In Which Beloved is Concerned

Heroism and Beloved.

There are some who say Sethe was heroic. There are some who say she was not. Ella: she didn't take Sethe as heroic. If anything, she took her as demonic. As far as she's concerned, she "ain't got no friends take a handsaw to their own children" (221).

Baby Suggs held on for love, but I don't think she understood. Or she may have understood, but in a different sense. If anyone there could understand where Sethe was coming from, it was Baby Suggs--but she was at Sweet Home when it was still relatively sweet--before the Schoolteacher came, before life went to hell in a hand basket. Baby Suggs wasn't there as Sethe was milked. Baby Suggs wasn't there. Baby Suggs couldn't really understand killing the already crawling? baby to keep her from the Schoolteacher. Baby Suggs was separated from all her children except Halle, she never truly had the connection Sethe had developed with her children. Paul D. was right, you must love small, other wise life becomes unbearable.

But Sethe. Sethe must have been, in at least some manner, heroic. She killed what she loved most to keep them from worse.

Denver though--she was the most heroic to me. She was constantly slighted--almost given the "short end of the stick" as it were. When Paul D. came, Sethe turned from Denver to Paul D. When Beloved came, Beloved cared not for Denver, but for Sethe. Eventually, Sethe seemed to care not for Denver (or even Paul D.), but for Beloved. Only Beloved. Despite this, maybe in spite of this, Denver continued to care for Sethe and Beloved. She stepped out into the community to ask for help. She searched for work. So they might eat. So they might live.

In Which The Stranger is Concerned

In many ways, Mersault is a heroic antihero.
>He is unconcerned about his role in a warrior society, despite the fact he killed the Arab.
>He has absolutely no desire to be recognized (In the beginning of the trial, he realizes "Usually people didn't pay much attention to me. It took some doing on my part to understand that I was the cause of all the excitement"(83)).
>Mersault does not care about immortality.
>Nor does he feel particularly worthy and peruse what he does best.
>Obviously, he is unaffected by a desire to not loose face or honor (seeing as he is relatively undisturbed by his-murdering-someone-and-ensuing-trial).

But yet, near the end, he does manage to reach a state of heroism, even by the classical code.
>By the end, the does desire to be recognized, if only to the extent "for a large crowd of spectators...[to] greet me with cries of hate"(123).
>He finds his place in a warrior society--if not as a warrior, in "the gentle interference of the world" wherein he finds inner peace, a solace.

Mersault also reaches a kind-of-heroism beyond the traditional definition:
>He reaches a state of understanding, almost of reconciliation. He realizes that "So close to death, Maman must have felt free then and ready to live it all again. Nobody, nobody had the right to cry over her" (122).
>He refuses to lie throughout the entire story. Whether it be conscious or unconscious, it is there nonetheless. I believe it is conscious—stemming from his realization that "none of it really mattered" (41). This requires a sort of bravery, even if it is buffered by a nonchalant attitude.
>His consistency is also very commendable. Even while in jail, though he is affected, his personality does not range, like Raymond's does.

I also feel Marie is over looked. She seems to have a much stronger personality and be much less fickle than portrayed. As far as we know (it can be inferred as such), she remains true to Mersault even after he a) kills someone b) is put in jail c) remains in jail d) goes through trial and e) is sentenced to death. She visits him in jail and attends his trial. He discounts her quickly by assuming she was now offering herself to "another Mersault." Marie is extremely brave to have held on that long—I don't think any of us (at least me) would have held it against her if she'd jumped ship after Mersault killed the Arab, let alone after contact was cut off while he was in jail. I also think this answers a question about love. Although it doesn't matter if it's there or not (according to Mersault), love is here. Otherwise, how could she have gone through this for a condemned man? I feel that love is ever present, whether it is detected or not; "to me she was Marie" (99).

In Which The Metamorphosis is Concerned

Hmmm....the Hero in The Metamorphosis. An interesting idea.

I did not actually pick out any of the characters as being particularly heroic, or heroic at all. I was a big fan of Grete, Gregor's sister, until she turned around and decided that Gregor was not Gregor and was the source of all their problems.

I suppose the father could be a sort of hero. Due to his new circumstances, he pulls himself up and away from his easy life at home and pushes himself back into the world of work, and suceeds. He places his entire being and soul into his new position and constantly tries to do what is best for his family.

In a way, that is more heroic than the knight in shining armor riding off to save the poor princess from the dragon...

In Which The Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man is Concerned

Heroism in The Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man...

There doesn't appear to be what one would label as classic "heroism" in The Artist. No flashing swords. No dangerous fights for honor. No dragons. Yet, despite the fact that a) this was not my favorite book (not my least favorite, but not my favorite), and b) Stephen is in many ways similar to Shawn who I tore apart in my last post on Playboy of the Western World, Stephen does manage to pull of a spout of heroism.

No, Stephen does not appear to search for his identity and role in being part of a warrior society. But he does fulfill other parts of the heroic code. It is indisputable that he follows what he does best--his writing. Through his writing Stephen fulfills other parts of the heroic code: the desire to be recognized and persuing excellence.

Actually, come to think of it, he does search for his identity and role in being part of a warrior society. That is the entire focus point of the book, Stephen searching for who he is and where he belongs in his society of competition, fear, and others and thier perceptions of the world. Throughout the story he hids behind masks: reckless and completely the church, devoted beyond belief, nonchalant, and finally he appears to come into his own. He eventually becomes comfortable with who he is, and no longer needs to prove himself to anyone. Not the deans at school. Not his friends. Not his father. He develops his own sense of the world, and expressing how he sees it.

Wild spring. Scudding clouds. O life! Dark stream of swirling bogwater on which apple trees have cast down their delicate flowers.

In Which the Phrase from The Playboy of the Western World is Concerned

I realized I forgot to address a certain phrase...

Act Three. Page 108. A little bit farther than halfway down the page. Christy is tied up.

Shawn: I'm afeard of him. [To Pegeen] Lift a lighted sod, will you, and scorch his leg.

This epitomizes Shawn. His timid, cowardly side, yet though he is afraid of being hurt himself, he feels no qualms about inflicting pain on another. He seems to be a proper Catholic, but does not observe love thy neighbor as thyself...

Is this why he is so un-heroic??? His inability to forgive, that his greatest strength and trait (his Catholicism) becomes his greatest fault (his inability to follow it completely). He appears to be completely devoted, but does not follow it to the greatest extent in his ability.

So maybe instead of criticizing staunch Catholicism, as I thought yesterday, maybe Synge is criticizing those who claim to be staunch Catholics, but truly aren't. He's criticizing the opposites of what they say and what they actually do.

In Which The Playboy of the Western World is Concerned

Heroism and The Playboy of the Western World by J.M. Synge

I believe it is generally agreed that Shawn is as un-heroic as it gets. He's cowardly, falls short of his word, and is hypocritical as well. *shudders* I tried to like him, truly, I did. But it didn't work. What does this say about Synge's perception of Shawn and similar staunch Cathloics?? I can't find what Synge's religion was, but was was interested in Darwin, so maybe Shawn is his way of going against the staunch Cathloics? Wouldn't this cause issues in Ireland where they fought against the Church of England and Protastantism for Cathloicism?

Christy, despite my inherent dislike of the fellow, follows many of the elements of the heroic code. He finds/attempts to find his place in society, wants to be recognized, persues prizes, fame, etc.; nor does he want to loose face/honor, at least in Pegeen's eyes. Yet I have difficulty seeing Christy as a hero. The comentary states that "the likes of Christy Mahon are appropriate contemporary heroes rather than the truly heroic figures from Ireland's past" (22).

In Which King Lear is Concerned

Heroism in King Lear:

I think it depends on personal taste in this case--who one qualifies as a hero and who one does not. Thus, I will attempt to base my determinations off of the "Heroic Code," which can be found on Mr. Trotter's website in regards to Greek Mythology. Here (hopefully) is a direct link to the document: http://arapahoe.littletonpublicschools.net/Portals/7/Language%20Arts/Trotter/Myth/HeroicElementsr.pdf

My personal favorite character is Albany. He is not inflicted by hubris and does not "want to loose face or honor." He ignores pressure to fight for his interests (how to exploit and get the most land and money possible) as many other characters are. Albany pursues prizes, but maybe not in the traditional sense. He is not worries about fame or money, but instead prizes respect, love, and loyalty. He makes peace with himself and finds his "identity and role in being part of a warrior society."

Edgar is possibly one of the most "heroic" heroes in Lear. He meets many (if not all) of the qualifications under the Heroic Code. I personally have issues with the idea that one must "Pursue prizes, fame, and a division of spoils" to be a hero. This can have both positive and negative connotations, but I tend to identify more immediately the negative. However, he does "pursue...fame." A division of spoils for Edgar that he seeks is recognition that it was not he, Edgar, who committed dastardly deeds--a clearing of his name.

Even, in a way, Edmund qualifies as a hero. Although he does not meet all elements of the heroic code (he doesn't seem too concerned with loosing his "face or honor"), he does meet others, such as finding his "place in a warrior society", "desiring to be recognized", and a "quest for immortality" (which can be interpreted as power, as power=ability to make impact (positive or negative)=being remembered (good or bad)=a form of immortality). He definitely pursues prizes, fame, and a division of the spoils (ok...he wants all the spoils). Edmund is, in a way, the antihero.

Thus, King Lear seems to epitomize the classical hero, one who knows where they belong in a warrior society (generally being a warrior himself), desires to be recognized and immortal, values face and honor, follows what he does best as well as the spoils and fame, and attempts to follow the heroic code. The women are generally depicted as being corrupt and non-heroic, except for Cordelia, who is extremely static. Thus, sheroes are a non-issue. I couldn't help but notice that the heroic code is geared towards males.

Whould the heroic code be different for girls??

Then...did Shakespeare, or those in the Elizabethan era, value classicalism, or at least traditional values such as face, honor, the strife of excellence?

In Which Christopher Columbus is Concerned

I was reading an article on Christopher Columbus, or, more accurately, Columbus Day and the representation of Columbus throughout different schools. Some schools are still teaching the wonderful, romanticized

"Columbus discovered America in 1492
With three small ships and a very brave crew,
He found this land for me and you!

Columbus discovered America in 1492
With the Nina, the Pinta, the Santa Maria
He found this land for me and you!"

(What I was taught in kindergarten). But other schools are teaching the definitely darker side of Columbus. The diseases. The stealing of gold. The marauding of resources. The like. In fact, one school even held Columbus on "trial," and he was condemned to life in prison.

I found it interesting. The last line of the article, a quote from Felipe Fernandez-Armesto, sums it up justly:

"Heroism and villainy are just two sides of the same coin."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33266425/ns/us_news-education//

In Which Sheroes are Concerned

I have been reading an anthology on Girls in myths around the world and will probably add various other posts related to this:

I noticed that many of the girls (sheroes) prevail not in physically awesome deeds like Hercules (although some do), most are instead heroic due to their persistence and wit and ability to learn.

Many of us became aware of the "original" version of Little Red Riding Hood in American Literature (The cute little fairy tale became a story to keep girls from sleeping with strange men). Yet, even that version is not the most original. The oldest the editor could find had what we were told, but more. In the end, Little Red Riding Hood is traveling yet again to her Grandmother's when a wolf attempts to stop her. She keeps going to her Grandmother's house, where she tells her Grandmother about the wolf. They prepare themselves with an axe and other weapons. When the Wolf arrives, they kill him themselves. The girls learn from their first experience and save themselves the second time.

There are many stories of the sheroe finding herself in an unenviable position and using her brain and wit to get out of the situation, and often finds herself in a better place than when she started.

Thus, it leaves one to wonder...are the qualities of a HERO different from a SHEROE? Are they different because of perceived differences? or do they hold true in life. That due to actual differences between men and women, they use what comes naturally to them to do what must be done?

In Which a Free Reading Book Shall be Attempted to be Analyzed

I recently read Impossible by Nancy Werlin. In short (hopefully) it is about a girl who lives with a foster family due to her crazy/mad mother. Lucy Scarborough goes to prom for the first time and is date raped (very out of character of her boyfriend who promptly commits suicide). Her best friend from childhood, Zach, comes to live with her and her family for the summer. They find out through her mother's (the mad one) diaries that it is a family curse for the girl to become pregnant at 18 (or 17), and upon the birth of her child (always a daughter), they go mad. The only way to stop this cycle is to perform the tasks in the "Scarborough Fair" song, including making a seamless shirt, finding an acre of land between the salt and the sea, plowing it with a goats horn and sowing it with a single grain of sand. The curse was implemented due to unrequited love by the "Elfin Knight" who also constantly thwarts any attempt to break it. Throughout the book Lucy and Zach (who fall in love and end up getting married half way through) and her family attempt to figure out how to break the curse before her daughter is born.

There appears to be many different types of heroes/sheroes within Impossible. There are the failed sheroes, the previous generations of Scarborough Girls. Lucy's foster parents are strong and end up helping to make a seamless shirt (home made felt on a dummy). There is also Lucy, the main sheroe, and Zach, the main hero.

Werlin emphasizes the importance of working together-the us rather than me. The previous girls did not have the support Lucy had and tended to be on their own attempting the "impossible" tasks, beginning the theory of madness and weak minds, which carried through the generations. However, Lucy is able to succeed with the help of her family, friends, and Zach.

Thus, there appears to be no one, individual hero, but rather a group that together creates and embodies the hero.

Does this imply then, that our society values the team rather than the individual accomplishment? We prefer to honor many rather than one? Or is it that we do not have confidence in the individual?

Ohh! Is it that when we do have confidence in the individual, we ask too much of them, and they fail, like the Scarborough girls did. That modern hero-requiring-acts-of-awesomeness actually require many to be completed?

Hmm...

In Which We (ok...I) Attempt to Begin

By putting bread, gold, horse, apple, or the very roads into a myth, we do not retreat from reality: we rediscover it. As long as the story lingers in our mind, the real things are more themselves."
-C.S. Lewis from The Dethronement of Power
(an essay on J.R.R Tolkien's Lord of the Rings)

Stories, tales, legends, fantasies--they define reality. Without them, we are nothing.

Myths breathe life into existence--they teach us what we are, who we are, why we are. They tell tales of old, of days gone by when bravery was status quo, and the only thing that mattered was honor. They speak of heroes, treasure, danger, greed, pride, and where there be dragons. They tell us the way life should be lived.

The myths that surround us define who we are. Our flights in imagination are journeys of self discovery. Through our fantasies, our personalized myths, we discover what we truly value in life.

Therefore, how does the role of the hero/sheroe change throughout culture, and what does that say about the society a) about which the piece was written, or, b) about the period during which the piece was written?

Oedipus, in Oedipus Rex, is seen initially as the hero of Thebes--he saves them from the Sphinx. However, after Thebes becomes cursed due to Oedipus and his killing-his-father-and-sleeping-with-his-mother issue, the true hero comes out. He is so disgusted with himself and what he has done that he blinds himself, so never to judge a "sightless" man again. He also continues his self-imposed universal hatred and exile. That he is seen in the middle as being irrational and rash only solidifies his heroic act of continuing his self-imposed exile. This shows his true mettle...that he stands by his word and is unafraid to stand by his honor.

Within The Shipping News by Annie Proulx, Quoyle is the sympathetic hero. He is the classic nobody, no-how, no-where. His life is a small cul-de-sac that he is incapable of escaping. By moving to the place of his ancestors, Newfoundland, he turns his life around and becomes (almost) all the reader hopes for. Through The Shipping News, Proulx reveals her values of standing for one's self, family, beliefs, and honor. Quoyle learns about his (less than flattering)family history and about those he is surrounded by. Through his new friends, like his boss/father-figure Jack, he learns about what "Newfoundlanders" value. And thus, he shapes his life anew.

Through my own personal flights of imagination, my heroes/sheroes embody (often) that which I whish I had. Everything from hand-eye coordination to bravery and non-chicken-ness. During one period of reality hitting fast and furious all around, I convinced that it was self-failing. I have since come to believe that it is instead how we define ourselves...at least how we feel we should be. And through this, our culture (self, community, national, world, etc.) can be derived.

"The value of the myth is that it takes all the things we know and restores to them the rich significance which has been hidden by "the veil of familiarity."
-C.S. Lewis from The Dethronement of Power

(an essay on J.R.R Tolkien's Lord of the Rings)

In Which We Concern The Big Question:

Don, don, DON!! *ominous music plays in the background*

Ideas:
>Mythology...
>>>How is bravery viewed and portrayed? What does this say about the culture a) about which the piece was written, or, b) about the time/values during which the piece was written?
>>>Do the attributes of a hero remain the same over time? (From http://www.greece.k12.ny.us/instruction/ela/6-12/Essential%20Questions/heroes&sheroes.htm )
>>>What is the role of a hero or "sheroe" (coined by Maya Angelou) in a culture? (From http://www.greece.k12.ny.us/instruction/ela/6-12/Essential%20Questions/heroes&sheroes.htm )
>>>When does a positive personality trait become a tragic flaw? (From http://www.greece.k12.ny.us/instruction/ela/6-12/Essential%20Questions/heroes&sheroes.htm )
>How are cultural ideals seen through literature and how does it change?
>How is love viewed?
>What compromises are made/why? What is required for a compromise?
>The order of chaos...how even when there appears to be no reason or sense, there is an order.
>How is "happiness" viewed and pursued/achieved?
>What is "success" and how is it defined, viewed, and pursued?

To be (or not to be) continued...THAT is the Big Question...