (in Joyce's opinion) social paralysis and is no longer there for the people, but is just a fond memory.

Araby

This is a story about a boy who is infatuated with his neighbor and goes to a bazaar to buy something for her and doesn't.

1) What is the name of the bazaar?
2) Why does the boy feel 'anguish and anger' at the end?
3) The description of the section of the book that this story was taken from says that it focuses on the confusion of leaving childhood behind. Does it really show that confusion as it is?

I really have no idea what the theme of this story is.

I didn't think the story was very interesting. It made sense and the characterization and writing and everything was good, but the piece itself didn't seem interesting. A lot of it was description, which has always bored me.

Anyway, the story's ending would have meant something else to me if I hadn't read the descriptions which said that this story had to do with the confusion of leaving childhood or something. I'm not sure exactly what I would have thought it meant, except that the story really didn't seem to have much to do with childhood, except the narrator was obviously young. In the end, his feelings of anger and anguish were what I felt was interesting about the story, since they connected with his failure to find anything for the girl and the obstacles he faces in getting to the bazaar. He feels as if the end isn't worth the effort and so feels that way.

A Good Man is Hard to Find

A Good Man is Hard to Find is a story about a family who takes a trip, meets an escaped murderer and dies.

1) Where was the family's destination?
2) Why did the Misfit shoot the grandmother?
3) Are good men hard to find?

I really don't know what to make of this story. I thought all the characters were written well and the story was interesting to read, yet it didn't seem to have a point or a theme or a reason for why it was written the way it was. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, except for the fact that we have to write about such things for this class.

One point about the story that I thought was done particularly well was the part about the shirt. (Bailey wears this yellow shirt with blue parrots, then after he was taken into the woods, the shirt of his that the Misfit puts on is that shirt.) The grandmother's line of how she doesn't remember what the shirt reminds her of shows very clearly the distressed and confused state her mind is in. It adds to the weird quality of the piece.

Oh yeah, and all the religious stuff confused me. I have no idea what exact deeper meaning the author was trying to convey, especially with all the references to Jesus. I mean, I got the obvious- that the Misfit takes pleasure in killing because he thinks the world is messed up and the grandmother thinks he should be saved, etc., but I think I'm missing something important because religion in general confuses me.

The Rocking Horse Winner

The Rocking Horse Winner is a story about a boy who wants to make money on racehorses and then dies.

1) What is the boy's name?
2) Why does he want money?
3) Is the story right? Can money not replace happiness?

This story's theme was that money cannot bring happiness and that luck doesn't concern itself only with bringing money.

This story was good because it (like the one we read in class the other day) utilized the element of suspense very well. In addition, it made the characters slightly disturbing, which added to the sense of intrigue. The added supernatural-ish parts (the way he got his answers from the rocking horse, the whispering house) added to the interest of the story and made it much more fascinating to read than if the author had simply let the point of his story be known through the description of a boy who tried to make money because his family was in debt through their own desire for money. The story goes deeper than that, the characterization is much more interesting and the point is not painfully obvious. The parts about the house whispering were particularly interesting because they added the atmosphere of suspense and the sense of something unusual happening. I got the impression somehow that the boy, Paul, did not actually try to win money to please his mother, though he didn't mind doing so. That was a minor motivation. I felt that he was actually taking his child's idea of 'luck solves everything' to the extreme because of the house- he felt its message and tried to get money because of that. He had luck of both kinds: good and bad, although maybe they're the same thing. What he thought was good luck brought bad things more than good, after all.

I'm not sure what exactly to say about the actual theme and idea of the story. The mechanics were all great and I enjoyed reading the piece. However, the idea of 'money does not bring happiness' is so cliché and well-worn that I seriously cannot find anything new and original to say about it.

My Fear

This poem stood out to me for some reason when I was reading through the poems tonight. I wasn’t sure why, then I remembered that we had briefly discussed nightmares in Spanish class. My subconscious must be telling me something.

Anyway, I think this poem is about a person having a nightmare. The whole thing aboviously deals with fear, which is an integral part of any nightmare. What makes me feel as if this is specifically about a nightmare is the last line: ‘before I slept, and met you’, thus implying that the person is asleep and dreaming.

The poem personifies fear as a person carrying a one’s fears in a sack in order to give these fears to the recipient/victim/dreamer. The Fear-man (I have a picture in my head of him looking sort of like the grim reaper) also keeps a list of what scares the person the most, including death. Death was probably mentioned because almost everyone can relate to having a fear of death, since very few of us actually want to die, or are unconcerned about our eventual demise.

The dreamer also wishes for whatever fears are brought to him in this nightmare to be simple and not very scary fears, like bats and crickets. ‘Small’ fears he calls them. These are fears that do not affect someone in a great way and are easily overcome. I, for example, fear bugs. They freak me out. Yet I am not extremely bugophobic and can deal with bugs and smash them when they invade my room. (Ants and cockroaches and silverfish and spiders are horrible things). I’ve found, though, that in dreams even little fears that aren’t serious can turn drastic. If one fears papercuts, for example, but only to the extent that one is usually careful turning a page but isn’t too upset when one actually gets a papercut, one might have a horrible nightmare about papercuts in which one dies from blood loss. In dreams our fears are often exaggerated to the point of ridiculousness and yet, while asleep, are still frightening.

I Stand Here Ironing

Sentence: This is a story about a woman reflecting on her daughter.

Questions:
L1: What is the daughter’s name?
L2: Why does the mother think she didn’t do a good job of raising Emily?
L3: This mother had circumstances which she couldn’t control which caused her to treat Emily as she did. Was she justified in doing so? Are others in a similar position justified as well?

Observations:
I find this story immensely more difficult to comment upon. It didn’t seem to have a straightforward point. The theme (as far as I can tell) was that one must show affection to one’s children, otherwise you will regret it when they have problems. That’s fairly obvious to most people, since our society regards children highly.

The characterization in this piece was much better than in the other one. The way the mother explained why she did what she did was understandable and in character with the personality she showed and the hardships she faced. Emily’s growth was plausible as well and showed her more like a real person than a stock character. The fact that at the end she was never able to show affection to her mother the way her mother wanted her to, but still overcame some of her problems made her seem more real, since nobody ever overcomes all their problems, or never overcomes any. (Although I suppose they might, but it’s not very likely). I did think it was odd the way the mother felt she didn’t show Emily enough affection because she clearly explained that she did love her daughter.

I didn't extremely enjoy the story. It was better character-wise than the other one, fairly interesting and was mostly well written (there was one paragraph that seemed out of place) as well. However, there was nothing that made me actually like it. It wasn't a bad story, but it wasn't attention-getting and fascinating and so forth. Possibly because the story didn't have much depth or complexity- it was obvious. So there was no need to really think about it.

The Lesson

Sentence: The Lesson is a story literally about a woman taking some kids out to a toy store, but with the theme of (un)equal opportunity.

Questions:
Level One: Where do the kids and Miss Moore go?
Level Two: Do the kids appreciate what Miss Moore is trying to tell them?
Level Three: Does it matter if America is a land of equal opportunity or not?

Observations:
First of all, we did all the ‘Is America really the land of equal opportunity?’ and whatnot last year, so I feel like I’ve already said all there is to say on this subject. (I.e., that no it’s not and that’s really bad and we can’t really do much about it.) However, there are other aspects of the story I can address.

I didn’t particularly like the piece. First of all, I didn’t like the main character. ‘Sylvia’ did not seem like a nice or sympathetic person. Her telling of how she locked ‘Sugar’ in the shower, among other things, was not particularly conducive to my ability to sympathize with her. Also, she seemed sort of a blatant plot device- her only purpose to allow the author a way to explain how America wasn’t the land of equal chances and opportunity and dreams. The addition of her ‘tough’ personality seemed like a bad attempt at giving her more dimension and disguising her plot device function. (The same thing applies to Miss Moore and the rest of the kids in a lesser degree; the only exist in order for the author to use them to talk about equality; any original qualities they own seem contrived and artificial.)

Second, if the author was subtly and artistically trying to make a point about poverty and unfairness, she (or is it a he?) failed. Not at making the point- that was glaringly obvious- but at artistic quality and subtlety. Sugar’s questioning speech about democracy and equal chance ruined any subtlety the piece possessed, which wasn’t much to begin with. The characters seemed to be there in order to explain that ‘all these wasteful toys cost a lot of money which could go to better things but they don’t so that’s not quite ‘American’ is it?’ The whole thing seemed contrived and was annoying. I tried to enjoy it, because I agree with the message completely, but this short story was not the way to explain the point literarily. The author would have done better with an essay.

As for my Level Three question, yes, I do think it matters. I thought that that might apply to this story because some of the kids in the story did not seem impressed with the message Miss Moore and Sugar were trying to convey. To them, does it matter if America really is the land of the equal and fair? They probably don’t think about questions such as these, so consciously, it doesn’t seem to matter to them, as in they don’t care. But the answer to questions like that does affect them. America is not a land of equal chance, which definitely affects their lives even though they don’t think about it.

Joe#3

Joe is realizing that the people in charge of the war, the government, etc., are seeing the future and know that if another war 'needs' to be fought, if Joe shows and tells everyone who and what he is, then no one will fight (or fewer people, anyway). Joe's perception of this is that he needs to point the gun at the people who told him to fight in order to clear them away so he can tell his story and people will listen and believe and war will be less and life will be better. Like we discussed in class, he feels he needs to fight in order to stop fighting.

Joe#2

I agree with what Joe wants; I think it's a good thing to communicate to people what he went through and why it's necessary to have as little war as possible. In a similar situation, I'd want that too. It goes beyond Joe's earlier desire of just talking with someone- he actually wants to communicate his suffering and ideas to others. In a sense, he'll be speaking for the dead (which is almost the name of that one book). I think he's uniquely qualified to do that because like he said earlier in the novel, he is the closest thing to dead and he needs to tell people that life as they know it should not be taken for granted.

Joe #1

Joe has lost his arms, legs, nose, mouth, eyes and ears. It matters a lot (to him). It makes him think of himself as a spokesperson for the dead because he can understand what they feel like because he can't interact with the world- just lie there. It changes his entire outlook on life. He no longer believes in 'fighting for a word' because he doesn't believe it was worth it, compared to what happened to him. His mind also becomes more active (after briefly losing his grip on reality). To him, it feels like he is someone else now.

To everyone else, it mostly doesn't matter. His friends and family and girlfriend will grieve for him, the doctors who helped him live will be proud of their medical accomplishment (he talks about that at one point) but everyone else doesn't care that one American in a war where millions have died is still alive, though mostly insensate. He's less than a statistic to them. (Did they have statistics back then? Did anyone care? As much as now?)