Voltaire and Saunders

     Upon reading In Persuasion Nation, I was reminded of one of the great satirists, Voltaire, and especially his most famous work, Candide.  If you have not read it (I highly reccomend it), the book is on the whole a critique of Leibniz' optimistic philosophy which was very popular around the time.  The story centers around the title character, and follows him through trials and tribulations throughout the world, and his journey away from his naivete at the beginning.  He encounters many horrible events, as well as his lover, Cunegonde, and rest of the characters in the story.  It was the biting satirical attack mixed with hyperbolic violence which really made the connection.  Voltaire parodied the Seven Years' War, religious hypocrisy, blind optimism, aristocracy, and just about everything relevant to the time; Saunders parodies commercialism, the modern lack of sympathy, hypocrisy, and everything else relevant to our time.  

     In "Brad Carrigan, American," Saunders makes fun of American television programming, with its increasingly stupid and mean qualities, especially reality television and sitcoms, while also proving important points about these shows' impacts on society.  The most important of television programs for this is the news, which shows petty fashion trends in the US and suffering around the globe to reinforce American pride and contentment.  "In Persuasion Nation," deals with the increased commercialism in American culture, as well as the increasing violence and absurdity in commercials.  This is very important when applied to American culture, and their mutual influences.  The violence depicted is somewhat akin to Candide, though the latter is completely based in our world, not a fictional commercial or television world we view.  

     Voltaire makes many of the same critiques Saunders does, for one, that we need more compassion, but also that it is imperative that we try to understand what is happening around the world, and to know the world.  While the end of Candide calls for this, as well as simplicity for happy living, this idea seems present in Saunders' work, for example, with Timmy and the gameboy.  Voltaire wants us to know the world, and Saunders wants to make it better.  In this way the authors have similar, but slightly different aims.  However, I still think they are connected, and I do not believe it was an accident that Voltaire himself is a character in "In Persuasion Nation," but perhaps a nod from one great satirist to another.

Some Notes on Lahiri

     I thoroughly enjoyed the stories by Jhumpa Lahiri we read in class, mostly because of their realism and relatability, not to mention the well-constructed plots.  I thought that what she wrote flowed naturally, and built well to the end.  To me, what the stories were, was a series of portraits of real life, and what people encountered.  (For whatever reason I thought "A Real Durwan" and "The Treatment of Bibi Haldar" were more fantastical.)  In my opinion, she portrayed life as it is, and explored events and concepts which many people face, among them death, love, infidelity, ostracization, homesickness, tradition, and immigration/moving.

     One thing worthy of note in the stories is that often, the adults are involved in the academic world, and this is the reason they left their homeland.  This middle-class, academic household is probably the most similar to the average Uni student's situation than anything we read in this semester.  Beside that, the stories are relatable because of the strength in their characters, and the similarity between them and actual life.  It is easy to find empathy with the characters, and many of us will face similar situations.  Who has not felt homesick like Mrs. Sen, albeit to a lesser degree?  I liked the stories because of this, their relatability.

     However, it is easy for a portrayal of real life to become boring, but I did not find that with Lahiri. I think this was because of the subtle choice of wording, and also the well-structured plots.  There is much that is easy to miss, such as Mr. Kapasi's disapproval/judgment in the titular story which we discussed in class.  Then, the way the stories were built was traditional but effective: a few hints and some foreshadowing, leading to a climax and quick denouement.  Most of the stories follow this, and many have "happy" endings, like "When Mr. Pirzada Came to Dine" and "The Third and Final Continent."  This also helped make the stories more enjoyable.

   In conclusion, I liked Lahiri's stories because of the accurate portrayal of the human experience.  I appreciated the way she was able to make the ordinary extraordinary, (similar to Nicholson Baker in The Mezzanine, for those who took 20th Century Novel) and her portrayal of human life.  I am very impressed with her ability for this.  This made me appreciate the last story, "The Third and Final Continent" even more, and especially its philosophy on the extraordinary ordinariness of people's lives, and I especially liked the closing line-- "As ordinary as it all appears, there are times when it is beyond my imagination"--a very healthy approach on life.  In short, I liked Lahiri's work because it was accurate to life.

Bilingualism in Salinger and Diaz

Probably the most definitive characteristic of Junot Diaz's writing is the combination of English and Spanish which he uses.  It helps set the scene for his work, and the culture in which it takes place.  I remembered that another author used phrases in another language in their writing: Salinger, in "De Daumier-Smith's Blue Period."  However, the mix of languages is very different in Salinger.

In Drown, Diaz launches us into a bilingual world right away.  As I said before, this helps solidify the setting, and cultural background in the story.  One way he achieves this is by not italicizing the Spanish words, which keeps them from popping out of the texture.  In addition, he adds enough context around the word to allow the reader to infer the meaning in many cases.  Lastly, he uses many of the Spanish words repeatedly, and refrains from using their English counterparts.  This creates a mix between the two languages, and flows very well.  It is a bit like Diaz invites us to his characters' world, to make us better understand their stories.  I think Diaz uses the mix of languages for these reasons--to solidify the setting, and to help us indentify us with the characters.

In "De Daumier-Smith's Blue Period," Salinger writes the story through the point of view of a young artist, John Smith.  He is definitely narcissistic, as evidenced by his painting of seventeen self  portraits.  He also considers himself to be high-class and sophisticated.  He continually makes up stories, and some people in class called him a pathological liar, a diagnosis of which I do not disapprove.  He grew up in the United States and Paris, where he started his career, and learned French.  He applies to work at a correspondent school for art in Montreal, and concocts a story about knowing Picasso and being related to Honore Daumier.  He accepts the position, and moves there for the summer.  However, whenever he wants to distance himself from a "lower-class" person he uses French.  This is well-summed up in the following scene, an altercation with a man on the bus:

   
      "All right, buddy," he said, "let's move that ass." It was the "buddy," I think, that did it. Without even bothering to bend over a little--that is, to keep the conversation at least as private, as de bon gout, as he'd kept it--I informed him, in French, that he was a rude, stupid, overbearing imbecile, and that he'd never know how much I detested him. Then, rather elated, I stepped to the rear of the vehicle.

In this excerpt, Salinger's character speaks in French, and also denounces the people who are not in his social rank by using the French language.

In these ways, these two authors use a combination with English in very different ways.  In Diaz, we are welcomed into the story, and in Salinger, the languages are meant to divide between classes.  

References in Lorrie Moore

     One thing that I noticed about Lorrie Moore's writing (aside from the different narrative styles), was the great number of cultural references in her stories, and their signification in context of the story.  In class, we talked about the copy of Madame Bovary in the Doris Day biography jacket and how it mirrors the the plot in "How to Be an Other Woman."  Often times they are used to emphasize a point, or to emphasize the setting.  The two stories this features most prominently in are "How to Talk to You Mother (Notes)" and "Amahl and the Night Visitors: a Guide to the Tenor of Love."

     In "How to Talk to Your Mother (Notes)," Moore intersperses events in the narrator's life with historical events.  Some of them are used to tell parallel stories, such as the development of cardiac surgery.  This is very important to the story, given that the narrator's father had died due to complications from a heart attack.  Other than this there are many references to historical events, like "The Bicentennial" (85), "Nixon wins by a landslide" (89), or "Mankind leaps upon the moon" (90).  Often the references seem irrelevant, but sometimes there is a slight connection.  The last time the narrator talks of a romantic relationship is in the same year Carter lost to Reagan, and the narrator "distributed donuts and brochures for Carter" (85).  But, in 1945, the narrator's brother becomes distant, and the narrator mentions the atomic bombing of Nagasaki.  However, these references help to solidify the time period presented in the story, and the passage of time.

     In "Amahl and the Night Visitors,"  the narrator's boyfriend, Moss, often alludes to operas when he talks with her.  The references also serve to differentiate the narrator from Moss and his friends.  At the dinner party, the singers mock and deride Amahl and the Night Visitors, when the narrator appears to like it.  The narrator says, "She uses words like verismo, messa di voce, Montserrat Caballe" (103).  These are all terms related to opera and singing.  (Montserrat Caballe is an opera singer).  The narrator is not familiar with these terms, and feels out of place.  Then, the narrator says, "to me, La Boheme's just a lot of scarves" (104).  This further divides the groups.   One more subtle detail is the repeated mention of Dionne Warwick songs on the part of the narrator.  Dionne Warwick was a popular singer, not classical.  This shows the use of references to divide the narrator and her boyfriend.

   In these stories, we see Lorrie Moore uses references for many different purposes, with the main ones being to separate characters, or to cement the setting.  This is one very interesting feature of her work--the carefully chosen references to enhance the stories.

Baldwin and Music

     One thing I noticed about the stories was the prevalence of music in many of them.  In these stories, it is a powerful force, capable of inducing a wide range of emotion in the characters.  From "The Outing" to "Previous Condition" and "Sonny's Blues," music plays a direct role in many of the scenes.  First, let us start with "The Outing."

     In "The Outing," we see a Pentecostal revival.  The saints, after a few testimonies, begin to dance and sing.  The experience is summed up in the following quote: "and someone cried aloud, a timeless sound of wailing; fire splashed the open deck and filled the doors and bathed the sinners standing there" (49).  Roy joins in, and Johnnie is profoundly alienated, "summoning all his forces, to save him from this frenzy" (50).  Though Baldwin never says it, music must have a role in this "frenzy," as it is not described until after the saints start singing and dancing.  This is the only story in which the music itself is not described.  It is also the only story in which music plays a negative role; the frenzy it produced was a bad experience for Johnnie.

    In "Previous Condition," music has a very different effect.  Peter reminisces on his experience with music: "When I first heard the Messiah I was alone; my blood bubbled like fire and wine; I cried; like an infant crying for its mother’s milk; or a sinner running to meet Jesus" (90). Baldwin describes the music very beautifully before this. This shows the power the music can have on the character. Later, in the bar, he mentions that he does not like the "brassy and commercial" music, and mentions that Ella Fitzgerald is playing after that. (100). Other than this, the music is treated very positively in this story.

     "Sonny's Blues" has a long section on music, including how Sonny learns to play.  The narrator seems to look down on jazz at first, and seems to blame Sonny's addiction on it in part, or at least link the two.  However, once he hears Sonny play, he is finally able to understand what Sonny has been suffering.  "I heard what he had gone through, and would continue to go through until he came to rest in earth" (140).  The music allow the narrator to come to terms with the losses he has faced in his life.       I saw my mother's face again, and felt, for the first time, how the stones of the road she had                 walked on must have bruised her feet.  I saw the moonlit road where my father's brother died.             And it brought something else back to me, and carried me past it, I saw my little girl again and           felt Isabel's tears again, and I felt my own tears begin to rise. (140).
Though the narrator realizes his problems will remain, he has an escape, and had a profound experience from hearing his brother play.  This experience is what starts the relationship between the brothers again.

In Baldwin's stories so far, music had often had a large part in the experiences of the characters.  Baldwin writes about the music with great precision and accuracy, something not many writers can do.  This is one thing that makes his stories very enjoyable: the catalyst-like effect music has on the characters.

Et exspecto resurrectionem mortuorum

     Death and what follows it has been prominent in the Salinger stories we read, mainly in "Teddy" and "A Perfect Day for Bananafish."  Many times in literature and in life,  death is sad, or perceived as an end to something.  Contrarily, in Salinger's story "Teddy," it is treated much more softly, almost with indifference, if not some kind of serene acceptance.  This may seem odd without the spiritual context of the story, for many people have different religious backgrounds which influence their life, and, in the case of authors, their work.  What is so interesting about this work is the Zen Buddhist and Hindu influence, instead of Judeo-Christian influence, or agnostic or atheist influence, which would be more typical in American authors up to this point.  Through this influence, death is nothing to fear, as people are reborn after death, or achieve Enlightenment.  Teddy speaks a little about this in the story.  He says the professors "are still pretty afraid to die...It's so silly...all you do is get the heck out of your body when you die.  My gosh, everybody's done it thousands and thousands of times" (193).  In this way, death is nothing to fear, as people have done it many times, and leads to another life.

This is what Teddy means when he says people "wake up"--they die to be reborn into another person.  Though, some vestige of their former life remains, as Teddy says, "I wouldn't have had to get incarnated into an American body if I hadn't met that lady" (188).  He says itis difficult to lead a spiritual life in America, and many people find it silly.  This suggests some sort of discipline after his relationship with the woman, which caused him to stop meditating.  Other than this, there seem to be no bad aspects to death in the story, except the pain it causes those close to the deceased.

In this way, death is not scary.  This helps alleviate the story's jarring ending, with Booper presumably pushing Teddy into the empty pool, and softens Seymour's suicide.  I wonder if Salinger ever thought of these characters' next lives, or even wrote anything about it.  It would be interesting to find out.  Some people may not have liked the philosophical and religious aspect of "Teddy," but I did, because it was so different from other works I have read.  This makes for a very compelling story, even if a 10-year-old dies at the end--we know that he is somewhere else, either in Enlightenment, or in another body.

Set-up Seymour

In A Perfect Day for Bananafish, the reader has an introductory scene of dialogue between an woman (Muriel) and her mother.  Muriel is staying with her husband at an upscale resort in Florida.  The mother is worried about her daughter, and what might happen because of her eccentric husband, Seymour.  Salinger sets us up to think that Seymour is some kind of monster, or at least highly unstable.  He does this through short phrases in the dialogue that hint at Seymour's history.

The first way Salinger does this is by having the mother repeatedly ask, "Are you okay?," when we know that Muriel has been married to Seymour for quite some time.  The repetition shows the mother's concern, which sets up our thoughts of Seymour.  The first example to appear is the mother's worry about Seymour's driving, along with the part about the "trees."  It seems Seymour had fairly recently crashed Muriel's family's car because he wanted to see the trees.  Muriel's mother then talks about her consultation with a psychiatrist, which adds more to the audience's concern.  Then, the doctor's wife asked if Seymour is related to a Suzanne Glass who owned a millinery--a hat-making shop.  The glue used to bind hats together was toxic, and prolonged exposure to it had many side effects, including mental ones.  This is where the term "mad hatter" originates, and is another subtle hint on Salinger's part.  Then the mother mentions something about "Granny's chair" and they talk about Seymour wearing his bathrobe on the beach.

All this makes the reader quite concerned for Sybil.  However, the scene can be read as partially confirming our suspicions, with Seymour having malicious intent.  This can be supported in spots when her calls her "my love" or when he kisses her foot.  However, it is also possible to read the scene as him playing innocently with a little kid. (The foot-kiss is still pretty sketchy though.)  In reading this way, we see Seymour as detached from adult society, so he seeks the company of children possibly to re-live his childhood.  Also, when read this way, the reader sees Salinger's set-up monster as a very troubled person.  The introduction takes on a different meaning that way.  I think this is one thing that makes the story interesting, that Salinger sets the reader up thinking that Seymour is a monster, but then shows him to be a very troubled individual.  This makes his suicide at the ending all the more tragic.

Closure

As we have been reading the stories in The Things They Carried, the narrator's reliability has been outright dismissed in the book itself.  This has caused a strong reaction among many people in the class, for reasons I completely understand.  However, this has done little to change my opinion of the book; I have no qualms about the fact that there is no way to be certain of the facticity of what we are reading.

O'Brien has written a work of fiction, which he declared at the beginning of the book.  We have no way of knowing whether or not events in the stories took place.  The book is dedicated to real people who served in the military with O'Brien, and share the names of the characters in the book.  What it appears O'Brien has done is this: he used events and people from the Vietnam War to tell stories, and played with the facticity to make the stories better.  Some could claim this is disrespectful to the people who died, but O'Brien created a false persona for himself in the book: he has no daughter in real life, but the narrator does.  In his view, he is making the stories more "true"--an opinion I agree with.  The stories are true to the experiences of the soldiers in Vietnam, as we are led to believe.  I think this was one of his goals, and he achieved it.  He represented the psychological, and physical effects the war carried on those involved.We can reconcile his treatment of fact, and certain people's memory by the book being fiction, and its achievement in this respect of "truth.

I think there was one more reason O'Brien wrote the stories, and he talks about it in "The Lives of the Dead."  In writing the stories, he reanimates the people he lost--and has a little bit more time to spend with them.  This justifies, in my mind, any wrongdoing on his part.

This book has been very different from others in that the narrator challenges his own credibility.  This can be very disturbing, causing some to wonder what is fact, but still, all the stories are true, in O'Brien's sense of the word. This is part of what made the book so compelling.  It didn't matter what happened, if any of it did, or if all of it did.  O'Brien wrote an incredibly powerful work, and so, I am not bothered by the details.