Last Blog! Woohoo!

 I thoroughly enjoyed Isabel Allende’s The House of the Spirits.  I loved the style of magical realism, and it reminded me of how children perceive the world and their surroundings.  When I was little, I believed anything a family member would tell me, so if I were in Alba’s shoes, of course, I would think my grandmother is clairvoyant and the three legged table can shake without any outside force.  My favorite character in the book was Alba because the reader was able to follow her from birth to adulthood.  Alba was not only interested in her grandmother’s magic and ability to tell the future, but she was also the only woman in the family that was some-what involved with politics and her stance on the government.  Alba is a strong and determined girl, like her grandfather, and she is not afraid to stand up for what she believes in.  I think this is why I liked her so much because while most of the citizens of Chili were hiding safely behind the curtains of their house, Alba rescued people that the government was trying to kill.  She risked her life and deceived her grandfather in order to do what she thought was morally right.

Another aspect of the book that I really enjoyed was the foreshadowing that Allende uses.  She begins foreshadowing events from the first chapter onward that are brought back up later in the story.  One of the most disturbing and sad events of foreshadowing occurred on Clara’s wedding day, when her massive dog, Barrabas, died.  He died with a huge butcher’s knife in his back, but it was never explained how this accident or murder actually happened.  He stumbled to Clara, who was dressed in her wedding gown, and died in her arms.  I think the death of Barrabas signified the loveless marriage that Clara had just begun.  She lost her best friend on her wedding day, and to me, that sounds like bad luck.  I think Allende used Barrabas’ death to foreshadow what was to come in the marriage of Esteban and Clara, which was mostly composed of violence and silence.

Put your raincoat on, you’re about to get BLUE!

As our humanities book describes, total art took the art making process and made it public.  The actual work of art is less important than the process used to create the work of art.  A well known example of total art can be seen in Yves Klein’s “Anthropometry”.  This total art consists of naked women using each other as painting utensils and sliding over a canvas of some sort (kind of like a weird, awkward slip and slide if you ask me).  “Anthropometry” reminded me of a modern day, more family oriented type of performance art or total art.  I’m sure many of you have even experienced this total art!  I’ll give you a hint:  There’re blue, mute, and love playing with paint!  I’m talking about the Blue Man Group!

For those of you who have never seen this strange depiction of total art, the Blue Man Group is a group of men, usually three to four, who have painted blue bodies and wear all black clothes.  They are portrayed as being from another planet, for they are unfamiliar with technology and such from our world.  They have childlike fascinations for music and color, and they bang on drums while splattering multicolored paint!  The whole performance gets the audience involved.  At one point, we had to dance along to the music while huge balloon balls were being tossed in the air!

After reading the humanities section on total art and reminiscing on the Blue Man Group, I realized I really enjoy performance art a lot better than looking at paintings in a museum for example.  Total art gets my attention, and I love how some pieces even include the audience in on the art making process!  The Blue Man Group actually had some random volunteers from the audience help them make fun pieces of art, such as painting the volunteer’s body blue and slamming them against a canvas!  Just watching the art making process filled me with emotion:  excitement, concern, confusion, and joy!  If I were to look at the finished product, such as a spatter painting made by one of the blue men, I would not have these various emotional responses unless I attended the event while he made the work of art!  To me, total art is more valuable than looking at a painting.  While most of us cannot afford a million plus dollar painting, we can keep the experience and memory of a performance/total art with us as long as we live for a fraction of the price!

Here's a link to the official blue man group site if you wanna check it out for yourself!

http://www.blueman.com/experience/music-and-video

I would rather eat a locust...

I may have fallen asleep multiple times while trying to read Nathanael West’s, The Day of the Locus.  Personally, I think the novel is utterly dry and complex with violence scattered throughout the story line.  Actually, was there even a story line?  I asked myself what the point of the book was after reading it, and I came to the conclusion that unlike other writers at the time, West incorporated failed dreams and realistic views into his novels.  He portrays a disgusting, brutal outlook on life in California, more specifically Los Angeles.  Almost all of the characters in the novel were unsuccessful in achieving their dreams, which made the story entirely depressing.  The violence depicted in the novel was also disturbing, but at the same time, it really didn’t catch my attention enough to become engrossed in the book.  Maybe today’s society has increased my ability to withstand the shock and violence described in movies, books, and songs.  Thus, this book wasn’t shocking enough for me.  When I picture Los Angeles I do think about the homeless people crowding the streets, those who West describe as those waiting to die there, and the crime that occurs in the city.  Even the mob scene that occurs at the end of the story doesn’t surprise me at all.  A big move star came into town; of course people get wild and senseless right?  It seems expected.  In the early twentieth century, I can understand how this book would raise some brows.  The reoccurring themes of violence, prostitution, and sexual innuendos were probably a little concerning at the time. 



What's the odds of becoming a famous actor/actress in Hollywood?



Los Angeles maybe the city of failed dreams for some...



Big city... Big opportunities right?



 



 

West describes the violence in such a way that it appears to stem from the characters’ boredom and resentment of Los Angeles.  The characters go to the city because they believe they will find success, but when they fail at achieving their dreams, they become aggressive and inhuman.  This may explain why the mob was easy to aggravate.  Also, the violence revolves around Faye Greener in the majority of the story. 

Faye is like an unattainable, fake robot that the male characters are madly attracted to.  This is cause for tension because there is a competition between the men, and the tension escalates at the party at Homer’s house and ends in a large fight.  Multiple times throughout the novel Tom imagines raping Faye.  I think these acts of violence represent the characters’ resentment toward Faye because they are not successful in winning her over.  The men’s’ failed attempts to get Faye’s attention and affection may symbolize their overall failure at life in Los Angeles.  I couldn’t bring myself to sympathize with the victims of the acts of violence, especially Faye Greener.  Faye Greener was said to be fake in her actions and words and seemed to put on a nonstop facade for her audiences.  I couldn’t even stand to read about this girl because she seemed so robotic and untrustworthy; thus I was unsympathetic to the wrongdoings that were done to her.  Like Tom Hackett’s view, I think Faye seemed to bring misfortune upon herself.

On an end note, I definitely don’t want to visit Los Angeles or read another Nathanael West book.

Trapped Behind the Yellow Wallpaper of Society

"I don't like to look out the windows even-there are so many of those creeping women, and they creep so fast. I wonder if they all come out of the wall-paper as I did?"  -The Yellow Wallpaper

When I read the section in our humanities book about American feminist writers, I instantly thought of a short story I read in high school called “The Yellow Wallpaper” by Charlotte Perkins Gilman.  Although I realize the writer/poet and story was not mentioned in the text, I couldn’t help writing about this intriguing, yet creepy story.  It describes a woman, who has been declared depressed by her own husband, who is a doctor, and another physician, and her struggle with her illness.  Her husband demands her to rest and not do any writing all day.  He acts as if she is so fragile that she will break or go crazy.   The unnamed woman feels as if her inactive, boring life is making her sicker, and she begins to keep a secret journal.  In her journal, she begins to write of this yellow, stained, dingy wallpaper that is in her new beautiful, eerie house.  She becomes fascinated and fixated by the wallpaper.  She believes that there is a pattern underneath the yellow wallpaper consisting of a woman locked behind bars.  She describes the woman as trapped, and the depressed woman feels she must set this wallpaper lady free.  She eventually scratches and tears into the yellow wallpaper and goes completely insane.  In the end, she loses her grasp of reality and believes she “crept” out of the yellow wallpaper!

I loved the feminist symbolism shown throughout this short story.  Throughout the story the woman is bossed around by her husband, who thinks he knows what is best for her.  She is treated as if she cannot make any decisions for herself, especially any rational ones.  The woman is meant to focus her attention only on domestic issues, as if she can’t handle “man’s work”.  Even the sub-pattern of the lady trapped in the yellow wallpaper represents the life of a woman in the early 1900s.  Women were trapped inside the home, performing only domestic housework and childcare.  If I lived during this time period and was limited to housework, there is no doubt that I would go crazy as well!  The lady in the wallpaper may also represent the woman’s mental restraints.  She has to act like a “proper lady” and like she has a great marriage, not as if she is suffering from a mental illness.  She is even restrained from her own creativity and imagination.  What a terrible limited life she leads!

"The Yellow Wallpaper" by Charlotte Perkins Gilman:

http://www.library.csi.cuny.edu/dept/history/lavender/wallpaper.html

Below is a link describing why Charlotte Perkins Gilman wrote "The Yellow Wallpaper" from the author herself.  She discusses her own troubles with boughts of depression and insanity. 
http://wps.ablongman.com/wps/media/objects/1321/1353521/essays/cpggilman.html

Overall, I think Charlotte Perkins Gilman should be at least mentioned in our book in the feminist section.  Although supposedly it wasn't until the latter half of the 1900s that "The Yellow Wallpaper" became recognized for its feminist qualities, the short story is still a phenomenal, intriguing piece of work that grabs a hold of the issue of mental illness and feminism during the early twentieth century.  The fact that Gilman’s “The Yellow Wallpaper” is still being evaluated and discussed today proves that there is more to her story than just surface reading. 

The Bird Who Chirps "Poo-tee-weet?"



Kurt Vonnegut, satirical genius



I was extremely disappointed that Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse Five, one of my favorite books, is not even mentioned in our humanities text throughout the WWII section!  Slaughterhouse Five is a satirical anti-war novel whose protagonist, Billy Pilgrim, is drafted in WWII, taken as a POW and placed in a slaughterhouse “safe house” in Dresden, and barely survives the horrendous fire bombings in Dresden.  Not to mention, Billy is an awful and clumsy soldier, which makes the story even more satirical because he is not even in the slightest a war hero.  Throughout the novel, Billy experiences time warps and is able to observe his whole life unfold before him, even his death.  At one point, Billy is abducted by aliens and taken to a planet called Tralfamadore.  From the Tralfamadorians, Billy learns that free will is impossible because destiny is already preset and cannot be changed.  This theme of free will is mentioned throughout the novel.



Fire Bombings in Dresden



Bodies after firebombings by US and British Air Force



I believe Vonnegut’s main theme of the novel is the destructiveness of war.  As the humanities book explains, artists and writers during this time period often wrote about the pointless atrocities of war, and Vonnegut does just the same but in a humorous, clever way.  He uses science fiction and flashbacks/forwards throughout Slaughterhouse Five, which keeps the reader entranced, while simultaneously including examples of the worthless violence seen during WWII.  One of my favorite examples of this in the story is portrayed after the fire bombings in Dresden occur and a bird is heard chirping “Poo-tee-weet?”.  The bird song even has a question mark after it as if to ask why?  Why did the firebombing have to occur?  What benefit did they have?  None.  The singing bird reminds us that the brutality of war is futile and useless just like the song, “Poo-tee-weet?”.  So, why do we still partake in wars?  You think after learning about the hundreds of years of detrimental wars in the past, we would all learn that war is juvenile.  Why can’t we live in a world where all nations work together for the betterment of everyone?  Will that world ever exist?  Hey, I guess if it weren’t for WWII then Vonnegut wouldn’t have made bank.

A quote from slaughterhouse five that stresses the point of the futility of war:

 "It is so short and jumbled and jangled, Sam, because there is nothing intelligent to say about a massacre. Everybody is supposed to be dead, to never say anything or want anything ever again. Everything is supposed to be very quiet after a massacre, and it always is, except for the birds. And what do the birds say? All there is to say about a massacre, things like “Poo-tee-weet?”"

Freud... Really?

Although I do believe that Sigmund Freud made substantial contributions toward modern psychology during the twentieth century, I also consider him bias and overrated.  In his time period, women were considered inferior to men, and according to his works, Freud agreed with this idea of inferiority.  In various works, he describes women as having the dominant purpose of fertility and reproduction.   If Freud was such a genius, then why didn’t he accept that fact that women have more to offer than merely fertility? 

I do respect Freud’s work and outlook on mental illness and psychoanalysis because his view on mental illness led to better treatment of the mentally ill.  Prior to Freud, the mentally ill were locked up and treated terribly, but Freud used psychoanalysis to bring unconscious desires into consciousness of the emotionally disturbed and to confront these desires.  Overall, I think Freud caused people to change their view of the mentally ill by looking at the disorders scientifically. 

While I admire Freud in this aspect, I despise his ideas on the Oedipus complex.  He thought that some disorders were caused by a child’s unconscious sexual desire for his/her parent of the opposite sex, while he/she is envious of the parent of the same sex.  I think this view is disgusting and ignorant! Really, Freud?  Where did you even come up with this idea?  To me, this idea seems completely random and does not make any sense.  I detest how Freud has to make mental and emotional issues into unconscious sexual wants.  I disagree with his idea of infant sexuality and all the sexual phases people endure throughout their life.  It’s gross.  In my opinion, Freud is sexist and obsessed with human sexuality of which he has no foundation for his ideas on sexual life phases.  

Alienation from Society

Kafka’s “The Metamorphosis” is a story of Gregor Samsa’s transformation into a beetle.  His family is disgusted by him and treats him as an outcast.  For most of the story Gregor is confined to his room to listen to his family go on with their daily activities through a key hole.



I read “The Metamorphosis” in high school, and even though this story was disturbing, I enjoyed the vivid detail and did not even question how he becamstrange storyline.  I was entranced in the idea that Gregor Samsa e an insect!  After discovering his transformation, his main concern was getting to work, for which he was already late.  The lack of questioning by Gregor makes me wonder if his transformation to an insect is purely symbolic.

In my opinion, this story represents alienation between Gregor Samsa and his family (or possibly even society).  Day after day, Gregor goes through his usual routine of working as a salesman, and he doesn’t make time for a social life.  He causes himself to be alienated by humanity and even his family.  Kafka may be using Gregor’s metamorphosis as a symbol for the alienation of society in the twentieth century.  Kafka also emphasizes Gregor’s monotonous job as essential for his family, and his family is forced to work after he turns into a beetle.  His relationship with his family deteriorates into nothing after Gregor is unable to work and provide for his family.  His family views him as worthless.  I personally think this represents the importance of a career and business life in the twentieth century.  People were so concerned with earning money and their jobs that they became alienated from one another. 

I think many people have this same feeling today.  Like someone mentioned in class, a person can be walking down the busiest street in a major city and still feel completely alone.  Maybe this is what Gregor Samsa was experiencing? 




Although the street is filled with people, everyone is a blur.