Julie's Southern Lit Blog

2006-05-01T14:37:00.000-07:00

I've been thinking a lot about what I wanted to write for the last post. I decided to write about an issue that has been present throughout the semester, and is spoken about greatly in Bastard Out of Carolina. What I am referring to is that idea of self-identity and how it is affected by public perception. I admire those who are completely self-confident, because our world today makes that very difficult. How can someone have their own sense of identity, when society shapes who we are, or labels people so rigidly. For instance with Bone, she is finally coming to see some positive qualities about herself, but her own personal thoughts about herself were never her idea of self, because she was told and shown who she was by her family members and by society. She can say that she is a stubborn, tough-featured, adventuruos, knowledge-seeking individual, but when other people see her, they see white trash who doesn't even fit in with her own family. This doesn't mean that her self-identity is what they see, but what others see becomes part of what she is. That is how it has always been. Regardless of who a person is inside, part of who they are is what they are perceived to be. I hope that is not discouraging, because I do believe that people should feel a high level of confidence and self-worth, because everyone has their own wonderful qualities. The readings just really made me think that people are not only who they think they are, because the way one person or a whole world of people sees you, influences your overall self. This idea also stirs up many emotions in side of me, because it made me realize how people are constantly degraded or put down by others: whether it is African Americans during the years after slavery (even until today), or Southern Belles who's lives have been broken, or proud "Christians," or landowners, or white trash. I have been very fortunate that I was born and raised a white, blonde, very normal looking girl with a nuclear family who lived in middle class suburbia. No one has ever really degraded me, but I fit into the "True American" way of life. But, there is absolutely no reason that others shouldn't be treated with the same amount of respect. I'm not saying that I've been completely respected all my life, but I haven't been called "stupid and lazy" or "the ugliest thing I've ever seen" or anything like that like the characters we have encountered have. I will say this, and I wish everyone in the world would read this: We should be honest with ourselves and others, but we should be respectful and understanding to those who are different from us. We are all different to someone else, and we all deserve to be able to have our own self-identity that is not beaten down by society's labels.

2006-04-24T21:18:00.000-07:00

I decided to analyze "Hunting Civil War Relics at Nimblewill Creek." I enjoyed this poem, and it seemed a little more straight-forward than many of Dickey's other poems. Of course, there could be hidden meanings that I didn't find, but I was able to draw some conclusions. The poem as a whole seems to be about the past, perhaps appreciating or remembering the past. By the title, the setting seems to take place by a creek, which was a war site; but the entire time I pictured the setting to be at a graveyard for soldiers, such as when he wrote "But underfoot I feel/The dead regroup." The two men, the narrator and his brother, are looking for war treasures, linking the technology of the present with artifacts of the past. There was much more than just the search for material things, however. The souls of the dead soldiers seemed to come alive in the brother. When Dickey wrote "For he smiles as if/He rose from the dead within/Green Nimblewill/And stood in his grandson's shape" I thought of the young man as representing his deceased grandfather (whether or not it was his actual relative, or a symbolic reference to an older generation). The brother cares about the past, and takes in his surroundings, with the cry of the birds in the background, which I associated with cries of death, or voices from the past coming forward. When it is written "For the dead have waited here/A hundred years to create/Only the look on the face/Of my own brother" I thought of the idea that no one else remembered or cared to appreciate the past, but this one man helped bring the memory alive of the forgotten. I took the very end of the poem, with the phrase "Fathers! Fathers!" as a way of not letting the past slip away forever. If you interpreted the poem differently, I'll be glad to know. After reading and interpreting it myself, I tried to find out what it really meant, but I didn't come across much. I did find that Dickey's actual brother collected Civil War artillery projectiles, by searching all over the country using a WWII mine detector. Dickey wrote the poem about his brother's obsession. There's no denying the talent Dickey possessed in taking one small subject and painting a stunning picture of imagery.

2006-04-18T21:55:00.000-07:00

Poetry can be very tricky to interpret and there are often many interpretations that can be drawn. Looking at James Dickey's poetry, I noticed one thing instantly, that the titles of many of his poems have a religious aspect: "Walking on Water," "Sleeping Out at Easter," "The Sleep Child," and "The Heaven of Animals." I didn't see Dickey's poems as being strictly religious, however, but there was definitely the idea of another life, and spirituality. This was an image that I saw throughout the poems, one of seeing yourself in this lifetime and in the next. He uses animals frequently, as well, and I may be wrong, but it seems that he's showing that the relationship between humans and animals is not so vast, and that there are qualities that exist throughout life, not just within the human body. One of the poems I took the most out of was "The Heaven of Animals." This had a calm tone to it, as some of the others did as well, even though the way the poem is set up doesn't make the reading flow very easily, at least not until you read it over, linking the lines together. Dickey says that the animals had no souls, but they were still found to be in a place after death. It sounds as though the Heaven will never be truly peaceful, because since the Heaven would be a similar setting: "If they lived in a wood It is a wood," there would be aspects of life that could not be repeated after death, such as that of hunting and killing. The poem gives the image of an existence for animals where there is no pain and fear, and there is acceptance, but without souls, there is nothing more. Dickey's poetrys are deep and meaningful, but the meaning may be lost until examined further and putting your own personal thought in. I believe good poets often don't write so that a message is clear and one-dimensional. A question I've thought about and I'll pass on is why Dickey italicized certain parts of his poems? I'm sure I will gain great insight from our discussions and understand the poetry on a deeper level.

2006-04-10T20:13:00.000-07:00

Good job to everyone who has presented so far! The presentations have been very interesting and diverse, which is perfect for our class. To the next couple groups, I'm sure you will do fantastic, as well. Rae and Amy's presentation really made me think about Native American culture in our society. My mom teaches kindergarten in a school district where many families from the Oneida Indian tribe live. She usually has ne or two Native American students in her class and they are taught the same way as everyone else. It's tough, because I believe they should grow up, learn, and be sociable with other children their age, but at the same time, you don't want them to lose their Indian heritage and values. Courtney and Brian presented us with some great stereotypes of southerners. By great, I mean that they brought up some very good points about speech, dress, and way of life. I think comedians know what they are doing when they make fun of themselves, because they understand there will always be stereotypes, so why not flaunt who they are? Doing so, it may just be reinforcing the stereotype, but if that is really who they are, they should appreciate themselves and the culture. Tina and Cassy's presentation was a shift, but it was great to see an individual's take on black culture. Lawrence's artwork was fascinating, and he definitely had true talent, especially because he took stories that already existed, and made images in the likeness of the stories. We learned that he never did portraits, but I was curious why he never made a detailed face. Perhaps he was trying to link an entire culture together, and mold colors and features together, instead of emphasizing differences. Phil and Nicole's presentation was a great way to end the day, even though it was too early for me to eat gumbo! I never knew the history behind Cajun culture and cooking, and from learning about it, I may even try to make some southern food (if only I could really cook- good job, Phil). Lastly, great job to my partner, Kevin!

2006-04-05T09:36:00.000-07:00

Flannery O'Connor's literature is definitely disturbing and complex. As I'm sure we could all tell, there are many subtleties that are difficult to pick up on. I wouldn't have even be able to tell she was a religious writer without learning that in class. Something I didn't pick up on right away that is fascinating to me is the connection between Mr. Guizac and Christ in "The Displaced Person." Originally, I had seen a connection with the peacock and spirituality, but not with the Displaced Person. It makes perfect sense after our discussion, however. I thought more about it and a few other connections came to mind, even if they weren't what O'Connor was intending. Mr. Guizac came from Europe and the horror of the concentration camps. Americans did not understand him or the situation going on in Europe. Christ was very misunderstood by individuals and by the society he was born into and lived in. Mr. Guizac wanted his cousin to marry the black boy, and saw no harm in this relationship. He knew that anything was better for his cousin than her current situation. He didn't see the problem, because he didn't seem to acknowledge the differences in skin color, class, or any other characteristic. Christ didn't place anyone into categories or reject anyone, and actually wanted to improve people's lives, such as when he cured the sick, gave food to those who were hungry, etc. American society, which Mrs. McIntyre represented in this once instance, was astonished, baffled, even disgusted by Mr. Guizac and his ideas. Society in the days of Christ didn't accept his plan, thoughts, or ideas, as well, even though he had individual followers. These connections may seem broad and vague, but they help to relate Mr. Guizac to Christ even more. The ending especially sealed the deal, and brought O'Connor's point across heavily. Mr. Guizac was crucified, just as Christ was, which led to Mrs. McIntyre suffering and most likely never having a peaceful and spiritual death. She didn't have to "follow" Mr. Guizac, but she could have believed in him or saved him. Christ wasn't saved, but people could believe in him and be saved. O'Connor's way of expressing her point is very complex, but her literature can really make the reader think and leave them unsatisfied. I think this is partly was O'Connor wanted, because if we are left unsatisfied, we will think more about the consequences of the people in her stories, and relate them to our own lives.

2006-03-28T18:39:00.000-08:00

I loved "A Streetcar Named Desire" because of the complexity of the story and the characters. I was looking forward to watching the film to see how the characters were portrayed. I saw the play performed when I was in high school, but I don't remember it well. If I remembered more, I could compare the written play, the film, and the stage play, but comparing the written play and the film is interesting enough, especially because stage plays usually "go by the book" quite a bit. The film is much more glamorized, because it can be. Tennessee Williams was not on set telling the actors how to look and speak. Even if he was, Hollywood directors would find a way to put their own spin on the story. The play tells a great story with intriguing characters, but I wasn't surprised that Hollywood changed things a bit. We've only had a glimpse into the film, but I can already tell that the characters and the story will be glamorized. When we read the play, we formed certain images in our minds of the characters. It's great to read a play or novel first, and then watch a film version, because you can see how your mental images compare to the actors. In this case, Stanley was the one person who looked a lot different than we had imagined. I saw Stanley as a good-looking guy, but not someone who would be drooled over. Marlon Brando, on the other hand, was eye candy (and if we thought so, think of what women decades ago would have thought!) But, that makes sense for the film, because it adds another element. Yes, Stanley and Blanche had a sort of sexual tension in the play, but it was already clearly emphasized in the film. Hollywood has a lot to do with action, lust, and conflict, and the actors are bringing those elements out. Even the actress who plays Stella, who isn't as prominent in the beginning of the film, plays her part very well. She is pretty, but plain, and seems innocent to her surroundings. The actress who plays Blanche had a unique tone of voice and way of speaking, which helps distinguish her. She is very well put together, and looks like a beautiful woman, but in certain close-up scenes, her age showed more, especially when she made certain facial expressions. But, if I hadn't already read the play, I may not have noticed those things. I'm curious to see if Blanche continually starts to look older throughout the film. Then, of course, there is Stanley. His way of speech added to his character, as well, because it was muffled and manly, but not harsh. He has a powerful and almost overwhelming look to him, which I think will be even more prominent when he is violent. So far, I enjoy the way the actors portray their characters, and I'm looking forward to watching the rest of the film unfold.

2006-03-19T18:01:00.001-08:00

When Tea Cake became violent with Janie, and she was forced to shoot him near the end of Their Eyes Were Watching God, I was surprised that and saddened. Janie was finally happy and loved, and the person who caused her to feel this way ended up suffering mentally and physically until his death. I guess it wouldn't have fit Hurston's story if Janie and Tea Cake lived happily ever after, but being a hopeless romantic, I was hoping for that to be so. By the time the novel was finished, however, I was satisfied with how it all turned out, because Hurston found a way to turn a horrible circumstance into a positive experience. Instead of Janie feeling guilty, depressed, and regretful, she was thankful for the time she had with Tea Cake, and would remember the way he treated her. The incident would have been completely different if she was charged with murder. One passage, during the trial, really caught my attention and made me feel for Janie even more. "It was not death she feared. It was misunderstanding. If they made a verdict that she didn't want Tea Cake and wanted him dead, then that was a real sin and a shame" (188). That showed how much she loved Tea Cake, and how much their relationship meant to her. She would have been more destroyed with the idea that she never loved Tea Cake, than the fact that she shot him. She was very remorseful that she was led to kill her husband, but she knew that he was not the same person and he never would be, and the illness would have led him to death. I believe she would have stayed by his side, no matter how bad he got, but it came to the point where her life was in danger. So, it was the thought that someone would have doubted her love for Tea Cake that would have killed her more than an actual sentence. I was very glad that the men of the town who were their friends understood what happened and didn't punish Janie with harsh words or actions. Although Tea Cake was gone, it was comforting to know that Janie was still happy with the time they had together. Her whole life she wanted the kind of love that he gave her, so although it was only for a short while, it meant the world to her. Now that's an inspiring story.

2006-03-19T18:01:00.000-08:00

2006-03-14T10:45:00.000-08:00

After our discussion in class, I thought more about how I viewed Richard Wright's piece. I really enjoyed reading it, because although I am an optimistic person, I am intrigued to read and learn about difficult or devastating situations. I disagree with any writers or critics who say that Wright's work is not artistic. Although it may not be as artistic as literature that say, uses a great deal of symbolism or metaphors, I believe it is more than just a political tool. I understand and agree that he wrote to bring about social change, but his stories could be moving in a way deeper than propaganda or politics. From his dialogues and detailed descriptions of events he experienced, I had a glimpse into a different life. One dialogue that stands out to me was when he was confronted by Pease and Morrie about not addressing Pease with "Mr." Richard was in an environment where he was trying to do everything right, but no matter how had he tried, nothing was going to be perfect. Even if he technically did and said everthing correctly, he would never be perfect simply because of the color of his skin. Pease and Morrie used their whiteness to their utmost advantage. They probably didn't have power or authority in the rest of their lives, so they were going to use control the only way they could, on a black person. Even though it wasn't morally right to treat a human being that way, that thought never once crossed their minds (or the minds of many other white people, such as the cops in the story).
Richard was left in a very difficult situation, and I was routing for him to find a way out. He said "If I had said: No sir, Mr. Pease, I never called you Pease, I would have been automatically calling Morrie a liar. And if I had said: Yes, sir, Mr. Pease, I called you Pease, I would have been pleading guilty to having uttered the worst insult that a Negro can utter to a southern white man. I stood hesitating, trying to find a neutral reply" (551). It's a damned if I do, damned if I don't situation, with no way out. I remembered that statement and I see it as significant. It shows that black people, such as young man like Richard, could easily find themselves in diffucult circumstances that would enivitably come to violence, whether or not they did anything wrong. I felt the reader, at that moment could read the mind of Richard, which is artistic in itself, along with the meanings that can be interpreted from this one thought.

2006-02-27T11:24:00.000-08:00

I really enjoyed reading Porter. One of my favorite passages was "The Grave." In this section, a whole new world was shown through the two children. Miranda and her brother represent the "new world" and even though it has only been a few years since the previous stories, the world has significantly changed. The way Porter transitioned the time had a more significant effect on me than Faulkner's way of writing the transition in "Delta Autumn." There was a similar effect used with the land (it was dying away), but they represented it in different ways. Faulkner spoke of roads, car, and other things man-made, while Porter used the empty graves, which I liked, because it connected the past (people who actually died) to the future (land was being sold, hadn't been profitable).
Not only that, both Porter and Faulkner represented the changes through the use of old and new characters. Faulkner used Roth and Isaac, while Porter used Miranda and Uncle Jimbilly. I appreciate both of their descriptions, but I personally enjoyed Porter more. I loved how she used Miranda and her physical appearance to show the change in time. Miranda wore overalls (the same outfit as her brother, but a different color) and she was a tomboy. She enjoyed being a tomboy, but the minute she laid eyes on the gold ring that her brother found, her feelings changed. When she put the ring on her thumb, she had a vision of herself in a dress (I pictured white and frilly), sitting under a tree, doing nothing and having no cares in the world. From this one tiny object, her whole personality shifted in an instant. She did quickly go back to hunting with her brother, but I saw her picturing that image of herself in the dress everytime she looked at the ring. I saw the ring as being very symbolic, because it symbolized the Old South. Not only did it actually come from a different era, it made Miranda envision herself the way she "should" have looked and acted. Her father let her be a tomboy, and even though it was looked down upon, you could tell that it was a new era, because a young girl most likely wouldn't have been able to leave the house dressed that way before. Miranda didn't seem to care what society thought (I mean, she was a child), but the ring almost took her back to a time when she should "go by the rules" and act and look a certain way. I would like to read Porter's later stories with Miranda to see if the ring is still mentioned. I would be curious to know if it is significant through her life, or just used in this story as a symbol.

2006-02-21T13:48:00.000-08:00

I was impressed with Isaac's maturity in "The Bear." I believe he was much more mature at 16 and 21 than many of the family members at older ages. One such reason I believe this is so is because of his views on the plantation as property. There is no right or wrong view, but I like how Isaac didn't think that the plantation and the land could be something that could be bought or sold. If you think about it, it does seem strange to buy a piece of land, that really only belongs to the earth. People have done it in the past and do it still today for commercial reasons: you can build houses, factories, stores, or really anything on a piece of land. But if you take away the thought of building anything on top of the land, or even the fact that land can be farmed on, and just think of it as nature, it does seem funny that people can claim it as their own. I was actually a little surprised when Isaac made a long statement about how God made the earth. God and other religious elements haven't been implemented into the stories much at all, but I think Isaac brings it up now because these thoughts support his feelings on the land. He said, "He created man to be His overseer on the earth and to hold suzerainty over the earth and the animals on it in His name, not to hold for himself and his descendants inviolable title forever, generation after generation..." Isaac made a very good point in saying that God made earth first, then animals and men afterwards, but he only made man to watch over the earth, not to take it as their own. It took a lot of guts for him to stand up and say these things, because no one else agreed (or at least admitted that they agreed with him). I can see why it would be a struggle for him to decide on owning the land, when he didn't even believe it was his to own.

2006-02-15T13:42:00.000-08:00

I am still thrown off a bit by Faulkner's style of writing, but it's a good experience to read literature that you are not used to. One thing I find especially interesting with Faulkner is the way some of his climatic scenes end so abruptly. In "Pantaloon in Black," the scene when the white man's throat is cut open ends so quickly, almost without resolution. The chapter which followed that scene caught my attention, though. The sheriff's deputy was speaking to his wife and made some very harsh statements about black people. When he said "...when it comes to the normal human feelings and sentiments of human beings, they might just as well be a damn herd of wild buffaloes," I felt like he needed a slap in the face. But, that is only one of thousands of comments degrading blacks. How could a person honestly believe that a living, breathing human being does not have any thoughts or feelings? I ask myself that, then I answer my own question by remembering that many white people did not consider blacks as other people. I'm almost suprised that more black people (men in particular) did not lash out and, for instance, slice a white man's throat open. Faulkner is definitely pointing out some deep issues while he describes specific experiences of a family of men. I'll be curious to see how it all plays out in the end.

2006-02-06T10:02:00.000-08:00

After reading "Desiree's Baby" and "The Autobiography of an Ex-Colored Man," I thought more about biracial children and their struggles. In the time following the Civil War, black children, light or dark-skinned, must have had a difficult time coming into their own, or at least having confidence when thrown into social situations with white children. I support diversity 100 percent, and love living in a time when people of all colors can live and work peacefully (of course to a certain extent), but thinking back, it must have been strange for black people (especially those who were born and raised in the South) to get used to interacting with whites in everyday situations, when they knew they weren't accepted as equals. It must have been liberating and freeing to not be treated as slaves, but intimidating at the same time. Then, when I think about the biracial families and children, I almost wonder if in a way, they had a more difficult time. Speaking of children especially, they weren't accepted by the whites, because they had black blood in them, but they probably weren't accepted by the blacks either, because they weren't the same. In "The Autobiography..." the boy fortunately had a loyal friend, the "Red Head," but he was only friends with him in the first place because everyone thought he was white. Then, just from being pointed out as black, his friendships, sense of identity, and family life drastically changed. When I thought about all of this, it got me thinking about biracial children today. Obviously, we live in a free and diverse society, but there are still obvious prejudices. I wonder if biracial or multiracial children, feel out of place. On the outside, no one may even know they are from parents of different races, or perhaps it is more apparent. I know not all of these children can be put into one category, and there are many different surroudings (family and society) that are a major factor on how a child feels, but I wonder if biracial children today still have many insecurities. I found a website dealing with this issue. It is http://www.webcom.com/intvoice/wardle2.html It was very interesting to me, because I personally haven't lived or grown up with multiracial people. If you check it out, I hope you find it interesting, as well.

2006-01-29T20:51:00.000-08:00

There are many great points that Frederick Douglass makes in his writings, things that really make you think. One of the things I found very interesting was how he described the effect slavery had on Mrs. Auld, one of his slaveowners. He describes her as looking and acting almost like an angel when he first met her, when he was brought to Baltimore for the first time. But, referring to slavery, he said "Under it's influence, the tender heart became stone, and the lamblike disposition gave way to one of tiger-like fierceness." He showed how slavery not only could tear apart the souls of the slaves, but also of the slaveholders. He said this transformation of Mrs. Auld began when her husband forbade her from teaching Frederick how to read. I was very impressed at the wit of Frederick at such a young age when he heard Mr. Auld tell his wife why she couldn't educate him. He told her that if you give a slave an inch, he'll take an ell (which I thought of as- give him an inch, he'll take a mile, as we say now). Frederick heard that, and decided since he was given an inch, he would take the mile, which I loved. He didn't give up, but found ways to educate himself.
I thought it was so clever when he taught himself how to write a few letters, then challenged any educated boy to a sort of "writing contest." He said, "...when I met with any boy who I knew could write, I would tell him I could write as well as he. The next work would be, 'I don't believe you. Let me see you try it.' I would then make the letters which I had been so fortunate as to learn, and ask him to beat that." Education was so important to him that he even taught dozens of other slaves how to read. The others came to his classes willingly, because they wanted to learn. "Their minds had been starved by their cruel masters. They had been shut up in mental darkness." Fortunately for him, he escaped that mental darkness and became a free man. You could tell that he wanted so badly for all slaves to have that opportunity, and fought to his death to try to make that happen.
I noticed in his writings that he explained his past in a way that made the reader truly feel for him, but he wasn't trying to pity himself. I think this is partly because he knew that so many others had it a great deal worse than he, but he still wanted to share his personal story, and that is an admirable trait.

2006-01-25T14:00:00.000-08:00

This course and the readings are very interesting to me, because I have not read a great deal of southern literature in the past. Some of the language in these first few readings has been tricky, but after our discussions, it is much easier to understand. I was glad to see the reading for Friday on Edgar Allen Poe. His work has always been intriguing to me, but I never knew much about him. I enjoyed reading about him in the introduction, because it gave me a better understanding of why he wrote the way he did and what his life was like. I found it very interesting that he was born in Boston, then considered himself a Virginian, but moved back to the North, because he couldn't receive work or success in the South. I feel like he almost didn't fit it anywhere, and perhaps that is one reason why his work was never positive or uplifting.
I'm reading "The Fall of the House of Usher" right now, and I am impressed with how descriptive it is. I like to be given a description which can be pictured, but where your own imagination still takes over, and that's how I believe Poe is writing. I'll write again with my thoughts on the story as a whole.

2006-01-25T13:49:00.000-08:00

Welcome to my blog!