The School-Donald Barthelme

           I have to say I really love this story. Even though it is dark and pretty disturbing I think it says a lot about education in America and the human condition in general. “The School” begins with the speaker, who we later learn is named Edgar, discussing all of the things that have died in his class with an unidentified listener. Everything from trees and animals to parents and even members of the class has died leaving this group of students with many questions. Their questions are generally only answered when the cause of death is evident to Edgar, their teacher. These simple answers do not satisfy the class, and they continue to prod Edgar for answers about the meaning and value of life.

            So, let’s talk about Edgar. This may just be how I read it, but his tone seems to come of as very indifferent. All of these things that die around him have no effect on his demeanor. He looks for the simplest solution as to why something dies and that is that. His attitude toward the death of all things, people, plants, and animals is the same. He doesn’t offer the children any solutions or concrete information on death and dying. From an educational standpoint he doesn’t take any of the opportunities the children give him for “teaching moments”. It is almost as if he is afraid to get into any deep discussion with the students who clearly crave that information and knowledge.

            Truthfully, I’m still not quite sure what I think about the children in this story. From an educational standpoint I see how their teacher fails them, but I don’t think that is the only meaning Barthelme had in mind when he wrote this story. Obviously they are deprived of answers to their questions, and seek to find meaning about life. This makes me wonder if maybe the children represent all people. We are always looking for the answers to questions that may not necessarily have concrete answers. Because children tend to be the most inquisitive of all human beings I can see why they would be used to represent that notion. In the mean time the adults in the story seem to have given up hope in searching for answers, and refuse to discuss the nagging question that plagues all people. What is the meaning of life?

            I can’t wait for class tomorrow, because I think this work could definitely lead to one of our best discussions so far. That may just be me though… :)

A Silver Dish- Saul Bellow

            “A Silver Dish” by Saul Bellow is about a man named Woody Selbst’s love for his father and his family. In the story Woody’s father, Morris, has recently died. Woody spends much of the story reminiscing about his past, and considering the role his father played in his life.

            Much of this story reminded me of Huck Finn, but the character that most resonated with me was Woody’s father Morris, or Pop as Woody calls him. This man reminded me very much of of “Pap”. Morris, just like Pap, was a thief, liar, gambler, cheat, and all around conman. He didn’t think twice about taking his own son’s savings and leaving him and the rest of the family on welfare. After Morris gets Woody kicked out of Seminary he maintains that he did him a favor.  He tells Woody “It was too strange a life. That life wasn’t you, Woody” (page 10).

            All of this considered I thought it was interesting how successful Woody had managed to become. Through his tile company Woody is able to take care of each member of his family. He even travels to many places like Japan, Istanbul, and Kenya. Woody is in essence a very selfless man. Unlike Huck Finn, Woody clearly has a love for his father. He takes care of him down to his final moments. I think the final paragraph on page 10 gives a very good explanation of why Woody loves his father so much.

I think if Huck Finn had an alternate ending where Huck grows up, he would be very similar to Woody Selbst. Woody never denies the fact that he probably very similar to his father. Instead, he accepts that fact and tries to take as good of care of his family as he can. 

Howl Allen Ginsberg

This poem in was a fascinating read, to say the least. After reading it twice I still feel like there are a lot of things I’ve missed. I’m having flash backs to “The Wasteland”.  I’m going to try to piece together what I did understand for this blog.

In the first section of this poem Ginsberg is discussing all of the people who he believes were the “best minds of his generation”. These people are far from anything mainstream society would consider “good”. In the second section Ginsberg describes a creature named Moloch, who (according to my computer’s dictionary) was “a Canaanite idol to whom children were fed”. I assume from my reading that Moloch is what has created these people that Ginsberg discusses in the first section. In the third section the speaker of the poem identifies with someone named Carl Solomon. I see this as Ginsberg’s way of identifying with all of the people mentioned in the first section. I did research Carol Solomon, and I found that he and Ginsberg met while they were both being treated in a mental institution in New York.

In many ways this poem reminds me of “Song of Myself” by Walt Whitman. Ginsberg paints a picture of various individuals, and then seems to say that he identifies with all of them. And that he shares their experiences, just like he shares the experience of being locked in a mental hospital with Carl Solomon. All of these people make up the world that Ginsberg resides in; therefore they are more real to him than the dysfunctional society that created them. Just like Whitman identified with the runaway slave, Ginsberg relates to the destitute, the drug addicts, and even the pedophiles. Both of these poets also seem to be pointing out the flaws in the system that runs our society. 

Harrison Bergeron

            First off I’d just like to say that these 20^th century authors are really starting to make me depressed. I’m seriously going to need a Prozac prescription before the semester ends. :D

            In all seriousness, I have enjoyed our readings this week even though they’ve been particularly dark. “Harrison Bergeron” was no exception either. In this work, by Kurt Vonnegut Jr., all people in the year 2081 are mandated by constitutional amendments to be completely equal to one another. If someone is different either mentally or physically they are forced to wear devices that “handicap” them and make them normal like everyone else. Then entire story is seen from the perspective of George and Hazel Bergeron. Their very intellectually and physically gifted son, Harrison, has been arrested for plotting to over throw the government. Eventually the “Handicapper General” kills Harrison, and his parents do not even realize what has happened.

            I find this story very interesting because it points out the flaws in this plan for a perfect and equal society. In the government’s attempt to make everyone “the same” they really just accentuate their differences. All of these handicapping devices on people bring attention to the fact that the individuals in the story are more beautiful, stronger, or more intelligent than everyone else. For example, just before one of the ballerinas begins to read the bulletin about Harrison the narrator states “She must have been extraordinarily beautiful, because the mask she wore was hideous”. This proves that even though the woman is forced to wear an ugly mask, everyone still knows she is beautiful.

            It makes me think of what we are often taught in education about treating everyone the same or as equals. In reality we are not all equal and we are certainly not all the same. Our differences should be celebrated not pushed aside by some politically correct colorblind mentality.

The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber

            The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber was a very good story. I really enjoyed reading it, and I feel like I could write a million things about it! :) It is about a married couple, Francis and Margot Macomber, who on a hunting safari in Africa with their guide, Robert Wilson. In the beginning Francis Macomber has embarrassed himself by running a way from a lion that he was supposed to kill. Francis and his wife have an entirely dysfunctional relationship, and his embarrassment over the lion does not make things any better. After Macomber is able to redeem himself by killing two buffalo he gains back the confidence that it seems he lacked his entire life. Unfortunately, Macomber is shot by his wife shortly after, and does not live to enjoy his newfound sense of self-assurance.

            For some reason this story reminded me of another work I read in my British Literature class called “A Chance for Mr. Lever” by Graham Greene. I think the main characters in these two stories have a lot in common with one another. Both are unsure of themselves, and out on an expedition to find some kind of redemption. In the end of each of these stories, when the men finally think they’ve figured things out, they both meet an untimely demise. Ironically, both of these works were published the same year.  

            I don’t think I could write a good blog about this story without at least mentioning the absurd relationship between Mr. and Mrs. Macomber. It says on page 13 that “Margot was too beautiful for Macomber to divorce her and Macomber had too much money for Margot ever to leave him.” I think this sums up their entire relationship. Neither of them seemed to truly love, or even like, one another. Margot’s adultery proved she definitely didn’t love Macomber. I think this dysfunctional relationship really plays into much of our discussion about human connection in 20^th century writing. These two people are not connected like you would expect a married couple to be, and they certainly don’t make each other happy. They stay together for superficial reasons and that is all. In the end you are left wondering if Mrs. Macomber shot her husband on purpose or if she really was trying to stop the charging buffalo.

            I am still trying to figure out Robert Wilson’s character. Is he simply there to add commentary form an outside perspective about this American couple? Or does he play a larger role in Hemingway’s commentary on human behavior?  Personally, I think he does both. I am interested to hear what the rest of our class thinks about this story, and its fascinating characters.