American Literature II

Reading Langston Hughes poem, “Note on Commercial Theatre,” reminds me of current Hip Hop and Rap. I’ve been told that Rock has roots in black America, but to me that seemed almost impossible to imagine. I listened to rock growing up and there weren’t any black bands I knew of. I may not have been looking for it, but I certainly didn’t come across any. All the bands I knew were either predominately white or all white. I asked my 55-year-old uncle and even he hardly remembers the black bands he listened to, although he told me black artists started or helped start rock-n-roll.

In the first stanza, “You’ve taken my blues and gone-/…You sing ‘em in Hollywood Bowl/ And you fixed ‘em/So they don’t sound like me.” I’ve cut out a few lines, but this parallels a lot of the conversation I have with my friends about current rap and its future. My best friend asked me “Will our children be able to image a time with only black rappers?” This of course isn’t to say other races can’t rap, only that the erasure of its roots and vastly different opinion on rap (Hip Hop and Rap were looked down on when I was growing up) are misleading and disrespectful.

He says in the last stanza that someday, someone will write about him (whoever the speaker is). Hopefully with current music that won’t be necessary and we can find an inclusive harmony and not erasure.

Langston Hughes is a poet whose timeless words continue to speak volumes from the start of the Jazz era, which was soaked in the blues of the deep south, to today’s African diaspora. His poems are filled with a creative truth. Within the selection of poems that we had to read for class, “Song for a Dark Girl”, really stood out to me. Most of his work focuses on the perceptions and thoughts of the black men and women who endured the hardship of racism at the time. This poem is of no exception as it seemingly tells the story of a young woman who has lost her “black young lover”, most likely to lynching which was a common occurrence at the time. The poem was short, yet powerful. What stood out even more was when I read his poem, “Silhouette”, and immediately felt a connection with the two.

I started to wonder if this poem was another perspective of the event. Also, when the speaker says, “How Dixie protects its white womanhood, Southern gentle lady, Be good! Be good!”, I began to question if the lady was a white woman in “Songs for a Dark Girl”, and although the song should be for a black girl given the views at the time, that it was potentially from a young white southern lady who was in love with a young black man. Reading this poem completely threw me off into different possible scenarios of the relationship between the two poems. “Silhouette” could possibly still be about the black girl, but why mention white womanhood? Hughes poems are powerful nonetheless, as its deep words expose the soul within his work and shows how it “has grown deep like rivers.”

 

I chose to write about Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird by Stevens. The format is what stood out to me the most. There are 13 different interpretations of what a blackbird could be, represented by 13 short poems. All of these combine to make one poem. The blackbird is an ever present thing. It exists in all environments and in all forms. Sometimes the blackbird is an all seeing eye, sometimes it is an omen, sometimes it is part of you, and other times it is just a blackbird. My favorite was the 6th way to look at a blackbird stating ” The shadow of the blackbird crossed it, to and fro, The mood traced in the shadow an indecipherable cause.” This goes into Stevens belief that there is no meaning, and if there was he is blind to it. Overall I think this poem shows that there are many ways to look at one thing, wether it be an object or even an event. Everyone experiences something in their own way.13 people can look at a blackbird and see 13 different things and one person can see a blackbird in 13 different ways.

 

I was always captivated, not by the moral of Icarus’ story, but his ambition, his wanting freedom and acting on it. To me, it was never his failure, or his destructive enthusiasm, but rather his attempt that mattered. I believe that even by not actually stating it, Williams is trying to imply something similar, that it’s the action that went unnoticed, in the poem and Brueghel’s painting which is most important. After all, for however briefly – Icarus did fly.

William Carlos Williams chose the title of, “Landscape with the Fall of Icarus” unaltered from the title of Brueghel’s painting, indicating Williams is not trying to alter it’s meaning but to delve into an interpretation of Icarus’ drowning. It begins with “According to Brueghel”, the use of according could be meant in the sense of in accord with, an agreement. The use of only the painters last name and not his self- decreed title, yet he did not use only his first name but chose his surname, a lineage that this painter carries on, however, it is a history which is lost, and therefore can simply relate to all of humanity. Or, it could simply be chosen for its style. The landscape is of spring, a beginning, yet the actions of these people in the forefront of the painting are banal. The farmers who plow and the man who (I think) fishes, has probably done so for years. The pageantry, the ceremony of cultivating their fields is an event without any true meaning. This is also connected to time, their lives and possibly the lives of their ancestors who have always done the same meaningless menial work. Yet they, like the sea, which sweats under the sun, are ignorant of Icarus’ suffering. In their spectacularly vivid lives, they’re empty; their toiling is irrelevant, only of importance to them and it’s the only thing that is important to them, not the drowning Icarus. It is unclear whether the “edge of the sea” is where it meets the land upon which the farmers stand or where the horizon joins it to the sky. But whether it is near these people or beyond them, it is not connected to the height Icarus fell from. The sun is a force greater than man, more powerful than Icarus, than his mechanism, only interacts with Icarus’ wings, in the story and poem, however, it seems to be far from Icarus in the painting. While Icarus is deemed “unsignificant”, not ‘insignificant,’ although I’m not sure why this word is preferred, and “unnoticed”, – his “splash”, his impact is ignored. The people who are not ambitious are never affected, their cycles never altered and ultimately they meet death, as the mortal Icarus does, but theirs is not from the burning glory not depicted in the poem or painting.

Now, what is most confusing is that the first letter of the poem and names are capitalized and there are no punctuation marks at all in the poem (its why I chose to place commas outside of the quotations). It has no pauses, no end, only the beginning is given importance, which is truly the end of the event. Its as if the poem is unfinished, even with Icarus’ death.

If you’re interested, there’s another poem which references the painting, the subject matter is the unnoticed suffering of men – Musee des Beaux Arts, W.H. Auden.

This poem and “The Ivy Crown” by Williams are probably my favorites. The other reminds me of a cheesy (but amazing) quote by young adult writer, Bardugo “Love speaks in flowers. Truth requires thorns.”

Although I want to continue on William Carlos Williams as well as Wallace Stevens, I’m sure this post has been long enough, however, I will say – Stevens’ poetry, in a way different from Williams’, is unhinged, unapologetic and yet, something that is understood in one form or another.

 

Langston Hughes, the foremost poet of the Harlem Renaissance, often seems to present his poems as part of a conversation, as the speech of a character directed at a particular kind of listener.  Choose one poem by Hughes and try to determine who exactly the speaker is.  Do not assume that the speaker is Langston Hughes; he frequently uses a fictional persona.  And who is the imagined listener for this poem?  Who is the speaker addressing?  Who is the audience?  Look carefully for clues in the poem that might help to specify who is speaking and who is being addressed.  Then consider how this knowledge influences your understanding and your experience of the poem. What exactly is the poem saying?  How does it influence your sense of what the poem is saying to recognize that it is being directed at a particular audience that may or may not include you?  Why do you think Hughes chooses to put readers in this position?  Or if you think the speaker is addressing you, what is the speaker assuming about you and what is he/she trying to say to you?

 

(If you prefer you may also use the default response paper prompt under “Response Paper Guidelines”)

 

1-2 pages, double-spaced.  Due March 29.

Out of the selections of Hemingway from In Our Time, I wanted to talk about the first eight ‘chapter’ vignettes.

Hemingway’s simplistic, short, and straightforward sentences in the first three vignettes, especially Chapter III, finely express the detachment, disillusionment, and strangeness of war. In fact, though not the exact same, the multiple vignettes of different scenes of war kind of remind me of Catch-22 which also utilized style to express the absurdity and despair of war. Again, particularly Chapter III avoids describing the narrator’s feelings, instead resorting to a journalistic-like notes. The juxtaposition of simple, factual statements in these kind of chapters to the horrible situation of war suggests a detached numbness as a way to deal with the trauma of war.

Chapter IV, noticeably, is something of a divergent as the narrator has something of a voice and personality. There’s a use of a lot of adjectives, in the phrases of “frightfully hot”, “absolutely perfect”, “simply priceless”, “absolutely topping”, “absolutely perfect”, “very fine”, “frightfully put out”, which makes it seem like a fun vacation instead of harsh war. It relates to the previous chapter in that both of them use a similar situation to display the different ways soldiers cope with war. The soldier in Chapter III copes by detaching himself and the soldier in Chapter IV copes by embracing the mindset of a glorious war.

Chapter V goes back to the relatively simple, straightforward sentences pertaining to horrors of war and death. Chapter VI gives named character(s) for the first time for the vignettes in Nick and Renaldi, thus removing some of  the detachment set as the usual precedent though still keeping with the simple sentences to keep a sense of detachment regardless. The feeling of disillusionment is further supported by the sense that these soldiers don’t really even know what they’re fighting for at this point. People are dying ‘for their country’ without a real reason.

The next chapter, however, goes back to nameless characters and narrator, but makes use of the stream of consciousness to really express the desperation and fear of the men in the trenches, in war. This is probably the most amount of emotion in the vignettes so far. There is no trauma being coped with numbness or detachment or glorifying right then; it’s a moment of raw feeling, though it’s only a moment, as when it’s over the soldier goes on to be emotionally withdrawn.

Chapter VIII is interesting, because it’s not clear if this is before, during, or after the war. The previous vignettes would insinuate it’s after since all the vignettes have been about soldiers, thus implying Drevitts and/or Boyle are veterans, but that’s questionable by the story having Boyle kill Hungarians because he thinks they’re “wops” — a derogatory slur for Italians. The fact that Hungary was on the opposite side of America during the war while Italy eventually joined the Allies, alongside America, is what makes this questionable. If it was about the aftermath of World War I, it would more likely have been Boyle killing Italians because he though they were Hungarian. That it is not so seems to imply that it’s about racism outside of that, with the irony being Boyle’s line of being able to tell “wops” a mile off. Perhaps the insinuation is  that the war’s not the only thing wrong, but that society and people outside of just the war are messed up too. That the reasons for disillusionment aren’t just caused by the war, but exist outside of it, too.

“The Custom of the Country” is what I’d like to call an endless emotional roller coaster that allowed the reader to breathe a sigh of relief upon completion. Wharton achieves, many things in this novel, but one of these many things is having developed realistic characters. By realistic, I mean characters that have good qualities and bad qualities that manifest themselves throughout the story line. Giving characters complexity allows readers to evaluate characters on a level that is beyond the surface. While the reader does judge and decides whether they like a certain character or not, the reader also has to respect and understand the characters because Wharton displays everything there is to know about each of the characters. For example, I did not enjoy Undine’s character at all, but as the reader I understood Undine and why she did the things she did. When taking the society she lived in, observing her relationship with her parents and her desire to always have more than what she currently had at a point in time, into consideration it was hard to blame her for everything. People are a product of their environment and Wharton displays that throughout most of the main characters in the book. Wharton’s wit and subtle sarcastic remarks are what make the book humerus and somewhat bearable. While I understand that the book is a satire and not meant to be taken too seriously, I couldn’t help but read the events in the book and notice how real they were. Overall the book wad solid, and though I probably won’t read this book again, I would certainly suggest it to a friend.

After Undine is divorced and returns to New York to visit her parents, Undine has a moment of reflection. Undine, momentarily, seems to see the role she played in her downfall and the end of her marriage. The paragraph I’ve chosen seems to go back and forth, and her moment of thoughtfulness is surrounded by her regular thoughts.

The section I’ve selected is the third paragraph in the sixteenth chapter. It starts with mention of Undine’s son, Paul, and Mrs. Spragg’s desire to see him: “Undine did not want to talk of her boy. She could forget him when, as she put it, things were ‘going her way’, but in moments of discouragement the thought of him was an added bitterness, subtly different from her other bitter thoughts, and harder to quiet. It had not occurred to her to try to gain possession of the child… she quieted her scruples by thinking of him as ‘better off’ with Ralph’s family, and of herself as rather touchingly disinterested in putting his welfare before her own.”  Here, the narrator seems removed. Undine here is not impassioned as she usually is. But, the mention of Undine not thinking to take her son seems like the narrator is making fun of Undine. Undine was “touchingly disinterested” in doing her job as a mother, which is very selfish. Touchingly is defined as, in a touching manor, and touching defined as, capable of arousing emotions of tenderness or compassion. “Touchingly disinterested in putting his welfare before her own” seems contradictory and I think the narrator does this on purpose to show how ridiculous the idea is. Undine being able to forget her son when she wanted to or when she was happy is not the example of a good mother anywhere and I believe the narrator wants us to know this. We get the perspective of Undine in this paragraph

Yet, the narrator follows this train of Undine’s feelings with, “… but it pained her that her boy should be so near, yet inaccessible, and for the first time she was visited by unwonted questionings as to her share of the misfortunes that had befallen her. She had voluntarily stepped out of her social frame, and the only person on whom she could with any satisfaction have laid the blame was the person to whom her mind now turned with a belated tenderness. It was thus, in fact, that she thought of Ralph.” These lines show the beginnings to some honest introspection on Undine’s part. It also shows sympathy for Undine from the narrator. Here, the narrator shows that Undine has some remorse over the limitations on her regarding her son. She is only annoyed that she is unable to visit her child and does not actually miss Paul himself but, it’s one of the more considerate or aware statements Undine has made regarding her child.  This passage also mentions Undine rethinking how she felt about Ralph.

In the next lines of the paragraph, the narrator returns to a mocking tone. “She could console herself only by regarding it as part of her sad lot that poverty, and the relentless animosity of his family, should have put an end to so perfect a union: she gradually began to look on herself and Ralph as the victims of dark machinations, and when she mentioned him she spoke forgivingly, and implied that ‘everything might have been different’ if ‘people’ had not ‘come between’ them.” Undine consoling herself by blaming others for her decision is ridiculous and that much is obvious. Undine also never described her marriage to Ralph as a perfect union before. The narrator agrees because the phrase “console herself only by regarding it,” meaning that the only way Undine makes herself feel better is by looking at the situation in a way different from the truth, or ‘regrading it’ as something that it was not.

The added quotation marks surrounding the last few phrases and words seem to question what their meaning is. Obviously, those words would make sense in that sentence without the quotations but the narrator adds them to imply that it makes no sense in relation to Ralph and Undine’s situation. The narrator seems to be mocking Undine by doing that. Those quotations usually denote uncertainty; they seem to be asking, what ‘might have been different,’ what ‘people’ had ‘come between them.’ The state of their marriage was due mainly to Undine’s transgressions so how can she imply that anything else really had a factor in it?

In this paragraph, there are examples of both mockery and slight sympathy from the narrator. Mostly mockery is present but there is understanding on the part of the narrator that may be foreshadowing for some slight changes in Undine’s behavior and outlook.

With a cast made up of almost entirely rich people, one of the most challenging parts about reading through The Custom of the Country is trying to find a source of tension to engage with. This is not to say texts focused on the rich or those seeking or on the verge of wealth are inherently boring. For instance, stories like playwright David Mamet’s Glengarry Glen Ross, concerned with the fight amongst salesman for success in the lucrative and cutthroat industry of urban real estate, or Anton Chekhov’s The Cherry Orchard, which focuses on a once wealthy Russian family that profited off the exploitation of serfs and now on the verge of bankruptcy in the wake of emancipation are nothing if not compelling. Unfortunately, the stakes present in these two former texts are nowhere to be found in The Custom of the Country. Undine and those around her are already rich and at little to no risk of losing their money. Moreover, protaganist Undine’s search is for acceptance into the upper crust of society, and ideally achieving celebrity status among them. If she fails, the stakes are inconsequential–her family’s small fortune remains safe, and the most she loses is her ability to self-actualize. In this way, Custom works well as an educational text about the lifestyles of upper-middle to upper class families of the early 20th century and the cultural rifts that existed between those that considered themselves new money vs. old money, but unfortunately, it doesn’t make for a very good story. 

I think that to say that Undine is cold, selfish, narcissistic, ruthlessly ambitious, etc. is fair, of course, because of her behavior throughout the novel eg. how she treats her partner and child. But don’t you think that’s the shallow analysis? I mean isn’t it easy to judge her? And why would you stop there, I mean it’s just not interesting, why not go deeper. The purpose of prose is to teach a lesson to the reader and that is done through its characters, and we only learn from the characters if we can relate to them. If the author fails to create realistic, authentic characters which we can relate to then I have to question their writing ability and probably they wouldn’t sell many copies or get any of their themes across and we wouldn’t be reading their work in our English class. If you cannot relate to Undine and recognize her in yourself to a certain extent then you are either being dishonest with yourself and are in need of some introspection, or you’re not reading very closely and thinking about her character. Undine represents a caricature of a quality that all human beings share, and she takes it to an extreme level. I think that Wharton purpose of describing Undine is to articulate her thoughts and feelings so deeply that we sympathize with her and recognize them in ourselves, so that we won’t fall victim to them the same way that she does. It’s a satire of the high capitalistic society which takes advantage of natural human desires to teach us, to warn us not to be like undeen.