The Hook

All the thesis presentations were wonderful and well thought out and well articulated and interesting, of course, but Joanne's thesis really resonated with me and with a lot of other members of the class as well because it was so interesting and original.
The idea that bestsellers follow a specific formula is incredibly apparent. I think the majority of the class can relate to the feeling of reading a James Patterson or a Dan Brown thriller novel under the classification as "guilty pleasures" for the same reason so many people line up to watch chick flicks or GI Joe movies. Guilty pleasures are fun and so is escapism. Since we are all experienced readers we know that reading fast-paced thriller novels is not particularly literary but they are fun to read, and hey! it's still a book, right?
Approaching the idea of an escapist thriller from a formulaic standpoint is a refreshing way to approach the genre. Either as a formula for success or as a strategy in order to recognize patterns. Most bestseller novels are written at the pace and style similar to the movies, eliminating literary details, symbolism, metaphor or what have you makes it attainable to the average reader that simply needs a book to read in a hurry.
I especially liked Joanne's close reading of the first passage of the novel as a formulaic device in order to "hook" the reader into the novel. And I realized how effective the "hook" sentence can be when I tried to remember how exactly the line went and all I could remember was:
"blah blah blah blah couple, blah blah laughter, blah blah blah blah breasts."
Yep, I'm hooked.

Proposal

Hey everyone.
So I was planning on waking up early this morning to finish editing my proposal, but an emergency came up a few hours ago and I have to go home right now to take care of it, so this is a very rough draft of my basic proposal that I did not have the chance to look over. I tried to convey a lot of material and I had some trouble channeling my thoughts. I'll come back later tonight and work out all the kinks.

I have always been very fascinated by Carl Jung’s development of archetypes and how they apply to literature. Basically the theory states that archetypes can be used as a literary device to emphasize personality or further traditional narratives. Jung applies this theory to myths and manifestations of the subconscious but several scholars have argued that the archetypal theory can be applied to modern literature.
One thing I noticed when I first started learning about archetypes is that they are largely divided by gender. Granted, in some cases the gender roles are reversed as in the case of the anima/animus, but for the most part the roles are typified into the two sects of gender. I am curious to see how the archetypal theory of self-actualization manifests in the role of a trans-gender individual.
My theory regarding trans-gender archetypes in the novel of Trans-Sister Radio is that the transgendered character, Dana, embodies a double archetype, e.g. the twin double or . Dana represents both sides of the double/counterpart archetype. This archetype represents a physical manifestation of what Jung calls “dissociation,” and the surgical change that Dana goes through within the novel is a physical manifestation of her psychological development. At the end of the novel Dana attains self-actualization by settling all the gender and sexual issues that she struggles with throughout.
My thesis is roughly this: The character Dana within the novel Trans-Sister Radio is an archetypal symbol of a double/counterpart whose dissociation is manifested in her gender issues.

Annotated Bibliography:

Brunel, Pierre. Companion to Literary Myths: Heroes and Archetypes. London: Routledge, 1992. Print.
This is book is roughly a dictionary-format of various archetypes and their role in myths. I’ve transposed the mythical function onto contemporary literature because I feel that it is relevant. I mainly focused on the books descriptions of archetypes in general and how they apply to literature, either through symbols or narrative. This is also where I discovered a description of the double/counterpart archetype for the first time and realized that it applied to our novel.

Jung, C. G., and Marie-Luise Von Franz. Man and His Symbols. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1964. Print.
Basic understand of all the archetypal symbols, their roles, their meanings and their psychological impact. This book is written to explain archetypal symbols in dreams, but the symbols carry over into literature. It also offers some historical examples of the archetypes, e.g. Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde as an archetypal symbol of the double/counterpart. The archetypes depicted in this text are largely gender specific.


Lauter, Estella, and Carol Schreier Rupprecht. Feminist Archetypal Theory: Interdisciplinary Re-visions of Jungian Thought. Knoxville: University of Tennessee, 1985. Print.
This book covers a lot of the same material covered in the other book I found about feminist archetypal theory. But I chose this book because it depicts the historical development of the archetypal theory and its application to literature. The book depicts the historical development from starting with Jung then moving to Frye and finally to Levi-Strauss. This book is more useful in describing how and why subconscious archetypes have become applicable to all types of literature.

Wehr, Demaris S. Jung & Feminism: Liberating Archetypes. Boston: Beacon, 1989. Print.Anima/animus.
This book explores the role of Jungian archetypes and how they fit in with the modern development of the feminist theory. The exploration of feminist archetypes is incredibly significant within Trans-Sister Radio because of the fact that Dana’s transition is applicable to both sides of the gender spectrum but ultimately Dana is inherently female throughout the text. This book has a very interesting section regarding the anima/animus distinction in literary archetypes and suggests that the role of gender in literature is based more on behavior than on anatomy.

Whitmont, Edward C. The Symbolic Quest: Basic Concepts of Analytical Psychology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 1991. Print.
This book focuses on the archetypal narrative in which a journey takes place in order for the characters to attain self-actualization. Whitmont describes the process of transformation and healing in relation to the archetypal quest, emphasizing the significance of dramatic shifts and experiences. He also illuminates the role of the community and a character’s role in relation to societal opinion and the effect it has on the development of the psyche.

The subject of this blog entry continues to be the cantaloupe.

Another literary device that Kevin Stein uses in his poem "Tract" is imagery. Tract uses sensory language in order to emphasize the significance of the cantaloupe. Stein doesn't remain in the realm of visual imagery. Instead he employs all five senses in order to draw attention to the cantaloupe and other fruit, including: watermelon, tomatoes and cortland apples. This strategy improves the aesthetics of the poem, introducing linguistic art with the sarcastic tone.
In fact, the incredible sensory language that Stein uses is one of the major reasons I love this poem so much. Stein sets a tone using beautiful visual language, then strays away from the tone and then reigns it back in. He strays off topic, uses the imagery to describe another type of produce, then goes back to the cantaloupe. Example:
This poem's subject is the cantaloupe tilting
its burnished head in the garden's black dirt.
Its sensuous tumescence. Its musky scent.
This poem does not give a gnat's whit about
tomatoes the learned once called "love apples."
So Stein starts the poem introducing the alleged subject cantaloupe, goes on to describe the physical setting and then the scent of the aforementioned cantaloupe, and then moves on to use sensory language on tomatoes.
The imagery is what makes this poem great. Without using the sensory language to tantalize the reader before straying off topic, this poem would be largely intolerable. If Stein hadn't described the cantaloupe's "burnished head" or its "musky scent" we, the readers, wouldn't give "a gnat's whit" about any of the produce mentioned, cantaloupe or otherwise. But, because Stein DID choose to seduce the reader with beautiful descriptions of the sensory elements the reader has become intrigued and wants to know more about the cantaloupe and continues reading.
Stein's language is aesthetically appealing specifically because it does appeal to the senses. When writing about a poem fruit it would be silly not to make the fruit sound delicious or appealing. In the poem Stein uses descriptions of taste, sound, smell, texture and of course sight. By awakening these senses in the reader Stein is awakening interest. By then immediately straying off topic from the fruit, which he has just made so appealing, he then heightens the readers intrigue. They want to know more about the cantaloupe, which he has so richly described, but instead Stein has moved on to talking about simile.
I think the use of imagery and irony is what appeals to me so much about this poem. It also appeals to me as a lover of poetry and of produce. It also makes me really want to eat cantaloupe.

The subject of this blog entry is the cantaloupe.

"Tract" by Kevin Stein was probably my favorite poem in the book so far, but what struck me the most was the use of irony to convey the message.
Stein begins the poem with the "This poem's subject is the cantaloupe" and follows with a physical description of the cantaloupe in the ground. The description is lovely and poetic, but it is also one of the few moments in the poem in which the subject, i.e. the cantaloupe is ever explicitly described. Ironic, because cantaloupe is supposedly the subject of the poem.
For the majority of the poem Stein talks about how he is only going to talk about the cantaloupe and how he will not stray off topic from the cantaloupe. However, whenever he mentions an example of something that he is not going to do, he then goes on and does it.
Example:
"This poem won't employ simile to imply the process is like
a woman's ripening, when mind rushes its juices
through her body's flushed fruit..."
Stein's strategy of reiterating the subjectivity of the poem as the cantaloupe when he is clearly not talking about cantaloupe is ironic. I believe what Stein is really trying to say is that poetry is never subjective and to prove that he is showing us various poetic strategies. The subject of this poem, therefore, is not cantaloupe. What Stein is really trying to address is poetry in general, and by employing various devices Stein is saying that subjective poems are hardly ever really subjective.
So, by stating that his poem is about cantaloupe when it is clearly not about cantaloupe is ironic because the poem is about poetry and not about cantaloupe. And by dismissing the idea that the poem is about anything besides the cantaloupe and then going on to talk about subjects besides cantaloupe further emphasizes the irony, because the subject of the poem is not cantaloupe but by repeatedly stating that it is about cantaloupe just keeps proving that it's not about cantaloupe, it's about other things. Things that are not cantaloupe.

In case anyone was wondering, I used the word "cantaloupe" 20 times in this post.

Cantaloupe.
21.

This might get complicated

(Image from webcomic Subnormality, which is fantastic and I urge everyone to google it after they're done reading this)

When our reading group first talked about this book, I was intrigued. Granted, I made jokes and giggled uncomfortably as immature 21-year-olds are prone to do, I started referring to it as "The-Transsexual-Divorce-in-Rural-Vermont-Book," but I was intrigued and excited. And I trusted that the book would be brilliant and well composed based on the high praise given by my incredibly intelligent classmate (Hi Hannah!)

Relationships are...complicated. Sexuality is complicated. And I think people are just starting to realize how complicated it can be. It is not like everyone can classify themselves as exclusively gay or straight and male or female, there are a great number of subdivisions that modern society is still coming to grips with.

Especially at a time when gay civil rights are still being debated, transgender issues are still an incredibly taboo topic. It makes people nervous and uncomfortable to talk about. Most people would rather bury their heads in the sand and preted that it does not exist. But those people, myself included, are incredibly lucky to feel comfortable and at home within their own skin and gender.

But going beyond the narrative plight of protagonist, Dana, going through a sex-change operation, I am interested in seeing how said operation will affect the other characters, namely between Dana and his/her lover Allison (See! It's getting complicated already.) One thing I noticed was how Allison was struggling to define herself as a lesbian. It was interesting to me that this is an issue she struggles with. She is a woman who loves a man who feels like a woman trapped in a man's body. Why is she trying to label her sexuality right now? Aren't there bigger issues to deal with?

Allison's daughter, Carly, classifies Allison as a woman who is extremely comfortable with her own sexuality. Carly often states that Allison has no problem with nudity or talking about sex with her young daughter. While Carly seems somewhat less comfortable with these topics she seems to accept her mother's stance. Which is why it seems weird that when Allison is faced with somewhat of a sexual dilemma she immediately tries to re-label herself. Don't these type of situations merit more than one word descriptions?

That being said, I'm excited to see how complicated things get as the plot furthers. I'm especially interested to see the relationships stand against the typical gender and sexuality roles.

And for no particular reason I'm including this picture I found of James Franco on the cover of a magazine dressed heavily in drag, just to prove how complicated things can get.

Abu Ghraib Paintings

The first thing I thought when I saw Fernando Botero's painting were that they reminded me of Francisco Goya's Black Paintings. They're similar in their use of dark, neutral shades combined with bold violent colors. They are also similar with their use of slightly distorted figure images and anguished facial expressions. This is particularly true of the first image in Botero's slide. While Botero was inspired by the coverage of the Abu Ghraib prison torture, Goya's inspiration came from his own experience with the Napoleonic Wars (Thanks, Wikipedia.) Either way the two sets of paintings demonstrate the stylistic approach when tackling such a morally reprehensible issue does not have to imitate realism in order to get its point across. The cartoonish approach seems to almost enhance the tragedy of the events they are trying to depict.
The first painting of the series has a dark neutral color palette combined with small bursts of bright, bold colors. Specifically in the attire of the prisoners and, of course, with the blood. The background in comprised entirely of various neutrals in the walls and the floors, the burst of blood spatter on the background of the wall enhances to the dramatic darkness of the location and the prison environment. Interesting how Botero seemed to imitate the traditional image of a prison for his painting when in the real photographs of the prison it looks nothing like a traditional prison. Also the position of the two prisoners are an example of the sexual exploitation of the prisoners forced upon them in order to enhance their humilition, coupled with the fact that they are dressed in women's attire. While none of the original pictures I found (not that I was able to look at them for very long) show that type of humiliation torture strategy exactly it seems a fitting transition for the actual humiliations the prisoners were forced to endure. This, coupled with the brutal demonstration of the one man vomiting blood combines the sexual humiliation and physical violence in one combined image.

The Boondocks

When I first watched the episode of the Boondocks I was, at first, a little offended. I thought it was insensetive to portray the New Orleans victims as lazy, stupid, beligerant and greedy. A few minutes later I remembered that I am an English major and should never ever take anything literally. The entire episode is obviously a metaphor for how the majority of the nation saw the Katrina victims. Grandpa represents the behavior of the majority of Americans non affected by the storm, especially in the beginning of the program when he is talking about the storm, saying how much he wants to help only to declare a few minutes later "WE'RE NOT HERE." I think that behavior is the typical reaction most Americans get when they see or hear bad news, "Oh, that's a shame. Wish I could help them. I wonder what else is on." When it comes down to actually doing something to help we generally write it off as an inconvenience.
What initially bothered me about the program was how the victims were portrayed. At first, I thought the writers were taking jabs at the behavior of the victims following the storm, about how they were lazily waiting around taking advantage of everyone's hospitality while they waited for their FEMA checks to come in. But then I realized what the writers were really doing, as far as I can guess, was putting a microscope on to what we, the non-victims, were scrutinizing about the real victims from our safe dry homes. For example, the character with the dreadlocks that keep taking stuff from the house is a sort of symbol of what we assumed New Orleans looters were like. As he saunters around with his hands in his pockets going saying "Y'all got some real nice stuff up in here" as he picks up vases and PSPs and white baseball hats. I think that when we heard that people were looting from houses in New Orleans we all kind of assumed that it was like that, people walking in taking gaming systems and jewelry and walking out, when it reality it was more like most people were just panicking in the chaos. Granted, I imagine for some people it was just a matter of people grabbing stuff while no one was looking, like the man that tried to steal Chris Rose's bicycle, but I find it hard to believe that the majority of people were wading through the ruined aftermath looking for nintendos.
The other major symbolic character, the patriarch of the New Orleans clan, is another negative symbol. The man that just wants to wait for his FEMA handout so he doesn't have to work. When it becomes necassary for him to start working, he re-emphasizes his victimhood so that he will continue being waited on.
And the actions of the family served as a representative symbol. When hearing about an approaching hurricane they destroy the ceilng and go up on the roof. I think the reason that the writers created this ludicrously rude, lazy, obnoxious and clearly lacking in common sense family was not to poke fun at the victims but to poke fun at our perception of the victims.
Like, really America? This is what you think is going on? Look at these people you have created in your minds. They are stupid, lazy, rude and selfish. There is absolutely no way that people like that actually exist.
But I also think that the writers managed to squeeze in one fairly accurate portrayal of a real Katrina victim among all the negative stereotypes and that was the little girl with the pigtails sitting mournfully on the roof wondering when exactly she could go back hom.