Fiction, Fantasy, Myth

The chapter starts out with Thomas tell his story, about how Thomas had to cope with his father drinking alcohol and we also learn that Chess and Checkers had to deal with their father drinking alcohol as well. The story also goes back and forth with the basketball game that was going on between Samuel and the other Indians, which is quite interesting because the game would go very close, and you would be stuck wondering who could win the game. The band also receives a letter to play in Seattle, and Checkers decides not to go with the band to Seattle, but she would be sharing the prize money. While the band is in Seattle, Checkers gets very close to the priest-Father Arnold. Coyote Springs wins the thousand dollar prize money, but the community starts disapproving of them. The council of the Spokane reservation writes a letter in which how they (the band members) are not “traditional” and they are getting “out of control” and this is after they have won from Seattle.  Even the community does not like the fact that their people are moving up, and the Thomas, Victor, and the bands knows this they still decide to take up the offer that they receive for New York.

If one pays careful attention to the detail authors put into writing their books, one may find little hints as to what is going to happen by the end of the book. On page 11 of Reservation Blues, we are introduced to “the-man-who-was-probably-Lakota.” Throughout the book, this man continues to scream “The end of the world is near!”. At the time we are first introduced to this man, Robert Johnson had just given Thomas his guitar. We see that this crazy Lakota man foreshadows Thomas’s destiny. He shows that the guitar Johnson gives Thomas will ultimately bring Thomas bad luck in the future. His quote, “The end of the world is near!”, shows that the man is predicting the end of Thomas’s world by the end of the book.

In the chapter “How to Tell a True War Story” as part of Tim O’Briens “The Things They Carried” we read about whether war stories are real or not. He brings up a point that a true war story is told in parts because no one can consistantly look to see if its true. No one can actually watch a person die. He gives the example of Curt Lemon, that he turned away looked back and turned away. If a story is too specific it is probably fake.

In Tim O’Brien’s How to Tell a True War Story, we are shown how important it is to be aware of other people’s situations. When Rat Kiley’s (a platoon member) best friend Curt Lemon is killed, Rat sits down to write a letter to Lemon’s sister. Rat writes a letter which he finds to be “very personal and touching.” After waiting two months for a response from Lemon’s sister, Rat realizes that he is not going to get a response. Lemon’s sister had gotten the letter, however, to her, the letter was disturbing and rude. A soldier is exposed to deaths of many different people including his platoon members during war. Depending on the nature of the soldier, he may react differently than his fellow soldiers do to the terrible things he witnesses. In Rat’s letter, he includes how Lemon liked challenges and testing himself. He says that Lemon was crazy but in a good way. Rat had no idea  that writing about Lemon’s courage would disturb his sister, rather it just seemed normal to him. Apparently, Lemon’s sister found this information to be unsettling. Lemon’s sister was not in the platoon and most probably had never experienced what it is like to go to the army and therefore, she was offended by Rat’s letter instead of touched. We learn that when choosing one’s words or ways to interpret something, it is important that one is aware of the needs or situation of the individual that they are communicating with.

I had decided to take out this book called the Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell. At first, I thought it wouldn’t be so good because I read “Blink” by the same author and I thought he sort of stated the obvious. He did, however, do the same in “Outliers”, but I enjoyed it because of the information he gave and ideas to back up his argument. Basically, his book is about success and how it happens. It’s quite interesting because we were speaking about the American Dream and how people gain success. The whole idea of opportunity was involved. What Gladwell argues is that no person that rose from nothing and gained success by himself. Gladwell conveys that a “genius” is not what we think of and through his book, he explains gaining success through luck, opportunity, preparation, and culture.

What do you think about his argument? He uses great examples to describe each category for achieving success, and I’m wondering if I’m the only one that comes to this agreement.

Recitatif is a short fiction story by a novelist Toni Morrison. The story opens up with a girl named Twyla telling her life story. Morrison writes this story from first person view which creates this sort of delusion in which a reader might think that he is reading somebody’s diary. The story unravels as Twyla writes about her memories of shelter in which she was put due to her mother poll dancing. In the shelter she meets Roberta, another girl whose parents have not died yet. Roberta was black and this at first was a barrier for Twyla as she was always told “that they never washed their hair and they smelled funny.” Throughout the time in the shelter girls became close friends and by the time one of them had to leave they got attached to each other. The way first part of the story is being told might seem very familiar to readers who have had similar memories when they were kids. Later on story picks up from the time when Twyla was working at Howards Johnson’s. There by some accident she meets Roberta and tries to talk to her but, Roberta seems hostile to Twyla and leaves the place. Throughout the story Twyla will meet Roberta couple more times but each time something stands between two old friends. Roberta tells her friend how she used to kick Maggie who was a black (or Roberta at least thought so) woman working in the shelter. This side of story Twyla has not remember and will never remember through the story because none of them know actually if it ever happened.

The way I understood this story is that racial thoughts never elude us. Even if we never act as racists outside, inside we still might have some wrong thoughts lurking around. In the story these thoughts have stood between two little girls who in childhood were best friends and did not think of each other as another race.

I found Recitatif by Toni Morrison extrememly interesting. It was an easy read which made the reading much more enjoyable. It begins with the lives of 2 girls, Roberta and Twyla and their multiple meetings in their lives, from an orphanage to a grocery store to a picket line without knowing the backrounds of these 2 girls. Toni Morrison withholds information about the race of these 2 girls for multiple reasons. If one were to know the race of one of the girls they would judge them differently. At no point is one able to tell whether Twyla is white or black, and if you were to assume one, you would be racial stereotyping one of these two groups. Morrison shows that no matter the race, both girls must deal with the problems in their lives and their ethnicity does not affect it. The author is trying to show that we constantly stereotype individuals and without knowing the race of these 2 girls, we assume them to be equals.

Flannery O’Connor’s “Good Country People” tells the tale of Hulga Hopewell, a disabled yet intellectually stimulated thirty year old living in the countryside with her mother. Hulga lugs her wooden leg around with an aloof spirit and suffers from a heart condition. Her academic achievements issued her a place above the rest of society and this caused her to grow “less like other people and more like herself-bloated, rude, and squinted-eyed”. Hulga’s sudden meeting with bible salesman Manley Pointer reinforces her distaste toward Christianity and her belief in atheism. However, after hearing about Pointer’s similar heart condition, Hulga’s immediately changes her perspective. She becomes engaged in conversation with Pointer and quickly becomes empathetic because of his pitiful background.
Hulga and Pointer’s relationship eventually develops into a romantic one. Hulga trusts Pointer to the point where she agrees to remove her artificial leg for him to marvel at. He states he is intrigued by Hulga’s leg because that is what makes Hulga special. Hulga hesitantly removes her wooden leg and Pointer relocates it in a place out of reach. Hulga hisses at Pointer and he replies with “ I may sell bibles, but I know exactly where I’m going”. Pointer elaborates on his past schemes and belittles Hulga as he disappears.
O’Connor concludes with Mrs.Hopewell praising Pointer’s persona of Christian simplicity. Her friend states, “some cant be that simple, I know I never could”. Mrs. Hopewell believed that since Pointer led a simple life, he led a good life. Hugla also became a victim of Pointer’s exploitation because of his two-faced nature. I think O’Connor pushing us to look past personas and find the truth behind the person, since good people are difficult to find.

This was an interesting excerpt to read because it had an unusual twist to it.  Mrs. Hopewell had hired the Freemans as her tenants because there were no other applicants.  Mrs. Hopewell had a daughter named Joy whom changed her name to Hulga.  Joy was involved in an accident at a very young age which had left her without a leg.  Mrs. Hopewell was very fascinated by the artifical leg.  Joy had taken her PH.D which forced her to go back to school.  One day a boy showed up at their door to sell bibles and introduced himself as Manley Pointer.  He came in and talked and had dinner with Mrs. Hopewell.  Hulga did not approve of this because she did not believe in bibles and didnt like the fact that he was trying to sell them bibles.  Hulga notices him looking at her while eating and ignores him.  Eventually the two become real close and begin to talk about her artificial leg.  He eventually gains her trust and takes the leg.  Hulga had insisted that he was a christian but he replies that he does not believe in anything. 

According to Mrs. Freeman, some people just are not as simple as they look.  I liked the reading but i also got lost towards the end, when the sign read “this product to be used only for the prevention of disease.” Like was it a potion to kill her ?  And she would not show him her aritificial leg  towards the end, but ending up showing him because she thought he was “good”?  The story was interesting because it shows how her first impression of him really turned out to be wrong.  I had originally thought the story would end in a different way.  But I would appreciate it if someone can help me clear up the ending of the story.

Marilynne Robinson mentions how Dawkins says, “Imagine … no persecution of Jews as ‘Christ-killers.'” Then Robinson criticizes Dawkins for condemning Jews for discouraging “marrying out”. Am I the only one who sees how irrelevant this is? Dawkins never said he loved the Jewish faith. In fact, Dawkins should be praised for being able to criticize Jews and be sympathetic at the same time, it shows that he’s thinking objectively (about Jews at the very least, he seems angry in the rest of his book).

Robinson then criticizes Dawkins for his wanton way of dealing with Hitler’s “science”. He claims Dawkins deals with Hitler in a single sentence, when in fact Dawkins devotes a whole chapter on it. Robinson also forgets to raise the question of whether or not Hitler committed atrocities in the name of science as opposed to personal gain. There’s also the fact that Hitler was raised in a Catholic family, went to Catholic school, and never formally renounced his religion.

Robinson brings up a good point that if we criticize all of religion, we should then be able to criticize all of science. In order to do this, you have to define religion and science. Religion is defined as a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. All religions do this, including extremist factions, so those are still clearly defined as religion. However, as it says in your psychology textbooks, science requires intellectual honesty. The Piltdown Hoax, being a hoax, clearly isn’t intellectually honest.

Robinson also says, “That God exists outside time as its creator is an ancient given of theology.” This is why we cannot prove/disprove God. Religious zealots always wave the fact that science cannot disprove God as a defense. However, Robinson’s quote is the reason why science cannot disprove God, religions place their God outside the boundaries of science, logic, and all things rational.