Mother Tongue & The Border of Words

Readings: Mother Tongue & The Border of Words
Authors: Amy Tan & Larry Smith
Analysis&Quote:

I don’t want to quote anything from either article although there are some lines that are my favorite. If I were to quote anything from the articles, I think my blog post would run to long.

Overall, I think both articles highlighted the importance of words and a word’s meaning. If you really think about what words are, they’re sounds that we’ve pushed beside each other and decided that that sound has meaning. Words don’t have meaning until they’re actually given meaning. And I feel most of the time it’s not the actual word that is important, but the meaning of each word and the meaning of that word in context to other words. Smith’s article talks about how words can separate people, but also bring people together. I agree with him. I think it’s not only the words that can separate or bring people together, but also and sometimes more importantly, the effect those words have. There’s a quote by Maya Angelou that says: “I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.”

Initially, I never understand why this quote was important or why so many people like it. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that words don’t have an impact because their words. They have an impact because of the meaning they convey and how they make a personal feel. In a way words can be intangible as well. They can be written down on a tangible object, but you can’t physically hold words like “hope” and “passion” like you can “apple” or “cucumber”.

I think Amy Tan’s article also highlighted the importance of words and the different ways English can be interpreted. I felt I related a lot to Amy’s article because I have immigrant parents, but I don’t relate entirely because both of my parents speak English. However, when I was younger, I did equate my mother’s way of speaking with her intelligence unfortunately. I now realize that she is incredibly smart and what she says makes a lot of sense.  I thought because she didn’t know how to say certain words “right” or didn’t understand the meaning of certain words that she wasn’t smart, but I was wrong. In fact, I’ve been more embarrassed by my lack of knowledge in other languages. Whereas Tan talks of feeling embarrassed by her mother, I feel that my parents were sometimes embarrassed because my sisters and I didn’t know another language. A lot of my other family members speak Arabic, Swahili, or our tribal dialect, but I only knew English. When my parents would explain why we couldn’t they would be more understanding, but not being able to understand what was being said, upon further reflection now, helps me understand how language can be a big barrier.

Being here at Wellesley, I’m really starting to understand the importance of language and words. During the first week of orientation, Professor Hodge gave a speech on why students need to study a foreign language. He explained how it opens doors to new cultures and in a way, to new ways of thinking and new ways of life. I think he made really good points because knowing how meaning translates into another language helps you become a better person. You become a better person because you learn to better understand people who are not like you, and accept them instead of tolerating them.

I feel his speech ties into the article because they stressed the importance of words, language, and the barriers they can create or break down. I think the articles did a good job of exploring words and what they mean in a concise way. 

Stone Butch Blues 2

Story: Stone Butch Blues

Author: Leslie Feinberg

Analysis&Quote:

“It’s just incredible. I can’t believe you’ve given me a sky to sleep under. But I can’t tell if its dawn or dusk you’ve painted.”

…

Ruth rolled toward me and rested her hand on my chest. “It’s not going to be day or night, Jess. It’s always going to be that moment of infinite possibility that connects them.”

I found it interesting that in this scene, Jess had a hard time determining whether or not it was day or night. What I found more interesting was that the fact she couldn’t figure it out bothered her. I would have thought that someone like Jess, who doesn’t fit into one of two categories wouldn’t have a problem accepting something as simple as this. But at the same time, during this last part of the novel she seems to be undergoing her final change. She’s making a life for herself in New York, has a best friend, and has a steady job.

Perhaps, this unnerves her because although she knows that she fits as neither a man nor woman, she knows that she belongs somewhere. She knows that she has her own niched carved out for people like her. This is evident in the newspaper clipping she found from 1930, and the legendary Rocco. I think maybe Jess has come to an understanding that if you can’t fit your identity into one of two categories that you can create one for yourself. She even says at one point that “I was the only expert on living my own life, the only person I could turn to for answers.”

Additionally, I can’t expect Jess to be comfortable with not fitting in all the time. She did start taking the male hormones to try and fit into a place that society carved out but discovered she couldn’t do that to herself. This scene may seem insignificant but I think it’s important because it shows that Jess is still growing at this point. Even if she is finally learning to accept herself, it shows she still has learning and thinking to do about how she feels going against society’s binary system. 

Stone Butch Blues 1

Story: Stone Butch Blues

Author: Leslie Feinberg

Analysis&Quote:

“He said later he couldn’t watch his own flesh and blood be kidnapped by Indians.”

Jess has endured a childhood of saving, but saving implies that there is danger or something wrong. It means that there is something bad occurring and you can’t do anything about it so you must be saved. In her case, this first happened when her father “saved” her from the Indians, and when her parents tried to save her from herself. There always seemed to be something inherently wrong with her, but she couldn’t figure out why. This is evident as she recalls how people always asked her or her parents if she were a  boy or a girl.

One reason why I like this line is because it could represent the oppressive society that Jess lived in ( and even we are currently living in its residual effects). “His own flesh and blood” could easily represent the patriarchy. He views his daughter as something that he owns, and he doesn’t want her to be tainted or become impure. “Be kidnapped” could represent the fact that women are always treated as second class citizens, and are incapable of changing their situations. Although in Jess’s, case and in this particular moment, she is a child she still needed saving. But what does this imply? Why doesn’t her mother try to explain this to her? Is it because her mother was initially indifferent to her daughter since her birth? Or is it because her father being the breadwinner of the house had the final say.

“Indians” could represent the racist tendencies of society. The fact that she couldn’t be with Indians sends the message that there is something wrong with them, perhaps they need saving, and that she shouldn’t associate with them. To build on that, he uses the word “Indians” which is actually incorrect because, as Jess calls them, they are “Native Americans”. This adds to the fact that not only is the society racist, but that it is inaccurate in terms of regards to another race’s culture and identity. In this sentence is the magical trio of what is usually least wanted in a society. There are many moments in the story that shed light on the injustices and obstacles she faced. But I think in order to find the source of where all of her anger, but also compassion and kindness stems from starts with her childhood. Although this sentence is talking about how her father didn’t want her being around Native Americans, it can also be applied to how he didn’t want her continuing down her masculine path and that’s why she was sent to charm school and mental institution.

It’s not that her father was evil, but he didn’t understand how to accept something he wasn’t used to. So he tried to save her but that ended up backfiring because she clung stronger to who she felt she really was. I think her mother’s lack of input and indifference perhaps made her kinder in general, and especially to the femmes she became friends with because she understood how it felt to breakthrough and change for someone who seems to have a closed heart.  

I also think this quote brings up the starting point of when she learned there was something wrong with her, and as a result she tried to change for people while also quietly rebelling.

Why I took "Class Matters" and Reflections

     
          After realizing I did the first post wrong, I want to give a little explanation as to why I took interest in this class. During my senior year, I took a class called "Current Issues" and I was actually really angry that I got that class as my elective because I had "senioritis" and felt it was pointless. But that class turned out to be one of my favorite classes out of all my four years and I still talk with the teacher to this day.

         We talked about various topics such as global warming, the worth of higher education, the military, the police, and income inequality. The latter stuck out the most to me because I started to realize how important and prevalent it was in our society. In one article we read, Paul Krugman stated that we were living in the "New Gilded Age." That was really scary to hear because although the Gilded Age was lavish for the Robber Barons it was hell for everyone else.

       So, when I saw this as a first-year writing option I found it interesting and was a little unsure of what to expect. But so far, being in the class has made me think a lot more of what I thought I knew and to be more open and to try to not form ideas so quickly about people. It's made me challenge my own beliefs and even my friends from home. I'm from "The South" so being in "The North" is a big culture shock to me. However, I don't entirely relate to "Southern ideas" because my parents emigrated from Africa and so I was brought up differently than most of my peers. This class has made me think and reflect on my entire life. Which is nice but a bit stressful as well. I've become more open and curious to hearing other ideas.

Interpreter of Maladies

Short Story: Interpreter of Maladies

Author: Jhumpa Lahiri

Analysis&Quote:

“But we do not face a language barrier. What need is there for an interpreter?”

“That’s not what I mean. I would never have told you otherwise. Don’t you realize what it means for me to tell you?”

“What does it mean?”

“It means that I’m tired of feeling so terrible all the time. Eight years, Mr.Kapasi, I’ve been in pain for eight years. I was hoping you could make me feel better, say the right thing. Suggest some kind of remedy.”

This isn’t one quote but I think this portion of the exchange is important to what Jhumpa Lahiri is suggesting. I think what Lahiri does is expand the idea of sickness in this particular short story. I think she suggest maladies are not only a physical sickness but a mental one as well.

In this portion of the scene Mr. Kapasi is speaking first. It’s interesting how he says “we do not face a language barrier.” Instead of him simply saying “you” do not face a language barrier because you can understand me, or “I” do not face a language barrier because I speak English. The word choice of “we” implies he sees himself in the position of the interpreter. When he says the next line, it shows that he doesn’t see psychological or emotional distress as another form of a malady. If he doesn’t see physical pain or distress then there is no sickness. However, this is unfair of him to judge/presume because his wife has a similar “malady”.

After she lost their son she became emotionally distressed and a little unstable. “…the countless other ways he tried to console his wife and to keep her from crying in her sleep.” Perhaps because he found it difficult to find the right words to say he found it difficult in that moment to understand what it was that Mrs. Das needed.

Mrs. Das realizes that Mr. Kapasi doesn’t understand, but then says, “I would have never told you otherwise.” This makes her sound selfish because she was only interested in him for her own personal reasons. And in fact, for Mr. Kapasi to be such a great interpreter of languages, he lacks human understanding. The moment Mrs. Das showed interest in him he was quick to jump to a fantasy about him and Mrs. Das having some type of romantic affair. Mrs. Das was only interested because she wanted someone to confide to, and for someone to tell her something to make her feel better about herself.

When she goes on to tell him “Don’t you realize what it means for me to tell you?” it seems as though she feels her like crumbling to pieces. She gave up any chance of having a life of her own when she fell in love with Raj. She “did not make many close friends”, and “Always tired, she declines invitations from one or two college girlfriends.”

She doesn’t have anything that is truly hers aside from her son Bobby. If Raj were to find out, she would most likely lose her children, home, and anything else that she acquired from Raj. Again, Mr. Kapasi doesn’t understand this as he continues asking her questions even though she explained to him how she and Raj’s life came to be. She then explains it also means her feeling tired and terrible all the time about it. She wants Mr. Kapasi to make her feel better and to interpret what her sickness it and give her “some kind of remedy.”

On further reflection, I came to the conclusion that Mr. Kapasi may have a malady that he can’t interpret or understand it. Or perhaps he is a sad and old dreamer. His wife is indifferent to him, but he took on another job to try and make her happy. The moment he found someone who showed interest in his job, he dreamed up a romantic affair between the two. I understand he didn’t feel like he was inspired or excited by his wife, but he is mentally behaving in the same way Mrs. Das did when Raj’s friend came over.

I found the short story interesting and think Lahiri is suggesting everyone has sicknesses whether physical, emotional, or psychological. I think she says that sometimes if you have a psychological or emotional sickness, it’s easy to find a quick solution to make yourself feel better. But I think she says that even those who seem the most righteous or “good” can have it themselves. I’m not sure whether she says having it is a bad thing, but I think she is saying that it isn’t something you can depend on others to solve for you. They can help you get to the heart of the problem, but you have to find your own remedy. Sometimes no one knows you better than yourself.

The House On Mango Street

Novel:The House On Mango Street

Author: Sandra Cisneros

Analysis&Quote:

“All brown all around, we are safe. But watch us drive into a neighborhood of another color and our knees go shakity-shake and our car windows get rolled up tight and our eyes look straight. Yeah. That is how it goes and goes.”

The chapter, Those Who Don’t is important because it highlights the importance of differences that the protagonist, Esperanza, recognizes at such a young age. It isn’t said explicitly how old she is but I can assume she’s pretty young.

Specifically, I think the last paragraph I important because the author flips gears and turned to how the “brown” people act when they go into a different neighborhood of another color and even class. I decided to focus on this quote/chapter because I feel like it says a lot about how children of a lower-income and/or minority catch onto differences quickly.

The title of the chapter already gives way to some type of difference by using the word “those”. It isn’t “those people” or “people who don’t understand”, but “those”. Most often people use those to describe objects or things, but in this case when it is applied to people it gives the idea that they are one monolith and that they can easily be generalized and group together as one thing. And what I also find interesting is how when the author then describes “those” people in the first sentence, I got a sense of who she was talking about. Or at least based on the characters background and history of the U.S, it becomes clear who “those” people are. Or maybe my own perceptions are clouding who I perceive as “those”.

The next three sentences in the first paragraph that follow depicts the character’s naivety but also gives way to the prejudice society she lives in. She describes what she thinks “those” people think of her and the other “brown” people. But, it can be assumed she’s never interacted with people of the other color and already has her opinions formed about “those” people and what they think of her. (I also find it interesting because it reminds me of how John Bellew hated black people in Passing but never talked to a black person.) This is evident from the last paragraph when she says, “But watch us drive into a neighborhood of another color and our knees go shakity-shake and our car windows get rolled up tight and our eyes look straight.” By paralleling the phrase, “They think” it becomes reinforced that Esperanza thinks of “those” people as one big clump. As they roll up their windows and keep their eyes straight, they don’t give themselves the chance to even physically not separate themselves from the “other” people.

The last sentence in the first paragraph even suggest that “those” people don’t seek out neighborhoods like those or voluntarily search for places like Mango Street. “They are stupid people who are lost and got here by mistake.” But it also shows how perhaps, she thinks where she lives is worth nothing and that it’s no place of importance if people don’t seek it out. Overall, I think this paragraph goes to show that the society she lives in in the novel (and can even be said for our society as well) creates stereotypes about certain people particularly when it comes to race.

In the second paragraph, I feel that Cisneros sort of feeds into the stereotypical street characters in low-income neighborhoods by the way Esperanza describes the people on the block. We know the guy with the crooked eye is Davey the Baby’s brother, and the tall one next to him in the straw brim, that’s Rosa’s Eddie V., and the big one that looks like a dumb grown man, he’s Fat Boy, though he’s not fat anymore nor a boy.” This sentence also provides another degree of separation from “those” people by saying “we” as if everything she mentions that follows is common knowledge. Although, Cisneros does portray in the typical street characters, I feel that it does come from a true place. Personally, in my neighborhood, on my street, there were certain ways to describe people. For example, further down my street is “The Candy Lady” who sold almost every candy including pickles, and if you went further up there is “The Bunny Lady” who had two bunnies. There is “Malcom X” who is super into black power, “Miss Anne’s daughter (fill in blank)”, and “Wanda and them”. So I feel that although it does seem to romanticize the working and lower-income class more, it’s not completely made up.

I really love the last paragraph because it describes how they act when they go into “those” people’s neighborhoods. But I also think it’s important to note how Esperanza says, “our car windows get rolled up” because it suggest that it’s not her that’s creating this separation but rather the parents or adults. By doing these little things they make it clear that there needs to be separation and it almost exacerbates the obvious differences between them and “those people”. I also love this paragraph because I feel most authors that write from a minority’s perspective fail to mention how they too separate themselves from people not like them. Granted that they usually were somehow institutionally separated or were pushed to the fringes of society.

The very last sentence, “That is how it goes and goes”, feels like an understatement to me. Esperanza thinks “those people” think that she and other people like her will “attack them with shiny knives” and she basically says this is the circle of life. This is how things work. Something else I also thought was interesting was how “those” people she is describing could use this same argument/ perspective about them. That “those” people could say they assume certain things about them but it’s not true.

Other quotes that I really liked so far are:

pg.11- “She looked out the window her whole life, the way so many women sit their sadness on an elbow.”

-I found this quote interesting because I like the imagery and I felt it may foreshadow something in the future for Esperanza.

pg.13- “Then as if she forgot I just moved in, she says the neighborhood is getting bad.”

 “In the meantime they’ll just have to move a little farther north from Mango Street, a little farther away every time people like us keep moving in.”

-This quote was interesting because it seems that her “friend” sort of represents “those” people, and at a young age her friend has an understanding that people like Esperanza are no good. Also, again the girl’s family is moving north and not south. I wonder again why the south is always viewed as bad and the north as some type of haven.

Seventeen Syllables

Short Story: Seventeen Syllables

Author: Hisaye Yamamato

Analysis&Quote:

“See, Rosie, she said, it was a haiku poem, a poem in which she must pack all of her meaning into seventeen syllables only, which were divided into three lines of five,seven, and five syllables.”

I find this line interesting because I feel from the beginning that Yamamoto was already giving the reader insight of that fact that something, good or bad, was going to be revealed in the story later on. I think it’s interesting that the Yamamoto uses haiku’s as the central point of the story because haiku’s are deliberate, precise, and are focused. In order for a haiku to be successful you must pack all of your meaning into a few word choices but simultaneously tell a grand story with it. Your word choice is important but also the words you choose to not say are equally as important. Why did the poet used joyful instead of happy or sad instead of depressed? I think this is important to note because Rosie’s mother or Uma Hanazono appears to try to tell her daughter her story throughout the novel through her writing of haikus.

It seems that her mother was writing haikus in an effort to find the right words to tell her daughter what she wanted to her to know, which was how she came to marry her father. “It was as though her mother had memorized it by heart, reciting it to herself so many times over that its nagging vileness had long since gone. “ But it’s apparent that Rosie wasn’t interested as when she talks about her proficiency in Japanese she  says, “English lay ready on the tongue buy Japanese had to be searched for and examined, and even then put forth tentatively (probably to meet with laughter).” Rosie found Japanese to be exhausting and from the language barrier she wasn’t really able to catch onto what her mother was trying to tell her. This is evident when her mother tells reads her her first haiku and Rosie doesn’t bother to try to understand. “Rosie knew formal Japanese by fits and starts, her mother had even less English, no French. It was much more possible to say yes,yes.” Even at the end when her mother tells her the story of how and why she married her father, and tries to get Rosie to understand her pain by making her promise not to marry Rosie says, “Yes, Yes, I promise,.”Rosie can’t understand because it’s something she hasn’t taken time to try to understand or pay interest in.

I believe from this story Yamamoto is making a point that children should love their mother. She’s stressing that you don’t always know what your mother has faced or done, and although she may not tell you explicitly she is always trying to get your attention to make you listen. From the ending, I believe Yamamoto says here is either hope that the child will listen or will not. The “consoling hand” could have come from either her mother(in which case she listened) or Jesus(in which case she didn’t.) I think the interpretation of who lent the consoling hand allows the reader to decide not only what kind of person Rosie is, but also give thought to how much do children value their mother and specifically, how much do first-generation children value their mother and heritage.

Passing #2

Novel: Passing

Author: Nella Larsen

Analysis&Quote:

Irene was thinking: “I had my chance and didn’t take it.”    

Again, I think this book is similar to The Great Gatsby in the fact that this novel chronicles the life of a women who seemingly has everything. Instead of class/economic background being kept a secret it is race.

            Honestly, I am not entirely sure what Larsen is trying to say in the novel, but I think she is hinting that you can’t repress your emotions or other cultural parts of you. When Clare started “passing” as white, she had to repress her black heritage/side. And although “passing” did have its economic benefits she was still unhappy with the life she was living because she couldn’t express her desire or actually have the chance to be around black people. Since she repressed herself for so long when the opportunity arrived she took it because it would give her the chance to fulfill her unmet desires.

            The same is said for Irene who held such a tight and controlled grip on her emotions. She put a lot of strain on herself by not allowing herself to express anger, sadness, and any other emotion that wasn’t happiness or joy. She was too scared to speak or say something and always found ways to justify why she didn’t say the sentence or mention something that happened. Because of this, when Clare started to enter her life she became even more frustrated because she wanted to say something but couldn’t. Her lack of courage and confidence made her yield to other people’s commands/wishes. This isn’t realized until she sees that she can never say no to Clare and once Clare does enter her life she realizes that even though she thought she had control over Brian that he actually had control over her. I believe she thought that since she was able to stop them from moving to Brazil that she had some sort of power or foothold in their relationship. But I think the moment she made that decision that Brian lost all respect for her and slowly and subtly started to control her, but Irene didn’t realize this until Clare came along.

            That said Brian is the most obvious example of repressed desires. He wanted to move to Brazil to make life better for his children so they wouldn’t grow up in a racist society and wanted to be somewhere new. However, he gave that up for Irene because he loved her at the time. Over time, I think his resentment started to build up and took form in him mocking his wife and sarcastically answering her.

            I think what Larsen demonstrates is a sort of give/take relationship or pro/con. She says that if you do repress certain desires of parts of yourself that you have to take into consideration what you are giving up and what you will take in return. I think Passing shows the reader or even warns the reader that you have to make decisions carefully because they can determine the rest of your life.

Passing

Novel: Passing

Author: Nella Larsen

Analysis&Quote:

This is what Irene Redfield remembered.

This story is about Clare Kendry “passing” in society but it is told through Irene Redfield’s memory. It’s interesting because when I started reading about ten pages into the story, my mind immediately went to F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby. There is something in the way Larsen writes her sentences, describes scenes, and presents characters that draws strong parallels to me. Take this description of how she describes Chicago:

A brilliant day, hot, with a brutal staring sun pouring down rays that were

like molten rain. A day on which the very outlines of the building shuddered

as if in protest at the heat. Quivering lines sprang up from baked pavements

and wriggled along the shining car-tracks.

In The Great Gatsby Fitzgerald describes Daisy’s living room:

A breeze blew through the room, blew curtains in at one end and out the other 

like pale flags, twisting them up toward the frosted wedding-cake of the ceiling,

and then rippled over the wine-colored rug, making a shadow on it as wind does

on the sea.

They are able to create vivid and strong imagery using only few words. The way they present characters share similar characteristics as well. Larsen describes Clare Kendry:

            There had been, even in those days, nothing sacrificial in Clare Kendry’s

idea of life, no allegiance beyond her own immediate desire. She was selfish, and

            cold, and hard.

Fitzgerland describes Daisy’s husband, Tom Buchannan:

His speaking voice, a gruff husky tenor, added to the impression of fractiousness

 he conveyed. There was a touch of paternal contempt in it, even toward people he liked —

 and there were men at New Haven who had hated his guts.

They describe characters in specific details that, like the imagery, give you a sense of them with only a few words. In general, the way/style they write is very particular. They’re economical with their word choice but simultaneously giving.

I’m drawing these parallels because I feel they are both using a similar approach to writing about sensitive subjects. The Great Gatsby is talking about the wealth of the wealthy, their indulgent lifestyles, and is commenting on society during the 1920’s. Passing is commenting on how society accepts/rejects race, how race intersects with class, and possibly how race is perceived by people of that race. I think it will be an interesting story not only in terms of the actual content, but in how the actual story is written.

What I’ve noticed is how Larsen writes in a way that class surpasses race, or at least in certain instances. From the beginning we don’t know who is black, white, or mixed. Only later after learning about their class do we learn that Clare Kendry is “passing” and that Irene Redfield has chosen not to do this. Irene is in a high class because she is able to buy these gifts for her children, decide between two dresses for a night event, and have a social calendar for all next week filled. Not to mention when she’s about to faint she doesn’t have to worry about how she will pay the taxi or pay for the glasses of tea she’s drinking.

However, Larsen almost hints that Clare Kendry is mixed from the rumors people spread about her:

And then they would all join in asserting that there could be no mistake about

it’s having been Clare, and that such circumstances could mean only one thing.

Working indeed!

I’m not sure if Larsen is suggesting that Clare is of a lower class and that’s why she’s working or if they know she’s partially black and because of that she’s working. If it is the latter, then Larsen slightly suggest class could be tied to race. Yet, overall I find it interesting how Larsen presents the characters class or writes signifiers of the person’s class and then proceeds to mention the race. Larsen could also be saying that the class you are in is affected more by one race than another. For example, it is worse to be a poor black than a poor white.

Another interesting point is how Larsen set the story in Chicago which, if I am remembering correctly, has always been a historically black city. I think Larsen is making another point by making the main character, a mixed woman passing as white, living/visiting a black city. Why is that? Could Larsen be making a statement about the black community at large? Other things I found interesting was the twelve year specificity. Why is twelve such an important number? And how, at least at this moment, there is no distinction between who is right or wrong. Larsen doesn’t seem to imply that Clare Kendry’s “passing” makes her an angel or a saint. She makes it hard, at least in the beginning to root for either character, which almost begs the question: Should we even root for a character? It seems this novels is exploring lots of gray areas to get people thinking, and not to provide a solution to the problems or issues that arise.

South of the Slot

Short Story: South of the Slot

Author: Jack London

Analysis&Quote:

I found this short story interesting but a bit infuriating. Initially, I was infuriated because Freddie was toying with the poor/working class. As I read more, it began to get more interesting once he unleashed his inner working man, Bill Totts. It also began to get interesting because I could see certain parallels of this short story with other books. And like Desiree’s Baby, I felt there were three main points London was trying to convey. (I always find interesting lines throughout the text, but I try to condense them so I don’t ramble and end up confusing myself.)

The obvious point, in my opinion, London wrote about is class fluidity and from that, what constitutes class. Class fluidity in this story happens quickly. In six months the protagonist, Freddie, finds himself being able to accurately imitate the working class. “In those six months he worked at many jobs and developed into a very good imitation of a genuine worker.” His transitioning between the poor and upper class begs the question of: what constitutes class? When Freddie discovers his fluidity it’s because he has mastered, “the language and qualms.” Later on his fluidity is shown through his drinking, smoking, loose love making, love fatty foods (bacon and sausage), and his way of speaking as Bill Totts.

As Freddie, we see his manners are completely different. He’s cold, stiff, unsociable, and is even made fun of by people in his class. He is always referred to as a “college man” and has a tight control on his emotions. London demonstrates that social customs constitute class more than income. This is the opposite of Desiree’s Baby where class was reliant on wealth and sometimes race.

On the flip side, London comments on how the intellectual/upper classes ridicule and undermine the lower class. Sure Freddie ended up as Big Bill Totts in the end, but he initially saw the working class and his inner working class man as a science experiment to be observed and written about. London shows the undermining of the working class by immediately writing about what Janny Scott and David Leonhardt called, “constitutional optimism”. Freddie says he will play the role of the “free and independent American who chose to work with his hands and no explanations given.” But Freddie doesn't realize he can play that role because has the cushion of being a sociology professor at a university. Because he sees their lives as a game, he doesn't understand why they are angry that he’s making more money that they do and blames it on their “inherit laziness.” He doesn't realize they have to live their lives like that every day. Freddie has the intellectual capacity to write about them, but he doesn't have the empathy to understand them.

He ridicules them by calling them savages, and the way London initially writes about them suggest Freddie’s distaste for them in a passive-aggressive way. Freddie was, “interviewed by his fellow workmen who were very angry and incoherently slangly.” He was “promptly reproached by the other fruit-lumpers.”

But it also has to be noted that Freddie’s has a connection with the working class because his inner working man, Bill is a part of Freddie. Can we say that Freddie learns empathy because Bill is an extension of him? I have to say no. I say this because he created Bill out of necessity to infiltrate the “underworld.” He doesn't feel bad for them as Freddie and in the end, he wants to kill Bill. “Bill Totts had served his purpose, but he had become too dangerous an accomplice. Bill Totts would have to cease.”

London also comments on how division of class can be both manmade and physical. It can even be a sort of feedback loop. (I learned this in my ES102 class. It states that causation can be both the cause and effect.) In this particular story, it means that a physical separation of class can come about because man decided it. Or the physical separation/natural obstacle was already there and so each side developed differently.

I think this is important to note because in the end Freddie has to choose between his two selves and the story starts off with old San Francisco, which to me is old Freddie and presumably, new San Francisco, which is Bill Totts. I also think it’s important to note because the North and South were also divided by the trolley cars, which is a manmade thing. I’m not exactly sure what all of this means but I feel that it’s important to note. (I also wonder why the South part of an area is always the “bad” area. Is it because Hell is South and Heaven is North?)

This story reminds me of Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. I read it senior year and it’s a book I actually enjoyed reading. In a way Freddie was like Bernard Marx in that he wanted to explore the “savage world.” But instead of Freddie leaving with an actual person, he left with his inner working man. This story also reminded me of Jekyll and Hyde. I've never read the book but I know the protagonist has a good versus evil battle inside of him. I think this story shared parallels with those two.

Now as I write this, I’m realizing how these blog posts are like mini-essays (at least for me) and I do appreciate them. I like finding ways to communicate my ideas. I’m not at the point where I can clearly explain what I’m thinking but I think I’m getting a little better every time.

* I think London also writes about gender, duality, cultural capital (education is important in the story), and separation within a class.*

Desiree's Baby

Short Story: Desiree's Baby

Author: Kate Chopin

Analysis&Quote:

Quote:“He was reminded that she was nameless.”

I think this line sums up everything Chopin is trying to say about class and how class is determined. When I read this line, I started writing notes and as I read along I was able to see between the lines. To me this quote is related to how class is determined. In class, we discussed what factors contribute to the determination of class. There are three main factors that Chopin uses throughout the short story while also adding race and gender into the mix.

The first factor is where you live. If you are wealthy you live in a place with a name. Madame Valmonde lived in Valmonde, Aubignys lived in L’Abri, and there is another place called La Blanche. If you don’t live in a well-known place it can even diminish you as a person. For example, Zandrine is the nurse maid, which is respectable position, but we don’t know where she’s from. Yet, the little quandroon boy who is nameless is told to be from La Blanche. Why is it that Zandrine with a higher position and name doesn't have an origin but the nameless boy does?

Your background or family origin is also an important factor. Desiree was a nameless blank state that Armand could paint on. Since she didn't come from anywhere in particular, he could make her whatever he wanted her to be. But we could also say that background doesn't matter because of the second paragraph in the story. Madame Valmonde hears all the whispers but doesn't care and adopts the girl because she is a blessing from God. Yet, if origins don’t matter then why wasn't Desiree at least given Valmonde’s last name? It can be presumed that she wasn't given a last name because Armand could, “give her one of the oldest and proudest in Louisiana.” If origins and family background weren't important she would have been given their last name from the moment she was adopted. Were they afraid her past would catch up or something worse?

In addition to origin and background being a determination of class, Chopin also seems to comment on the old wealthy class versus new wealthy class. Armand is young Aubignys while his father is old Aubignys. In class, we discussed how attitudes and manners are passed down by class but this may not always be true. Old Aubignys is described as easygoing and having made the slave’s lives easier so that they were “gay.” Young Armand Aubignys is a militant and strict ruler. They don’t have the same views towards blacks and how they should be treated even though they are father and son.

Even more, Chopin demonstrates how gender and personality can be a contributing factor to not only determining class but staying in it as well. Desiree is infantilized throughout the story. Madame Valmonde is “holding her in an instant tenderly in her arms”. Desiree is describes her baby with a childlike innocence noting how he has “real fingernails”. She “tottered” to Armand in their bedroom and only lives to make Armand happy. This makes it easy for Armand to dominate her. Another interesting point is how Armand didn't have a mother figure long in his life, and Desiree didn't have much of a father figure. (I say this because her adoptive father is only shown finding her and then arranging the marriage deal.)

This is the perfect combination for a male-dominated romantic relationship. The house also reflects the relationship and domination between Armand and Desiree. A house is traditionally a woman’s domain, but it is introduced without having a woman’s touch. Not to mention it sounds sad and rugged in appearance. This is the first blow to Desiree having any type of power.

Then the trees are described. “Big, solemn oaks grew lose to it, and their thick-leaved, far-reaching branches shadowed it like a pall.” In a natural form, they mimic the pillars that shadowed Desiree where she was saved both times by men. Not only is Desiree infantilized, but she has no sort of power over herself, her baby (I say this because the baby only makes her happy if the baby makes Armand happy), and any physical place. This makes it hard for her to try to be on her own while still remaining in the same wealthy class.

Chopin also discusses how you spend your wealth as a determination of class. Armand is able to buy Desiree a corbeille from Paris, a nurse maid from an exotic location, a mahogany bed, and silk and lace gowns. He has enough wealth to buy all of these luxurious items for her. But his greatest display is that of his son, but soon he finds no joy in displaying him.

In this short story, we see race as a determination of class. When Armand found out the baby was partially back he turned cold to his baby and his wife. (What I also found strange was how he immediately blamed Desiree for the baby’s blackness even though she noticed it can’t be. “Look at my hand; whiter than yours Armand.”) Black people are shown as slaves in the field working until sunset, and obviously are of a lower class. The wealthy are depicted as white or presumed to be white.

Chopin explores class, race, and gender in a unique way I could have never thought of. It reminds me of Wide Sargasso Sea by Jean Rhyss which explores race, class, and gender. I did not expect to get so much out of this close reading because I wasn't sure if I could analyze well enough to find anything. By reading between the lines and remembering how we did it in class helped me discover what Chopin was saying in Desiree’s Baby.

The Karate Kid: Daniel & Ali's First Date

Title: The Karate Kid

Director: John G. Avildsen

Analysis:

    From the moment Ali’s parents drove around Daniel LaRusso’s mother’s car, there were contrasting class signifiers. His mother’s beaten up station wagon, the sleek silhouette’s the Mill’s gray car, the clean streets, and lack of noise and bustle. Then slowly, the camera pans up to the columned white house with pruned shrubbery, and clean brick walls. Ali emerges from two great white doors in a nearly all-white ensemble, and smiles brightly at Danny. She doesn’t hesitate presenting her parents, Mr. and Mrs. Mills, which reveals another short but nice view of their home.

“That’s a beautiful house you have.”

Mrs. LaRusso recognizes Ali’s economic standing to some degree. The camera work seems to suggest this as well. The Mills are seen standing on the porch showing their literal higher standing than most people. While Mrs. LaRusso is confined to an old beaten down car. Yet, what surprised me the most was how she acted after the statement.

She continues living.

She could have slumped back in her seat reminiscing on her daydreams of owning a big home. Or she could have complained about her conditions and sulked for a good thirty seconds, but she didn’t. Even when the car broke down, she laughed and fix it as if it was nothing.

Her reaction and actions are vastly different from the Mills. The two recognize Danny’s lower standing as the camera pans down to his mother’s car, literally showing they are at the bottom of the economic ladder. When they ask about where he lives and discover it’s most likely a less-than-reputable neighborhood, they become colder toward him. They didn’t talk to him and turned their daughter instead. They didn’t ask any more questions about him or to him.When the brick fell, they panicked because they didn’t want to show that they were broken. They wanted to remain put together and perfectly packaged.

I think the main insight the quote depicts is how the poor view wealth. Granted, this is one large generalization drawn from a movie, but it could apply to at least a few thousand people. LaRusso’s mother noticed Ali’s wealth but it didn’t appear to have an effect on her. She didn’t treat Ali differently and instead sort of let her “jump into her life” when the car broke down. Whereas the Mills noticed LaRusso’s lack of wealth and appeared to presume he wasn’t worth talking to.

Small details and what isn't said often reflects people’s  true nature better. This small scene does depict the “rich parents don’t like child hanging with poor child” trope, but it does a good job.

It even makes me a little interested in watching the movie. It’ll bring me a little closer to joining my older sisters’ 80’s parade. I’ll finally understand all her Ninja Turtle, Chuck Norris, and Karate Kid references.